COMPLAINT 1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

David J. McGlothlin, Esq. (SBN 026059)

david@southwestlitigation.com

Hyde & Swigart

2633 E. Indian School Road, Ste. 460

Phoenix, AZ 85016

Telephone: (602) 265-3332

Facsimile: (602) 230-4482 Ryan L. McBride, Esq. (SBN 032001)

ryan@kazlg.com

Kazerouni Law Group, APC

2633 E. Indian School Road, Ste. 460

Phoenix, AZ 85016

Telephone: (800) 400-6808

Facsimile: (800) 520-5523

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

INTRODUCTION

1. The United States Congress has found the banking system is dependent upon 

fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair 

Leonard Joel Ceder,

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Experian Information Solutions, 

Inc., Synchrony Bank, and TD 

Bank USA,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.:

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 

PURSUANT TO THE FAIR CREDIT 

REPORTING ACT, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, ET SEQ.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 12
COMPLAINT 2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods 

undermine the public confidence, which is essential to the continued 

functioning of the banking system. Congress enacted the Fair Credit 

Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (“FCRA”), to insure fair and 

accurate reporting, promote efficiency in the banking system, and protect 

consumer privacy. The FCRA seeks to ensure consumer reporting agencies 

exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect 

for the consumer’s right to privacy because consumer reporting agencies 

have assumed such a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit 

and other information on consumers. The FCRA also imposes duties on the 

sources that provide credit information to credit reporting agencies, called 

“furnishers.”

2. LEONARD JOEL CEDER (“Plaintiff”), by Plaintiff’s attorneys, brings this 

action to challenge the actions of EXPERIAN INFORMATION 

SOLUTIONS, INC. (“Experian”), SYNCHRONY BANK (“Synchrony”), 

and TD BANK USA (“TD Bank”) (or jointly as “Defendants”) with regard 

to erroneous reports of derogatory and negative credit information made by 

Defendants to national reporting agencies, and for failure of Defendants to 

properly investigate, and this conduct caused Plaintiff damages. 

3. Plaintiff makes these allegations on information and belief, with the 

exception of those allegations that pertain to Plaintiff, or to Plaintiff’s 

counsel, which Plaintiff alleges on personal knowledge.

4. While many violations are described below with specificity, this Complaint 

alleges violations of the statute cited in its entirety. 

5. Unless otherwise stated, all the conduct engaged in by Defendants took 

place in Arizona.

6. Any violations by Defendants were knowing, willful, and intentional, and 

Defendant did not maintain procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such 

violation.

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 2 of 12
COMPLAINT 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

7. Unless otherwise indicated, the use of Defendants’ name in this Complaint 

includes all agents, employees, officers, members, directors, heirs, 

successors, assigns, principals, trustees, sureties, subrogees, representatives, 

and insurers of Defendants’ named.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

8. This Court has federal question jurisdiction because this case arises out of 

violation of federal law. 15 U.S.C. §1681 et seq.; 28 U.S.C. §1331; 

Jurisdiction arises for Plaintiff’s supplemental state claims under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1367.

9. This action arises out of Defendants’ violations of the Fair Credit Reporting 

Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1681(x) (“FCRA”).

10. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the District of 

Arizona pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Plaintiff is a resident of 

Maricopa County, the State of Arizona and Defendants are subject to 

personal jurisdiction in the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona as they 

conduct business there, and the conduct giving rise to this action occurred in 

Arizona. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). 

PARTIES

11. Plaintiff is a natural person residing in the County of Maricopa, State of 

Arizona. In addition, Plaintiff is a “consumer” as that term is defined by 15 

U.S.C. § 1681a(c). 

12. Defendant Experian is a corporation doing business in the State of Arizona. 

13. Defendant Synchrony is business that provides credit services and conducts 

business in the State of Arizona. 

14. Defendant TD Bank is a company doing business in the State of Arizona.

15. Defendants Synchrony and TD Bank are furnishers of information as 

contemplated by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) that regularly and in the ordinary 

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 3 of 12
COMPLAINT 4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

course of business furnish information to a consumer credit reporting 

agency. 

16. Defendant Experian is a national credit reporting agency, doing business in 

Arizona, with a principal place of business in Ohio.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

17. At all times relevant, Plaintiff was an individual residing within the State of 

Arizona.

18. At all times relevant, Defendants conducted business in the State of Arizona.

19. On or about October 16, 2014, Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy in the United 

States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona. Plaintiff’s case was 

assigned Case Number 2:14-bk-15638-EPB (the “Bankruptcy”).

20. The obligations (“Debt”) to each defendant were scheduled in the 

Bankruptcy and Defendants, the Creditors, received notice of the 

Bankruptcy.

21. On or about January 23, 2015, Plaintiff received a Bankruptcy discharge.

22. None of the Defendants filed any proceedings to declare their Debt “non 

dischargeable” pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523 et seq. 

23. Defendants also did not request relief from the “automatic stay” codified at 

11 U.S.C. §362 et seq. while the Plaintiff’s Bankruptcy was pending to 

pursue the Plaintiff on any personal liability for any of the underlying Debts.

24. Accordingly, the Debt to each defendant was discharged through the 

Bankruptcy.

25. Further, while the automatic stay was in effect during the Bankruptcy, it was 

illegal for any of the Defendants to report any post-Bankruptcy derogatory 

collection information.

26. Defendants’ attempt to collect upon their respective Debt by reporting postBankruptcy derogatory information was therefore false or inaccurate and 

prohibited by the automatic stay or Discharge. 

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 4 of 12
COMPLAINT 5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

27. Plaintiff subsequently learned that each of the named Defendants reported 

post-Bankruptcy derogatory credit information regarding the obligations on 

Plaintiff’s credit reports, thereby causing erroneous and negative credit 

information in Plaintiff’s credit files.

Synchrony Bank Misreported Credit Information

28. In an Experian credit report dated May 6, 2015, Synchrony reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account No. 706159103444****: Post-bankruptcy 

information for the following dates: December 2014 (60 days 

past due).

29.Synchrony should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s 

account after October 16, 2014, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

October 16, 2014.

30. On or about May 29, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Synchrony’s reported 

information regarding the Debt pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681I(a)(2) by 

notifying Experian, in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit 

information furnished by Synchrony.

31. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Experian (the 

“Experian Dispute Letter”), requesting the above inaccurate and incorrect 

derogatory information be removed as follows:

• This account was discharged in my Bankruptcy which was filed 

on 10/16/2014 and discharged 01/23/2015, bearing case No. 

2:14-bk-15638-EPB in the District for Arizona. The balance on 

this account should be “$0” and the status should be reporting 

as “current”. Specifically, please remove the derogatory 

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 5 of 12
COMPLAINT 6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

information for the following post-bankruptcy dates: December 

2014 (60 days past due). 

32. The Experian Dispute Letter further requested that Experian:

• Immediately delete this account and the disputed derogatory 

information from [Plaintiff’s] credit report.

• The discharged debt should be reported with an account balance 

of $0 with a status of “current”.

• Further, there should be no post-bankruptcy activity reported on 

this account. The date of last activity on this account should predate my bankruptcy filing date, 10/16/2014, since a default on this 

account occurred no later than the Bankruptcy filing date.

• Any post-bankruptcy derogatory information should be 

immediately deleted from [Plaintiff’s] report.

• If [Experian] do[es] not immediately delete this from 

[Plaintiff’s] credit report, please include a 100-word statement in 

my credit report of all of the disputed information contained in this 

letter regarding this account. 

33. Upon information and belief, Experian timely notified Synchrony of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but Synchrony continued reporting derogatory 

information.

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 6 of 12
COMPLAINT 7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

34. Synchrony and Experian were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

specific account on Plaintiff’s consumer report pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§1681i.

35. On or about July 7, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Experian that

Synchrony and Experian received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and Defendants verified they had updated the account. 

36. Surprisingly, rather than remove all the derogatory information from 

Plaintiff’s Report, Synchrony and Experian simply replaced derogatory 

information with new derogatory information on Plaintiff’s report. 

Specifically, Synchrony and Experian reported the following inaccurate, 

derogatory information:

• Account #706159103444 : Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: November 2014 (Account 30 days past 

due); December 2014 (Charge Off).

37. Synchrony and Experian, upon receipt of Plaintiff’s dispute, failed to 

conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information as required 

by 15 U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A).

38. Synchrony and Experian failed to review all relevant information provided 

by Plaintiff in the dispute to Experian, as required by and in violation of 15 

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

39. Due to Synchrony and Experian’s failure to investigate, they each further 

failed to correct and update Plaintiff’s information as required by 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681s-2(b)(1)(E), thereby causing continued reporting of inaccurate 

information in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681-s(2)(b)(1)(C).

40. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Synchrony and Experian’s erroneous 

and negative reporting of the Debt by communicating Plaintiff’s dispute 

with Synchrony and Experian were fruitless.

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 7 of 12
COMPLAINT 8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

41. Synchrony and Experian’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of 

the Debt in light of its knowledge of the actual error was willful.

42. Synchrony and Experian’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

43. By inaccurately reporting account information relating to the Debt after 

notice and confirmation of its errors, Synchrony and Experian failed to take 

the appropriate measures as determined in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-s(2)(b)(1)(D) 

and (E).

TD Bank Misreported Credit Information

44. In an Experian credit report dated May 6, 2015, TD Bank reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #435237759503** **: Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: February 2015-March 2015 (Showing 

Account Balance of $5,282.00).

45. TD Bank should not have reported derogatory information, including 

balances on Plaintiff’s account after January 23, 2015, because Plaintiff’s

Bankruptcy was discharged on January 23, 2015.

46. On or about May 29, 2015, Plaintiff disputed TD Bank’s reported 

information regarding the Debt pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681I(a)(2) by 

notifying Experian, in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit 

information furnished by TD Bank. 

47. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Experian (the 

“Experian Dispute Letter”), requesting the above inaccurate and incorrect 

derogatory information be removed as follows:

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 8 of 12
COMPLAINT 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

• This account was discharged in my Bankruptcy which was filed 

on 10/16/2014 and discharged 01/23/2015, bearing case No. 

2:14-bk-15638-EPB in the District for Arizona. The balance on 

this account should be “$0” and the status should be reporting 

as “current”. Specifically, please remove the derogatory 

information for the following post-bankruptcy dates: January 

2015-March 2015 (Showing Account Balance of $5,282.00).

48. The Experian Dispute Letter further requested that Experian:

• Immediately delete this account and the disputed derogatory 

information from [Plaintiff’s] credit report.

• The discharged debt should be reported with an account balance 

of $0 with a status of “current”.

• Further, there should be no post-bankruptcy activity reported on 

this account. The date of last activity on this account should predate my bankruptcy filing date, 10/16/2014, since a default on this 

account occurred no later than the Bankruptcy filing date.

• Any post-bankruptcy derogatory information should be 

immediately deleted from [Plaintiff’s] report.

• If [Experian] do[es] not immediately delete this from 

[Plaintiff’s] credit report, please include a 100-word statement in 

my credit report of all of the disputed information contained in this 

letter regarding this account. 

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 9 of 12
COMPLAINT 10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

49. Upon information and belief, Experian timely notified TD Bank of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but TD Bank continued reporting derogatory information.

50. TD Bank and Experian were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

specific account on Plaintiff’s consumer report pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§1681i.

51. On or about July 7, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Experian that 

TD Bank and Experian received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and Defendants stated the account was “updated.”

52. Surprisingly, rather than remove all the derogatory information from 

Plaintiff’s report, TD Bank and Experian simply left derogatory information 

on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, TD Bank and Experian reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #435237759503****Post-bankruptcy information for 

the following dates: February 2015-March 2015 (Showing 

Account Balance of $5,282.00).

53. TD Bank and Experian, upon receipt of Plaintiff’s dispute, failed to conduct 

an investigation with respect to the disputed information as required by 15 

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A).

54. TD Bank and Experian failed to review all relevant information provided by 

Plaintiff in the dispute to Experian, as required by and in violation of 15 

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

55. Due to TD Bank and Experian’s failure to investigate, they each further 

failed to correct and update Plaintiff’s information as required by 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681s-2(b)(1)(E), thereby causing continued reporting of inaccurate 

information in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681-s(2)(b)(1)(C).

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 10 of 12
COMPLAINT 11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

56. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct TD Bank and Experian’s erroneous 

and negative reporting of the Debt by communicating Plaintiff’s dispute 

with TD Bank and Experian were fruitless.

57. TD Bank and Experian’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the 

Debt in light of its knowledge of the actual error was willful.

58. TD Bank and Experian’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

59. By inaccurately reporting account information relating to the Debt after 

notice and confirmation of its errors, TD Bank and Experian failed to take 

the appropriate measures as determined in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-s(2)(b)(1)(D) 

and (E).

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

15 U.S.C. § 1681 ET SEQ. (FCRA)

60. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this 

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

61. The foregoing acts and omissions constitute numerous and multiple willful, 

reckless or negligent violations of the FCRA, including but not limited to 

each and every one of the above-cited provisions of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C § 

1681.

62. As a result of each and every willful violation of the FCRA, Plaintiff is 

entitled to actual damages as the Court may allow pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 

1681n(a)(1); statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(1); 

punitive damages as the Court may allow pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 

1681n(a)(2); and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681n(a)(3) from Defendants.

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 11 of 12
COMPLAINT 12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

63. As a result of each and every negligent noncompliance of the FCRA, 

Plaintiff is entitled to actual damages as the Court may allow pursuant to 15 

U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1); and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 

15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(2) from Defendants.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court grant Plaintiff the following relief 

against Defendants:

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

15 U.S.C. § 1681 ET SEQ. (FCRA)

• an award of actual damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(1);

• award of statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(1);

• an award of punitive damages as the Court may allow pursuant to 15 

U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(2); 

• award of costs of litigation and reasonable attorney’s fees, pursuant to 15 

U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(3), and 15 U.S.C. § 1681(o)(a)(1) against Defendants 

for each incident of negligent noncompliance of the FCRA; and

• any other relief the Court may deem just and proper.

TRIAL BY JURY

64. Pursuant to the seventh amendment to the Constitution of the United States 

of America, Plaintiff is entitled to, and demands, a trial by jury.

Dated: August 21, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

BY: /S/ RYAN L. MCBRIDE______

RYAN L. MCBRIDE, ESQ.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:15-cv-01635-SRB Document 1 Filed 08/21/15 Page 12 of 12