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

29

30

PRICE LAW GROUP, APC

David A. Chami, AZ #027585

1204 E Baseline Rd., Suite 102

Tempe, AZ 85283

P: 818-907-2133

Fax: 866-401-1457

david@pricelawgroup.com

Attorney for Plaintiff Nicholaus Fischer

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

NICHOLAUS FISCHER,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC.; 

EXPERIAN INFORMATION 

SOLUTIONS, INC.; TRANS UNION 

LLC; and EQUIFAX INC.

Defendants.

Case No.:

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR 

JURY TRIAL FOR VIOLATIONS 

OF:

1. THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING 

ACT [15 USC § 1681 et. seq.]; 

2. THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION 

PRACTICES ACT [15 USC 1692 et. 

seq.]

INTRODUCTION

1. Nicholaus Fischer (“Plaintiff”) bring this action to secure redress from 

SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. (“SunTrust”), Trans Union LLC (“TransUnion”), 

Experian Information Solutions Inc. (“Experian”), and Equifax Inc. 

(“Equifax”) (herein collectively as “Defendants”) for violations of the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et. seq., the Fair Debt 

Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et. seq., and their 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

agents for their illegal reporting on Plaintiff’s credit reports and in their illegal 

efforts to collect an alleged consumer debt from Plaintiff. 

PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Nicholaus Fischer is a consumer, a natural person allegedly obligated 

to pay a debt, and a citizen of the United States of America who presently 

reside in: Maricopa County, Arizona.

3. Defendant, SunTrust is a mortgage company that offers servicing, origination, 

and transaction-based real estate services, including homeowners, home 

buyers, home sellers, investors, and other real estate market participants.

SunTrust’s main office is located in Richmond Virginia and regularly transacts 

business throughout the United States including Arizona and can be served 

through its registered agent Corporation Service Company located at 2338 W 

Royal Palm Rd., Suite-J, Phoenix Arizona 85021.

4. SunTrust engages in the practice of furnishing consumer information to 

consumer reporting agencies, and is therefore a “furnisher of information” as 

contemplated by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a) & (b). In addition, SunTrust engages 

in the practice of collecting debt as defined in 15 U.S.C. 1692a(6). 

5. TransUnion is a credit reporting agency, as defined in 15 USC 1681a(f) and 

RCW 19.182.010(5). On information and belief, TransUnion is regularly 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and disbursing information 

concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as 

defined in 15 USC 1681a(d), to third parties. Trans Union can be served 

through its registered agent Prentice-Hall Corp System located at 2338 W 

Royal Palm Rd., Suite-J, Phoenix Arizona 85021.

6. Defendant, Experian is a credit reporting agency, as defined in 15 USC 

1681a(f) and RCW 19.182.010(5). On information and belief, Defendant is 

regularly engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and disbursing 

information concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer 

reports, as defined in 15 USC 1681a(d), to third parties. Experian can be 

served through its registered agent CT Corporation System located at 3800 N 

Central Ave., Suite 460, Phoenix Arizona 85012.

7. Defendant, Equifax is a credit reporting agency, as defined in 15 USC 1681a(f)

and RCW 19.182.010(5). On information and belief, Defendant is regularly 

engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating, and disbursing information 

concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports, as 

defined in 15 USC 1681a(d), to third parties. Equifax can be served through its 

registered agent Prentice-Hall Corp System located at 2338 W Royal Palm Rd., 

Suite-J, Phoenix Arizona 85021.

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

8. On information and belief, TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax disburse the 

consumer reports to third parties under contract for monetary compensation. 

9. At all relevant times, Defendants acted through duly authorized agents, 

employees, officers, members, directors, heirs, successors, assigns, principals, 

trustees, sureties, subrogees, representatives, and insurers.

JURISDICTION

10.The District Court has federal question jurisdiction over these claims pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1331; 15 U.S.C. 1681 and 15 U.S.C. 1692.

11.Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) in that a 

substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in 

this District. Because Defendants transact business here, personal jurisdiction 

is established.

12. In or around January 2007 Plaintiff purchased a home located at 7315 E. 

Northland Drive #4 B5, Scottsdale, Arizona 85251 (hereinafter the “Property”). 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

13. Shortly after Plaintiff purchased the property the United States real estate 

market crashed along with many financial institutions causing severe hardship 

on many Americans including Plaintiff. 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

14. Plaintiff continued to make his mortgage payment throughout 2007, 2008, and

2009 despite the fact that the home was significantly under water. 

15. The mortgages used by Plaintiff to purchase the home were provided by 

Crestar Mortgage and totaled over $250,000.00 between the first and second 

mortgages.

16. The mortgages were used to purchase the home and therefore are considered 

“Purchase Money” and subject to Arizona Anti-Deficiency laws. 

17. On or about June 1, 2010 Plaintiff stopped making payments on his loans with 

SunTrust; who had either purchased the debt was acting as the mortgage 

servicer. 

18. Plaintiff listed the Property for sale in 2010 in attempt to sell the home via 

short sale and maximize the possible recovery for SunTrust. 

19. On or about January 11, 2011, Plaintiff submitted a contract for sale of the 

home totaling $74,000.00. 

20. Rather than accept this sale, SunTrust chose to foreclose on the property on 

January 20, 2011.

21. The property sold at Trustee’s sale for $53,401.00; more than $20,000.00 less 

than the short sale offer.

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

22. By foreclosing on the Property via Trustee sale, SunTrust elected to forego 

any rights to collect on the deficiency balance related to the mortgages 

pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute §33-814(G).

23. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, SunTrust began illegally reporting the debt on 

Plaintiff’s credit report as a Charge Off and continued to do so every month 

following the foreclosure. 

24. In or around March of 2015 Plaintiff applied for a conventional mortgage 

refinance on his current home at a significantly higher interest rate than the 

current market rates; that application was denied. 

25. Plaintiff, at that time, learned of the inaccurate reporting by SunTrust. 

26. On or about July 9, 2015, in an effort to correct the inaccurate information, 

Plaintiff sent a dispute letter to all of the Defendants. 

27. The Dispute letters explained that the home had been foreclosed on in January 

of 2011 and further explained that there could be no late reporting after that 

date. 

28. In one such letter to Experian, Plaintiff forewarned that he had already 

communicated with an attorney and that the failure to correctly report the trade 

line would result in litigation as the reporting was harming Plaintiff.

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

29. Despite the detailed information provided to Defendants, no changes were 

made; except that Experian and Trans Union further updated the payment 

history on Plaintiff’s credit report to indicate the debt was a “Charge-Off” as of 

June/July 2015; 4 years after the foreclosure had occurred. 

30. The reporting by Defendants has caused Plaintiff to receive two mortgage loan 

denials and further has caused Plaintiff severe emotional distress and mental 

anguish. 

All Defendants

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Violations of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et. seq.

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

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

32.The FCRA requires a furnisher such as SunTrust, after receiving notice from a 

credit reporting agency that a consumer disputes information that is being 

reported by that furnisher, to conduct an investigation with respect to the 

disputed information, to review all relevant information, to report the results of 

the investigation to the credit reporting agency, and, if the investigation reveals 

that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, to report those results to all 

other credit reporting agencies to which the furnisher has provided the 

inaccurate information. 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

33. From in or around January 2011 until the Present, SunTrust has provided 

inaccurate information to the credit reporting agencies.

34. During that time, Plaintiff notified Defendants that the reported payment 

history was inaccurate. Thereafter, the credit reporting agencies notified 

Defendant SunTrust that Plaintiff was disputing the information it had 

furnished to the credit reporting agencies. 

35. Plaintiff also notified SunTrust directly of the errors. 

36.Defendant SunTrust violated sections 1681n and 1681o of the FCRA by 

engaging in the following conduct that violates 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a), (b):

(a) Willfully and negligently failing to conduct an investigation of the 

inaccurate information that Plaintiff disputed;

(b) Willfully and negligently failing to review all relevant information 

concerning Plaintiff mortgage;

(c) Willfully and negligently failing to report the results of investigations 

to the relevant consumer reporting agencies;

(d) Willfully and negligently failing to report the inaccurate status of the 

inaccurate information to all credit reporting agencies;

(e) Willfully and negligently failing to properly participate, investigate 

and comply with the reinvestigations that were conducted by any and 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

all credit reporting agencies concerning the inaccurate information 

disputed by Plaintiff;

(f) Willfully and negligently continuing to furnish and disseminate 

inaccurate and derogatory credit, account and other information 

concerning both Plaintiff to the credit reporting agencies; and

(g) Willfully and negligently failing to comply with the requirements 

imposed on furnishers of information pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681s2(a), (b).

37. Defendant SunTrust’s conduct was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a 

substantial factor, in causing serious injuries, damages and harm to Plaintiff

that are outlined more fully above, and as a result, Defendant is liable to 

compensate Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, actual and punitive 

damages, along with attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as other such relief, 

permitted by 15 U.S.C. § 1681n. 

38. The FCRA provides that if the completeness or accuracy of any item of 

information contained in a consumer’s file at a consumer reporting agency is 

disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly of such 

dispute, the agency shall conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine 

whether the disputed information is inaccurate, or delete the item from the file 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

within thirty (30) days of receiving the consumer’s dispute notice. 15 U.S.C. § 

1681i(a)(2)(A).

39.The Act further requires the credit reporting agency, within 5 business days of 

receiving notice of the consumer’s dispute, to provide notification of the 

dispute to the person who furnished the information in dispute and requires the 

credit reporting agency to “include all relevant information regarding the 

dispute that the agency received from the consumer.” 15 U.S.C. § 

1681i(a)(2)(A). In conducting its reinvestigation of disputed information in a 

consumer report, the credit-reporting agency is required to “review and 

consider all relevant information submitted by the consumer.” 

40.The Defendant, credit-reporting agencies, failed to conduct a reasonable 

reinvestigation of the inaccuracy that the Plaintiff disputed. 

41.The Defendant, credit-reporting agencies, failed to review and consider all 

relevant information submitted by Plaintiff. 

42.The Defendant, credit reporting agencies, failed to employ and follow 

reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of Plaintiff’s

credit report, information, and file, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b).

43. As a result of the above-described violations of § 1681i and § 1681e(b), 

Plaintiff has sustained damages.

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

44.The Defendant, credit-reporting agencies, violations of the FCRA were willful 

and therefore Plaintiff is entitled to seek statutory and punitive damages. 

Defendant SunTrust

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Violations of the FDCPA, 15 USC 1692 et. seq.

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

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

46. The FDCPA provides that a “debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, 

or misleading representation or means with the collection of any debt.” 15 

U.S.C. § 1692e. Furthermore, a debt collector will be found in violation if the 

following conduct is determined: a false representation of “the character, 

amount, or legal status of any debt” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(a). 

47. From the date of January 2011 until the present, Defendant SunTrust continues

to report a Charge-Off to all three major credit reporting agencies.

48. Defendant SunTrust’s reporting of the balance was a false representation of 

amount and legal status of the debt. 

49. Defendant SunTrust’s conduct was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a 

substantial factor, in causing serious injuries, damages and harm to Plaintiff

that are outlined more fully above, and as a result, Defendant is liable to 

compensate Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, actual and punitive 

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 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

29

30

damages, along with attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as other such relief, 

permitted by 15 U.S.C. § 1692k. 

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully request that judgment be entered 

against Defendant for the following:

A. Actual damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and 1681o and 1692k(1);

B. Statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(2)(a);

C. Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and 

1681o and 1692k(3);

D. Any pre-judgment and post judgment interest as may be allowed under the 

law; and

E. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Please take notice that Plaintiff demands a trial by jury in this action.

DATED this 16th

PRICE LAW GROUP, APC

day of October, 2015,

By: 

David A. Chami

/s/David A. Chami ’ 

Attorney for Plaintiff Nicholaus Fischer

Case 2:15-cv-02075-JJT Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 Page 12 of 12