ROY 13. THOMPSON, OSB 825013 

Lead Counsel 

roythompson@eomeast.net 

AMY M. BO(}RAN, OSI3 990051 

amymbogran@eomeast.net 

TIIOMPSONBOGRAN, PC 

5 Centerpointe Dr., Suite 400A 

Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035 

Telephone: 503.635.3400 

Facsimile: 503.635.3897 

or Attorneys for Plaintiff 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT' COURT' 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

ROY B. THOMPSON, 

Plaintiff~ 

v. 

INNOVIS DATA SOLUTIONS, 

INC., EXPERIAN INFORMATION 

SOLlJ'l'IONS, INC., 

TRANS UNION, LLC, .J. P. 

MORGAN CHASE & CO., elba 

CHASE BANK, PROVIDENCE 

HI~ALTH & SERVICI~SOIU:GON, BANK OF AMERICA 

CORPORATlON,FIA CARD 

SERVICES, N.A. 

Defendants. 

Page j - j:IRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case No.3: 14-ev-02032-PK 

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Fair Credit Reporting Act 

(15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) 

Defamation 

Money Had and Received 

Declaratory Relief 

Jury Trial Demanded 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 1 of 26
Plaintiff alleges that all times material: 

1. 

This is a civil action brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act "FCRA"), 

15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 

1681 p. 

2. 

Plaintifl'Roy B. 'fhompson ("Plaintiff") is a natural person and consumer 

residing in the State of Oregon, as defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act 

("FCRA"), 15 U.S.C. § 168Ia(c). 

3, 

Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. ("Experian"), is an Ohio 

corporation doing business throughout the country and in the State of Oregon. 

F!xperian is a consumer reporting agency as den ned by FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 168 laO), 

4. 

Defendant TransUnion, LLC ("Trans Union"), is a Delaware limited liability 

company doing business throughout the country and in the State of Oregon. 

TransUnion is a consumer reporting agency as defined by FCRA, 15 U .S.C. 

168 I a(1). 

II 

Page 2 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 2 of 26
5. 

Defendant lnnovis Data Solutions, Inc. ("Innovis") is a Missouri 

corporation doing business throughout the United States and in Oregon. It is a 

consumer reporting agency as defined by FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 a(f). 

6. 

Defendant J. P. Morgan Chase & Co., dba Chase Bank, is a Delaware 

banking entity doing business throughout the United States and in Oregon. It is a 

credit fiJrnisher as defined by FCRA, IS U.S.c. 1681 s·2. 

7. 

Defendant Bank of America Corporation is a Delaware entity doing 

business in Oregon. It is a credit furnisher as defined by FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 s2. DcJcndant FIA Card Services, N.A. (FIA) is its wholly owned subsidiary, doing 

business in Oregon. It is a credit furnisher as defined by FCRA, 15 U.S.C. J 681 s2. 

8. 

Defendant Providence Health & Services - Oregon is an Oregon non profit 

entity doing business in Oregon. It is a credit furnisher as defined by FCRA, 15 

U.S.c. 1681 s-2. 

Page 3 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 3 of 26
9. 

All dclcndants have had contact, including written communications, with 

Plaintiff in Orcgon, while knowing that Plaintiff was residing in Orcgon, and havc 

caused injury to PlaintilTknowing that Plaintiff resides in Oregon. 

10. 

This Complaint alleges fcderallaw questions and state law questions. This 

Court may cxercise pendent jurisdiction over the state law questions. 

II. 

In early 2014, Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase a house in Lake 

Oswego, Oregon. In order to obtain financing for the purchase, Plaintiff applied 

fix a loanlt-OITI Umpqua Bank. Plaintiffs loan application was denied due to 

negative items on his credit report. The negative items were placed on his report 

by Defendants Providence Health & Services, Bank of America and/or its 

subsidiary FIA, and .1.1'. Morgan Chase ("Chase Bank"). 

12. 

On or about .Ianuary 8, 2014, I'laintiflreceived a copy of his credit report 

n·om CoreLogic Credco. The report contained ttllse, inaccurate, and derogatory 

collection accounts improperly attributed to him. 

Page 4 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 4 of 26
13. 

The false, inaccurate, and derogatory collection accounts improperly 

attributed to Plaintiff included the following (item numbers refer to the Credco 

crcdit report numbering): 

a. Negative Credit Report Item # I by Defendant Chase Bank f~llsely 

reporting dclinquency in March, 2010 regarding a Chase Account 

idcntified herein as "A". Chasc Bank had previously written to 

Plaintiff on November 16,20 10 saying that it received payment on 

time and it would notify the credit reporting agencies accordingly. 

b. Negative Credit Report Item # 2 by Defendant Chase Bank falsely 

reporting delinquent payment on a mortgage in 2008 regarding a 

Chase Account identi lIed herein as "13". PlaintilT submitted receipts 

showing payments to Del'Cndants Chase Bank, Experian, Innovis, and 

TransUnion, yet none of these defendants have corrected the report. 

e. Negative Credit Report Items # 3 and 4 by Professional Credit 

Services, the collection agency for Del'Cndant Providence Health & 

Services, falsely reporting a $250 copay debt. On January 15,2014, 

Professional Credit Service wrote to Plaintilf letter stating that 

Providence Health & Services had cancelled the collection and the 

credit reporting agencies would be notified accordingly. Items 3 and 

Page 5 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 5 of 26
4 were identical, thus causing Plaintiff double credit score loss for the 

same incorrect data. 

d. Negative Credit Report Item # 5 by Defendant Bank of America 

andlor its subsidiary FIA, falsely reporting an overdue annual fee for 

a credit card which Plaintiff never activated. On January 10,2014, 

Bank of America wrote to Plaintiff stating that his account had no 

delinquency and that Bank of America had written to the credit 

reporting agencies to update Plaintiffs report accordingly. 

14. 

Plainti IT ultimately obtained financing through Banner Bank. However, 

Plaintiff had to pay an interest rate 1.4% higher than he would have been charged 

ifhc had obtained the Umpqua Bank loan, resulting in approximately $150,000 in 

economic damages. 

15. 

PlaintilT has suffered the following actual damages: the plaintitT received a 

loan at 5% through Banner Bank versus the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in 

approximately $150,000 in damages. 

II 

II 

II 

Pag(: (, - FIRST AMENDI\!) COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 6 of 26
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

FCRA - 15··LJSC § 1681 n - Willful Actions 

Against De1cndants Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion 

17. 

PlaintilT realleges paragraphs 1- 14 as if fully set forth herein. 

18. 

On or about January 14,2014, PlaintilTnotified Experian and TransUnion, 

that it had placed incorrect information regarding Plaintiff relating to Chase 

Account "A". On January 17,2014, PlaintitTnotified lnnovis it had also placed 

incorrect inlormation regarding Plaintiff relating to the same account. PlaintitT 

noti ned all of thesc credit reporting agencies that Plaintiff was purchasing a house 

and that the report needed to be removed immediately to prevent injury to 

Plaintiff. The report now appears to be corrected on PlaintiH"s account; however, 

the report was not corrected in time to prevent injury to Plaintiff. 

19. 

On or about January 14,2014, Plaintiff notified Experian and TransUnion 

that it had placed incorrect information regarding PlaintilTrelating to Chase 

Account "B". On January 17,2014, Plaintiffnotiliedlnnovis it had also placed 

incorrect information regarding PlaintilT relating to the same account. Plaintiff 

notified all ofthese credit reporting agencies that Plaintiff was purchasing a house 

Page 7 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 7 of 26
and that the report needed to be removed immediately to prevent injury to 

PlaintiiT 'fhe report was never corrected, thus causing Plainti tf injury, 

20, 

Experian, Innovis, and 'fransUnion willfully failed to comply with the 

requirements imposed under the i'CRA, 15 U,S.C § 1681, et seq" including but 

not limited to: 

a) failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible 

accuracy of the information in consumer reports, as required by 15 

UXC § 1681e; 

b) failing to comply with the investigation and reinvestigation 

requirements in 15 U XC § 1681 i. 

2L 

As a result of Experian and TransUnion's violations ofthe FCRA, Plaintiff 

has suflered the following actual damages: the plaintiff received a loan at 5% 

through 13anner Bank versus the 3,6% Umpqua loan, resulting in approximately 

$150,000 in damages and any statutory damages, These defendants are jointly and 

severally liable for damages caused under the FCRk 

n 

Defendants' complete and utter indifference to its obligations under the 

FCRA reveals a conscious disregard of the rights of Plainti 1'1', and the injuries 

Page 8 . FIRST AMENDED COMPI ,AINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 8 of 26
suffered by Plaintiff are attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, and willful 

and wanton misconduct, calling for an assessment of punitive damages against 

Defendants, pursuant to IS USC § 1681 n. 

23. 

Plaintiff is entitled to his attorney fees, pursuant to IS U.S.C. § 1681 n. 

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

FCRA - IS U.S.C. § 16810 - Negl igent Actions 

Against Defendants Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion 

24. 

I'laintiffrealleges paragraphs I - 23 as iffully set forth herein. 

25. 

On or about January 14,2014, Plaintiff notilled Experian and TransUnion, 

that it had placed incorrect inf<'JrInation regarding Plaintiff rclating to Chase 

Account "A." On January 17,2014, Plaintiff notified Innovis it had also placed 

incorrect inf(mmltion regarding Plaintiff relating to the same account. Plaintiff 

notified all of these credit reporting agencies that Plaintiff was purchasing a house 

and that the report needed to be removed immediately to prevent injury to 

Plaintiff. The report now appears to be corrected on Plaintiffs account; however, 

the report was not corrected in time to prevent injury to Plaintiff 

II 

Page 9 - FIRST AMENDI;:]) COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 9 of 26
26. 

On or about January 14,2014, Plaintiff notified Experian and TransUnion 

that it had placed incorrect information regarding Plaintiff relating to Chase 

Account "B". On January 17, 2014, Plainti ff notified Innovis it had also placed 

incorrect information regarding Plaintiff relating to the same account. Plaintiff 

notified all of these credit reporting agencies that PlaintiiTwas purchasing a house 

and that the report needed to be removed immediately to prevent injury to 

Plaintitl The report was never corrected, thus causing PlaintifT injury. 

27. 

On or about January 14, 2014, Plaintiff notified Experian and TransUnion 

that it had placed incorrect information regarding Plaintiff relating Providence 

J Iealth and Scrvices. Plaintiff notified all of these credit reporting agencies that 

Plaintiff was purchasing a house and that the report needed to be removed 

immediately to prevent injury to Plaintiff: The report now appears to be corrected 

on Plaintifrs account; however, the report was not corrected in time to prevent 

injury to Plaintiff 

28. 

Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion negligently failed to comply with the 

requirements imposed under the FCRA, including but not limited to: 

Page 10- FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 10 of 26
a) failing to follow reasonable proccdures to assure maximum possible 

accuracy ofthe information in consumer reports, as required by 15 

u.s.c. § 1681e; 

b) hliling to comply with the investigation and reinvestigation 

requirements in ] 5 lJ .S.c. § 1681 i. 

29. 

As a result of Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion's violations of the FCRA, 

Plaintiff has suffered the following actual damages: the plaintiff received a loan at 

5% through Banner Bank versus the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in 

approximately $150,000 in damages. These defendants are jointly and severally 

liable for damages caused under the FCRA. 

30. 

Defendants' complete and utter indifference to its obligations under the 

FCRA reveals a conscious disregard of the rights ofl'laintiff~ and the injuries 

suffered by PlaintilTare attended by circumstances oflJ-aud, malice, and willful 

and wanton misconduct, calling for an assessment of punitive damages against 

DeJenclants, pursuant to 15 USC § 168111. 

31. 

Plaintiff is entitled to his attorney fees, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 16810. 

Page 11 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 11 of 26
THIRD CLAIM FOR lU~LmF 

FCRA-15-USC§ 1681s-2 

Against Defendant Chase Bank - Chase Account "]3" 

32. 

Plaintiff realleges paragraphs 1- 31 as if fully set forth herein. 

33. 

To the best of Plaintiffs knowledge, Defendants Experian, Innovis, and 

TransUnion notified Defendant Chase that the account was disputed. 

34. 

Plaintiff personally contacted Defendant Chase Bank beginning January 10, 

2014 via facsimile transmission and certii1ed and regular mail that Plaintiff 

disputed the incorrect infclJ"Ination Defendant had placed on Plaintiffs credit 

report. Plaintiff informed Defendant that the incorrect iniclJ"Ination needed to be 

removed immediately to prevent injury to Plaintiff due to Plaintiffs financing 

needs. Plaintiff and Defendant had multiple communications during the next few 

weeks, including at one point a refusal by Defendant to share information with 

PlaintilTbecause it did not have "permission from the customer to share 

in 11mnati on." 

II 

II 

Page 12 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 12 of 26
35. 

Despite the credit reporting agencies' notification of Plain tifT's dispute and 

Plaintilrs communications directly with Defendant Chase Bank, Defendant Chase 

Bank did not correct its inaccurate report regarding Account "B". 

36. 

Defendant Chase Bank violated Plaintiff's rights under the FCRA by 

a) failing to conduct a reasonable investigation into the accuracy of the 

information regarding Account "13". 

b) failing to update incomplete or inaccurate inf<mnation it had 

previously reported to the credit reporting agencies. 

c) Eliling to update its report to the credit reporting agencies to include a 

statement that the negative report was disputed, thus creating a 

misleading report which can be expected to have an adverse effect on 

Plaintiff. 

37. 

As a result of Defendant Chase Bank's actions, Plaintiff has suflered the 

following actual damages: the plaintifT received a loan at 5% through Banner 

Bank versus the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in approximately $150,000 in 

damages. 

II 

Page 13 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 13 of 26
38. 

Plainti1f is entitled to attorney fees and costs of this action pursuant to 15 

lJ.S.c. § 16810. 

39. 

Defendant Chase Bank's complete and utter indifference to its obligations 

under thc FCRA reveals a conscious disregard of the rights of Plailltifj~ and the 

injuries suffered by Plaintiff are attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, and 

wi II ful and wanton misconduct, calling for an assessment of punitive damages 

against Chase Bank, pursuant to 15 USC § 1681 n. 

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

DEFAMATION 

Against Bank of America and its Subsidiary FIA 

40. 

Plaintiff rea lieges paragraphs 1 - 41 above. 

41. 

PlaintitT received a credit card from Defendant Bank of America and/or its 

subsidiary FIA which Plaintiff never activated. 

42. 

DcJcndant Bank of America and/or its subsidiary FIA billed Plaintiff for the 

annual tee for the credit card. Defendant may also have billed PlaintiJf for interest 

Pngc 14 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 14 of 26
on the annual fee for the credit car(l. 

43. 

Plaintiff did not pay any sums to Defendant andlor its subsidiary PIA on this 

account. 

44. 

Del(~ndant Bank of America and lor its subsidiary FIA reported Plaintiff 

delinquent to the credit reporting agencies. 

45. 

Defendant Bank of America andlor its subsidiary FIA knew Plaintiff had 

never activated the card when it reported Plaintiff as delinquent. 

46. 

Plaintiff did not owe any money to Defendant Bank of America. 

47. 

Defendant's report was done with malice andlor intent to injure Plaintiff. 

48. 

Plaintill"s reputation was injured by Defendant's false report to the credit 

reporting agencies in that his credit score was lowered causing him to be perceived 

as a higher risk credit applicant. 

II 

II 

Page 15 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 15 of 26
49. 

Plaintiff demanded a retraction 11'0111 Defendant Bank of America. Bank of 

America ultimately wrote a letter that it was notifying the credit bureaus that the 

account was up to date. However, the retraetion was too late to prevent injury to 

PlaintifT. 

50. 

As a direct cause of Defendant's del~lmation, PlaintilThas the following 

actual damages: the plaintiff received a loan at 5% through Banner Bank versus 

the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in approximately $150,000 in damages. 

51. 

Defendant Bank of America and/or FIA's complete and utter indifference to 

its obligations under the common law and reveals a conscious disregard of the 

rights of Plaintin: and the injuries suffered by Plaintiff are attended by 

circllmstances of Jhllld, malice, and willful and wanton misconduct, calling fiJI" an 

assessment of punitive damages. 

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

DE£' AMATION 

Against Providence llealth & Services 

52. 

PIa inti IT reallcgcs paragraphs 1 - 51 above. 

Page 1 (, - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 16 of 26
53. 

Plaintiff received medical treatment for an injury to his eye from 

Providence. At the time PlaintilTreceived the treatment, he was charged a $35 

copay. He paid the $35 copay in a timely manner. 

54. 

At some time aner treatment, Defendant Providence Ilcalth & Services 

decided to charge Plaintiff a $250 capay. This is in violation ofthe terms of 

Plaintiffs contract f(lJ· health services and in violation orthe agreed $35 eopay at 

the time ofthe medical treatment. In addition, Defendant was improperly holding 

$266 of Plaintiff's money, more than enough to cover the claimed $250. 

Defendant's attempts to collect the $250 were f1·audulent in that Del'enclant 

misrepresented to Plaintiffthat he owed money to Defendant even though he had 

already paid the capay and even though Del'endant was already holding more than 

enough ofPlaintirfs money to cover the copay. 

55. 

Defendant Providence Health & Services, and lor its agent Professional 

Credit Service reported Plaintiff delinquent to the credit reporting agencies despite 

knowing that Plaintiffhad already paid the $35 copay and despite improperly 

holding $266 of Plaintiffs money which was more than enough to cover the 

claimed $250. 

Page 17 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 17 of 26
56. 

Defendant Providenee and/or its agent Professional Credit Service reported 

thc delinqucncy as two scparatc accounts, both of which were delinquent, rcsulting 

in double credit score reductions for the same incident. 

57. 

Plainti ff did not owc any money to Providence lJealth & Services. 

58. 

Defendant's rcports wcre done with malice and/or intent to injure PlaintifC 

59. 

Plaintiffs reputation was injured by Defendant's false report to the credit 

reporting agencies in that his credit score was lowered causing him to be perceived 

as a higher risk crcdit applicant. 

60. 

Plaintiff dcmandcd a retraction 11·0111 Defendant Providence Hcalth & 

Services. Defendant's agent, Professional Credit Service, ultimately wrote a letter 

that it was notifying the credit bureaus that the aecount was "canceled." However, 

the retraction was too late to prevent injury to PlaintilT. 

61. 

As a direct cause of De1endant's del~lInation, PlaintilThas suffered the 

fiJIlowing actual damages: the plaintiff received a loan at 5% through Banner 

Page 18 - FIRST AMFNDFD COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 18 of 26
Bank versus the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in approximately $150,000 in 

damages. 

62. 

Defendant Providence's complete and utter indifference to its obligations 

under common law and reveals a conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiff, and 

the injuries suffered by Plaintiff arc attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, 

and willful and wanton misconduct, calling for an assessment of punitive 

damages. 

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

DEFAMAol'\ON 

Against Defendant Chase bank 

63. 

Plaintiff realleges paragraphs I ~ 62 above. 

64. 

Plaintirf received two loans (i'om Washington Mutual, which were 

ultimately sold to Chase Bank: Accounts "A" and "B". 

65. 

Defendant Chase Bank claims that Plainti rf was late on payments on Chase 

Account "g" in 2008. Defendant reported this account as delinquent to the credit 

reporting agencies. 

Page 19 - FIRST AMFNDED COMP] ,AINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 19 of 26
66. 

Plainti IT madc all payments on timc on Chase Account "[3". PlaintilT has 

thc receipts for 2008 paymcnts and has submittcd copies ofthcsc receipts to 

Defendant and to thc crcdit reporting agencies. Dcfendant has not corrected its 

rcports to the credit reporting agencies. 

67. 

Dcfendant Chasc Bank claims that PlaintiiTwas late on payments on Chase 

Account "A" in 20 I O. Defendant reported this account as delinquent to the credit 

reporting agencies. 

68. 

Plainti iT madc all paymcnts on timc on Chasc Account "A". Defendant 

wrote PlaintifT in 2010 that Plaintiff was not delinquent on this account and that 

Dcfcndant would correct the false delinqucnt report it had previously provided to 

thc crcdit rcporting agcncics. Defcndant did not do this. Ultimately, in 2014 aftcr 

Defendant submittcd a copy of the 20 I 0 Icttcr to thc credit rcporting agencies, the 

credit reporting agencics removed this t~llse report. 

69. 

Defendant's reports and failure to rcmove reports as promised was done 

with malice andlor intent to injure Plaintiff 

Page 20 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 20 of 26
70. 

Plaintiffs reputation was injured by Defendant's false reports to the credit 

reporting agencies in that his crcdit score was lowered causing him to be perceived 

as a higher risk credit appl icant. 

71. 

Plaintiff demanded that retractions /l'om Defendant Chase Bank be sent to 

the credit reporting agencies. To the best of Plaintiffs knowledge, Defendant 

Chase Bank has never sent retractions to the credit reporting agencies. 

72. 

As a direct cause of Defendant's defamation, Plaintiff has sutTered the 

following actual damages: the plaintiff received a loan at 5% through Banner 

Bank versus the 3.6% Umpqua loan, resulting in approximately $150,000 in 

damages. 

73. 

Defendant Chase's complete and utter indillerence to its obligations under 

common law and reveals a conscious disregard of the rights of Plaint itT: and the 

injuries suffered by PlaintiiT are attended by circumstances of fi'aud, malice, and 

willful and wanton misconduct, calling f(lr an assessment of punitive damages. 

II 

II 

Page 21 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 21 of 26
SIWI~NTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

Money Had and Received 

Against Providence Health & Services 

74. 

Plaintiffrealleges paragraphs I - 73 above. 

75. 

Providence St. Vinccnt is an abn of Providence Health & Services- Oregon. 

76. 

In September, 2014, Plaintiff learned that Providence St. Vincent had sent 

$266.17 of money owed by Defendant Providence Health & Services to the 

Oregon Departmcnt or State Lands. 

77. 

The $266.17 given to the Oregon Department of State Lands was described 

by Providence St. Vincent as "Credit Balance/ Accts Receivable." This money had 

been given to Providence SL Vincent by or on behalf of Plaintiff. 'The money is 

properly the property of Plaint ill. 

78. 

Providence St. Vincent and/or Providence IIcalth & Services knew 

Plaintiffs address when the money was sent to the Department of State Lands and 

should have sent it to Plaintiff 

Page 22 - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 22 of 26
79. 

Plaintiff had to obtain its funds t1'om the Department of State Lands in late 

2014. Defendant Providence Health & Services was unjustly benef1tted by the usc 

of this money during the years it was improperly controlled by Defendant, and 

Plainliffwas damaged due to the loss of usc of this money. 

80. 

Defendant's actions were intentional and wrongful and punitive damages 

should be awarded. 

EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

DECLARATORY RELIEF - 28 USC § 1332 

Against Defendants Experian, Innovis, 'T'ranslinion, and Chase Bank 

81. 

Plaintiff rca lieges paragraphs I - 80 above. 

82. 

Plaintiffs credit report by the credit reporting agencies continues to include 

Chase Bank's incorrect and negative inJ~)rl11ation about Plaintiff in regard to Chase 

Account "B". 

83. 

An actual controversy exists as to whether the account information is 

incorrect. 

Page 2J . FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 23 of 26
84. 

Plaintiff will not be able to obtain l'avorable credit unless this account 

infi:)rmation is declared incorrect. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests entry of judgment: 

I. A warding damages joint and severally against Defendants Experian, 

Innovis and TransUnion lor the difference in the loan between 

Umpqua Bank and Banner Bank. 

2. A warding damages against Bank of America, filA, Providence, and 

Chase for the difference in the loan between Umpqua Bank and 

Banner Bank. 

3. A warding Plaintiff his attorney tees jointly and severally against 

Dcienclants Experian, Innovis, and Trans Union. 

4. Awarding Plaintiff his attorney iees against Defendants Bank of 

America, FI A, Providence, ancl Chase. 

5. Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages jointly and severally against 

Defendants Experian, Innovis, and Trans Union. 

6. A warding Plaintiff punitive damages against Dciendants Bank of 

America, FIA, Providence, and Chase. 

7. A warding Plaintifr damages against Defendant Providence for money 

had and received in an amount to be proven at trial. 

Page 24·· FIRST AMFNDED COMPLAINT 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 24 of 26
8. Declaring that Plaintiff was not delinquent in Chase Account "B". 

9. Awarding Plainliff such other relief as the court deems equitable and 

just. 

DATED this 28th day of January, 2015. 

Page 25· FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

/,1'/ Rov B. Thompson _~_~ __ . 

ROY B. THOMPSON, OSB 825013 

AMY M. BOGR;\N, OSB 990051 

THOMPSON BOG RAN, PC 

of Attorneys for Plaintiff 

5 Centerpointe Dr., Suite 400A 

Portland, Oregon 97035 

503.635.3400 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 25 of 26
CER'rIFICATE or SERVICE 

I hereby certify that J served the foregoing Amcnded Complaint on the attorneys for 

Delcnclants TransUnion, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America by the Court's CM/EeI! filing 

system. 

I (lllther certify that I will be promptly serving the remaining dctcndants who havc not yet 

appeared in this matter in accordance with ]lRCP 4. 

DATED this 28th day of January, 2015. 

Page 26 - FIRST AMENDlm COMPLAINT 

/.1'/ ROE B. ThomjL!c)s,,·O'1.nL· ___ ~ 

ROY B. THOMPSON, OSB 825013 

AMY M. BOGRAN, OSB 990051 

TlIOMPSON BOGRAN, PC 

of Attorneys for Plaintiff 

5 Centerpointe Dr., Suite 4001\ 

Portland, Oregon 97035 

503.635.3400 

Case 3:14-cv-02032-PK Document 20 Filed 01/28/15 Page 26 of 26