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 

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

Dacia Pryor, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Trans Union, LLC, Avant, Inc., 

and Synchrony Bank, 

 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-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

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. DACIA PRYOR (“Plaintiff”), by Plaintiff’s attorneys, brings this action to 

challenge the actions of TRANS UNION, LLC (“Trans Union”), AVANT, 

INC. (“Avant”), and SYNCHRONY BANK (“Synchrony”) (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.

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

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

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 Trans Union is a foreign limited liability company doing business 

in the State of Arizona.

13. Defendant Avant is a corporation doing business in the State of Arizona. 

14. Defendant Synchrony Bank is a bank doing business in the State of Arizona. 

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

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

course of business furnish information to a consumer credit reporting 

agency. 

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

16. Defendant Trans Union is a national credit reporting agency, doing business 

in Arizona, with a principal place of business in Delaware.

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 March 17, 2015, Plaintiff filed for a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in 

the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona in order to 

obtain a fresh start and rebuild her credit. Plaintiff’s case was assigned Case 

Number 2:15-cv-02837 (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 June 29, 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-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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, inaccurate, and negative 

credit information in Plaintiff’s credit files.

28. The continued reporting of erroneous, inaccurate, and derogatory 

information negatively impacted Plaintiff’s credit and her “fresh start”.

Avant Misreported Credit Information

29. In a Trans Union credit report dated August 8, 2015, Avant reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #1239****: Pay Status: “Account 120 Days Past Due 

Date.”

30. Avant should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s 

account after March 17, 2015, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

March 17, 2015.

31. On or about August 12, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Avant’s reported 

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

notifying Trans Union, in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit 

information furnished by Avant. 

32. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Trans Union

(the “Trans Union Dispute Letter”), requesting the above inaccurate and 

incorrect derogatory information be removed as follows:

• Account #1239 : This account was discharged in my 

Bankruptcy which was filed on 03/17/2015 and discharged 

06/29/2015, bearing Case No. 2:15-bk-02837-GBN in the 

District for Arizona. There should be no derogatory reporting 

after the filing date. Specifically, please remove the Pay Status, 

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

which is currently reporting as “Account 120 Days Past Due 

Date.”

33. The Trans Union Dispute Letter further requested that Trans Union:

• Immediately delete this account and the disputed derogatory 

information from my 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, 03/17/2015, 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 [Trans Union] 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. 

34. Upon information and belief, Trans Union timely notified Avant of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but Avant continued reporting derogatory information.

35. Avant and Trans Union were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

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

§1681i.

36. On or around August 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Trans Union

that Avant and Trans Union received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 

15 U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6).

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

37. Subsequently, on or around September 5, 2015, Plaintiff requested an 

updated Trans Union report online to verify information on her report had 

been corrected.

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

Plaintiff’s report, Avant and Trans Union simply left derogatory information 

on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Avant and Trans Union reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #1239** **: Pay Status: “Account 120 Days Past Due 

Date.”

39. Avant and Trans Union, upon receipt of Plaintiff’s dispute, failed to conduct 

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

U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(A).

40. Avant and Trans Union failed to review all relevant information provided by 

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

U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

41. Due to Avant and Trans Union’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).

42. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Avant and Trans Union’s erroneous 

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

with Avant and Trans Union were fruitless.

43. Avant and Trans Union’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the 

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

44. Avant and Trans Union’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Avant and Trans Union failed to take 

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

and (E).

Synchrony Bank Misreported Credit Information

46. In a Trans Union credit report dated August 8, 2015, Synchrony reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #601919260116 : Pay Status: Charged Off.

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

account after March 17, 2015, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

March 17, 2015.

48. On or about August 12, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Synchrony’s reported 

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

notifying Trans Union, in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit 

information furnished by Synchrony. 

49. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Trans Union

(the “Trans Union 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 03/17/2015 and discharged 06/29/2015, bearing Case No. 

2:15-bk-02837-GBN in the District for Arizona. There should 

be no derogatory reporting after the filing date. Specifically, 

please remove the Pay Status, which is currently reporting as

“Charged Off.”

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

50. The Trans Union Dispute Letter further requested that Trans Union:

• 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, 03/17/2015, 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 [Trans Union] 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. 

51. Upon information and belief, Trans Union timely notified Synchrony of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but Synchrony continued reporting derogatory 

information.

52. Synchrony and Trans Union were required to conduct a reinvestigation into 

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

§1681i.

53. On or around August 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Trans Union

that Synchrony and Trans Union received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute 

pursuant to 15 U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6).

54. Subsequently, on or around September 5, 2015, Plaintiff requested an 

updated Trans Union report online to verify information on her report had 

been corrected.

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

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

Plaintiff’s report, Synchrony and Trans Union simply left derogatory 

information on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Synchrony and Trans Union

reported the following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #601919260116** **: Pay Status: Charged Off. 

56. Synchrony and Trans Union, 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).

57. Synchrony and Trans Union failed to review all relevant information 

provided by Plaintiff in the dispute to Trans Union, as required by and in 

violation of 15 U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

58. Due to Synchrony and Trans Union’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).

59. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Synchrony and Trans Union’s

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

dispute with Synchrony and Trans Union were fruitless.

60. Synchrony and Trans Union’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting 

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

61. Synchrony and Trans Union’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Synchrony and Trans Union failed to 

take the appropriate measures as determined in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-

s(2)(b)(1)(D) and (E).

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

15 U.S.C. § 1681 ET SEQ. (FCRA)

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

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

64. 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.

65. 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.

66. 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:

///

///

///

///

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 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

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

67. 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: October 9, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

BY: /S/ RYAN L. MCBRIDE______

RYAN L. MCBRIDE, ESQ.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:15-cv-02035-DMF Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 Page 12 of 12