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 

Audree Renee Osborn, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Experian Information Solutions, 

Inc.; Wells Fargo Bank, National 

Association; and Arizona Public 

Service Company,

 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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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. AUDREE RENEE OSBORN (“Plaintiff”), by Plaintiff’s attorneys, brings 

this action to challenge the actions of EQUIFAX INFORMATION 

SERVICES, LLC (“Equifax”), WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION (“Wells Fargo”), and ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE 

COMPANY (“APS”) (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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

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 Wells Fargo is a bank doing business in the State of Arizona. 

14. Defendant APS is a utility company doing business in the State of Arizona. 

Case 2:15-cv-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

15. Defendants Wells Fargo and APS 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. 

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

Arizona, with a principal place of business in Georgia.

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 June 13, 2011, Plaintiff filed for a Chapter 13 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 2:11-bk-17044-MCW (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 August 8, 2014, 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.

Case 2:15-cv-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

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. 

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”.

Wells Fargo Misreported Credit Information

29. In an Equifax credit report dated August 11, 2015, Wells Fargo reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account No. 5023158132743****: Post-bankruptcy 

information for the following dates: July 2011 (90 days past 

due); August 2011 (Voluntarily Surrendered); September 2011 

(Charge Off); Status: “Closed. $4,583 written off.”; Account 

History: “Charge Off as of Sep 2011, Voluntarily Surrendered 

as of Aug 2011, 90 days past due as of Jul 2011.”

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

account after June 13, 2011, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on June 

13, 2011.

31. On or about August 27, 2015, Plaintiff disputed Wells Fargo’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 Wells Fargo. 

Case 2:15-cv-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

32. 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 #5023158132743 : This account was discharged 

in my Bankruptcy which was filed on 06/13/2011 and 

discharged 08/04/2014, bearing Case No. 2:11-bk-17044-MCW

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: 

July 2011 (90 days past due); August 2011 (Voluntarily 

Surrendered); Status: “Closed. $4,583 written off.” This is 

incorrect.; Account History: “Charge Off as of Sep 2011.” This 

is incorrect.

33. 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, 06/13/2011, 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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

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

letter regarding this account. 

34. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified Wells Fargo of 

Plaintiff’s dispute, but Wells Fargo continued reporting derogatory 

information.

35. Wells Fargo and Equifax 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 about October 15, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax

that Wells Fargo and Equifax received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute pursuant 

to 15 U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and Defendants verified the account had been 

updated. 

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

Plaintiff’s report, Wells Fargo and Equifax simply left derogatory 

information on Plaintiff’s report. Specifically, Wells Fargo and Equifax

reported the following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #5023158132743** **: Post-bankruptcy information 

for the following dates: March 2012 (Charge Off).

38. Wells Fargo 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).

39. Wells Fargo 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).

40. Due to Wells Fargo 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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

§ 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).

41. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct Wells Fargo and Equifax’s erroneous 

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

with Wells Fargo and Equifax were fruitless.

42. Wells Fargo and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of 

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

43. Wells Fargo and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged 

Plaintiff’s creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, Wells Fargo and Equifax failed to take 

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

and (E).

APS Misreported Credit Information

45. In an Equifax credit report dated August 11, 2015, APS reported the 

following inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account No. 95405 : Status: Account charged off, written 

off. $1,079; July 2011-June 2015 (Charge Off); August 2013-

May 2015 (Account Balance showing of $1,079).

46. APS should not have reported derogatory information on Plaintiff’s account 

after June 13, 2011, because Plaintiff filed for Bankruptcy on June 13, 2011.

47. On or about August 27, 2015, Plaintiff disputed APS’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 

APS. 

Case 2:15-cv-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

48. 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 06/13/2011 and discharged 08/04/2014, bearing Case No. 

2:11-bk-17044-MCW 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: July 2011-December 2013, February 

2014-March 2015, May 2015-June 2015 (Charge Off); Pay 

status: Charged Off; Remarks: Unpaid Balance Charged Off.

49. 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, 06/13/2011, 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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

50. Upon information and belief, Equifax timely notified APS of Plaintiff’s 

dispute, but APS continued reporting derogatory information.

51. APS and Equifax were required to conduct a reinvestigation into this 

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

§1681i.

52. On or about October 15, 2015, Plaintiff received notification from Equifax

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

U.SC. § 1681i(a)(6), and verified that historical account information was 

deleted and the account was updated. 

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

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

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

inaccurate, derogatory information:

• Account #95405** **: Post-bankruptcy information for the 

following dates: July 2011-July 2014 (Charge Off); Status: 

Paid. Closed. $1,079 written off.

54. APS 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).

55. APS 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).

56. Due to APS and Equifax’s failure to investigate, they each further failed to 

correct and update Plaintiff’s information as required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s2(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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

57. Plaintiff’s continued efforts to correct APS and Equifax’s erroneous and 

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

APS and Equifax were fruitless.

58. APS and Equifax’s continued inaccurate and negative reporting of the Debt 

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

59. APS and Equifax’s inaccurate and negative reporting damaged Plaintiff’s 

creditworthiness.

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

notice and confirmation of its errors, APS 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)

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

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

62. 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.

63. 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-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 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

64. 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

65. 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: December 28, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

BY: /S/ RYAN L. MCBRIDE______

RYAN L. MCBRIDE, ESQ.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:15-cv-02631-DLR Document 1 Filed 12/28/15 Page 12 of 12