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 

Bridget Ann Kaus AKA Bridget Ann Dunn,

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Equifax Information Services, 

LLC, Barclays Bank Delaware,

Capital One Bank USA, N.A.,

Chase Bank USA, N.A., and 

WebBank, 

 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-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 1 of 18
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. BRIDGET ANN KAUS AKA BRIDGET ANN DUNN (“Plaintiff”), by 

Plaintiff’s attorneys, brings this action to challenge the actions of 

EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC (“Equifax”), BARCLAYS 

BANK DELAWARE (“Barclays”), CAPITAL ONE BANK USA, N.A. 

(“Capital One”), CHASE BANK USA, N.A., (“Chase”), and WEBBANK 

(“WebBank”) (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.

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 2 of 18
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

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 

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 Equifax is a foreign limited liability company doing business in 

the State of Arizona. 

13. Defendant Barclays is a bank doing business in the State of Arizona. 

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 3 of 18
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

14. Defendant Capital One is a National Bank doing business in the State of 

Arizona. 

15. Defendant Chase is a bank doing business in the State of Arizona.

16. Defendant WebBank is a corporation doing business in the State of Arizona.

17. Defendants Barclays, Capital One, Chase, and WebBank 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. 

18. Defendant Equifax is a national credit reporting agency, doing business in 

Arizona, with a principal place of business in Georgia.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

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

Arizona.

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

21. On or about August 10, 2009, Plaintiff filed for Chapter 13 Bankruptcy in 

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

case was assigned Case Number 2:09-bk-19053-EPB (the “Bankruptcy”) in 

order to obtain a fresh start and rebuild her credit..

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

Bankruptcy and Defendants, the Creditors, received notice of the 

Bankruptcy.

23. On or about October 6, 2014, Plaintiff received a Bankruptcy discharge.

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

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

25. 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.

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 4 of 18
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

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

Bankruptcy.

27. 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.

28. 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. 

29. 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.

Barclays Bank Delaware Misreported Credit Information

30. In an Equifax credit report dated May 8, 2015, Barclays reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #514021800604****: Post-bankruptcy information for the 

following dates: September 2009 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported).

31. Barclays should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s 

account after August 10, 2009, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

August 10, 2009.

32. On or about June 5, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Barclays’s reported information 

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

in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit information furnished by 

Barclays. 

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 5 of 18
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

33. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Equifax (the 

“Equifax 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 08/10/2009 and discharged 10/06/2014, bearing Case No. 

2:09-bk-19053-EPB in the District for Arizona. There should 

be no derogatory reporting after the filing date. Specifically, 

please remove the derogatory information for the following 

post-bankruptcy dates: 09/2009 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported); August 2009 (30+ days past due).

34. The Equifax Dispute Letter further requested that Equifax:

• 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, 12/26/2013, 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 [Equifax] 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-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 6 of 18
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

35. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified Barclays of Plaintiff’s 

dispute, but Barclays continued reporting derogatory information.

36. Barclays and Equifax were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

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

§1681i.

37. On or about July 10, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax that 

Barclays and Equifax received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and verified the prior paying history “has been 

updated.”

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

Plaintiff’s report, Barclays and Equifax simply left derogatory information 

on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Barclays and Equifax reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #514021800604 : Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: September 2009 (Date Major 

Delinquency First Reported).

39. Barclays and Equifax, 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).

40. Barclays and Equifax failed to review all relevant information provided by 

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

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

41. Due to Barclays and Equifax’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-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 7 of 18
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

42. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Barclays and Equifax’s erroneous and 

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

Barclays and Equifax were fruitless.

43. Barclays and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the 

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

44. Barclays and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Barclays and Equifax failed to take the 

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

(E).

Capital One Misreported Credit Information

46. In an Equifax credit report dated May 8, 2015, Capital One reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #517805723308** **: Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: October 2009 (Date Major 

Delinquency First Reported); September 2009 (60+ days past 

due).

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

account after August 10, 2009, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

August 10, 2009.

48. On or about June 5, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Capital One’s reported 

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

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

information furnished by Capital One.

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 8 of 18
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

49. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Equifax (the 

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

derogatory information be removed as follows:

• Account #517805723308 : This account was discharged in 

my Bankruptcy which was filed on 08/10/2009 and discharged 

10/06/2014, bearing docket No. 2:09-bk-19053-EPB in the 

District for Arizona. There should be no derogatory reporting 

after the filing date. Specifically, please remove the derogatory 

information for the following post-bankruptcy dates: 10/2009 

((Date Major Delinquency First Reported); August 2009 (30+ 

days past due); September 2009 (60+ days past due); 08/27/14 

(Inquiry made after my initial Bankruptcy filing date). 

50. The Equifax Dispute Letter further requested that Equifax:

• 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, 08/10/2009, 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 [Equifax] do[es] not immediately delete this from 

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

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 9 of 18
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

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

letter regarding this account. 

51. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified Capital One of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but Capital One continued reporting derogatory 

information.

52. Capital One and Equifax 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 about July 10, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax that 

Capital One and Equifax received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and Defendants verified that the prior paying history 

on the account “is being reported correctly.”

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

Plaintiff’s report, Capital One and Equifax simply left inaccurate

information on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Capital One and Equifax

reported the following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account 517805723308** **:: Post-bankruptcy information for 

the following dates: October 2009 (Date Major Delinquency 

First Reported); Status: Charge Off.

55. Capital One and Equifax, 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).

56. Capital One and Equifax failed to review all relevant information provided 

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

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 10 of 18
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

57. Due to Capital One and Equifax’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).

58. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Capital One and Equifax’s erroneous 

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

with Capital One and Equifax were fruitless.

59. Capital One and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of 

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

60. Capital One and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Capital One and Equifax failed to take 

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

and (E).

Chase Bank USA, N.A. Misreported Credit Information

62. In an Equifax credit report dated May 8, 2015, Chase reported the following 

inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #541657784525 : Post-bankruptcy information for the 

following dates: September 2009 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported).

63. Chase should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s 

account after August 10, 2009, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

August 10, 2009.

64. On or about June 5, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Chase’s reported information 

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

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 11 of 18
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

in writing, of the incorrect and inaccurate credit information furnished by 

Chase. 

65. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Equifax (the 

“Equifax 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 08/10/2009 and discharged 10/06/2014, bearing docket No. 

2:09-bk-19053-EPB in the District for Arizona. There should 

be no derogatory reporting after the filing date. Specifically, 

please remove the derogatory information for the following 

post- bankruptcy dates: 9/2009 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported); August 2009 (30+ days past due).

66. The Equifax Dispute Letter further requested that Equifax:

• 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, 08/10/2009, 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 [Equifax] do[es] not immediately delete this from 

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

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 12 of 18
COMPLAINT 13

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

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

letter regarding this account. 

67. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified Chase of Plaintiff’s 

dispute, but Chase continued reporting derogatory information.

68. Chase and Equifax were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

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

§1681i.

69. On or about July 10, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax that 

Chase and Equifax received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and verified the prior paying history on the account “is 

being reported correctly.”

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

Plaintiff’s report, Chase and Equifax simply left derogatory information on 

Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Chase and Equifax reported the following 

inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #541657784525** **: Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: September 2009 (Date Major 

Delinquency First Reported).

71. Chase and Equifax, 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).

72. Chase and Equifax failed to review all relevant information provided by 

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

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

73. Due to Chase and Equifax’s failure to investigate, they each further failed to 

correct and update Plaintiff’s information as required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681sCase 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 13 of 18
COMPLAINT 14

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

2(b)(1)(E), thereby causing continued reporting of inaccurate information in 

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

74. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Chase and Equifax’s erroneous and 

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

Chase and Equifax were fruitless.

75. Chase and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the Debt 

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

76. Chase and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged Plaintiff’s 

creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Chase and Equifax failed to take the 

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

(E).

WebBank Misreported Credit Information

78. In an Equifax credit report dated May 8, 2015, WebBank reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #687945011904069 : Post-bankruptcy information for 

the following dates: May 2011 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported); October 2009 (60+ days past due); November 2009 (90 

days past due); December 2009 (120 days past due).

79. WebBank should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s 

account after August 10, 2009, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on 

August 10, 2009.

80. On or about June 5, 2015, Plaintiff disputed WebBank’s reported 

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

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

information furnished by WebBank. 

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 14 of 18
COMPLAINT 15

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

81. Specifically, Plaintiff sent a letter, certified, return receipt, to Equifax (the 

“Equifax 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 08/10/2009 and discharged 10/06/2014, bearing docket No. 

2:09-bk-19053-EPB in the District for Arizona. There should 

be no derogatory reporting after the filing date. Specifically, 

please remove the derogatory information for the following 

post-bankruptcy dates: 05/2011 (Date Major Delinquency First 

Reported); October 2009 (60+ days past due); November 2009 

(90 days past due); December 2009 (120 days past due).

82. The Equifax Dispute Letter further requested that Equifax:

• 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, 08/10/2009, 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 [Equifax] 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-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 15 of 18
COMPLAINT 16

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

83. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified WebBank of Plaintiff’s 

dispute, but WebBank continued reporting derogatory information.

84. WebBank and Equifax were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

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

§1681i.

85. On or about July 10, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax that 

WebBank and Equifax received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant to 15 

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and verified the prior paying history on the account “is 

being reported correctly.”

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

Plaintiff’s report, WebBank and Equifax simply left derogatory information 

on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, WebBank and Equifax reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #687945011904069** *: Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: May 2011 (Date Major Delinquency 

First Reported); October 2009 (60+ days past due); November 

2009 (90 days past due); December 2009 (120 days past due).

87. WebBank and Equifax, 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).

88. WebBank and Equifax failed to review all relevant information provided by 

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

U.SC. § 1681s-2(b)(1)(B).

89. Due to WebBank and Equifax’s failure to investigate, they each further 

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

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 16 of 18
COMPLAINT 17

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

§ 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).

90. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct WebBank and Equifax’s erroneous 

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

with WebBank and Equifax were fruitless.

91. WebBank and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the 

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

92. WebBank and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, WebBank and Equifax 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)

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

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

95. 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.

96. 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-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 17 of 18
COMPLAINT 18

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

97. 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

98. 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 12, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

BY: /S/ DAVID J. MCGLOTHLIN______

DAVID J. MCGLOTHLIN, ESQ.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:15-cv-02043-DLR Document 1 Filed 10/12/15 Page 18 of 18