Source: https://www.creditreportproblems.com/pennsylvania-complaint-against-big-three-agencies/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 16:20:35+00:00

Document:
Defendants Trans Union, LLC, Equifax Information Systems LLC, and Experian Information Solutions, Inc., national consumer reporting agencies (“CRAs”), have been selling credit reports inaccurately marking Plaintiff as deceased. When the CRAs inaccurately report a living consumer as deceased, Defendants make it practically impossible for that consumer to access credit, as it did with Plaintiff. Defendants’ practice also harms the businesses that purchase its reports; as such companies cannot process credit applications due to the applicant’s lack of a credit score. There is no good faith rationale to explain Defendants’ practice other than the generation of revenue. If Defendants actually believed that Plaintiff was deceased, they had no legally permissible basis to sell his report. If Defendants believed Plaintiff was alive, they knowingly sold his report with a gross inaccuracy. Moreover, Defendants know that identity thieves use the credit information of truly deceased persons to commit credit fraud. Defendants thus violated Plaintiff’s rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), as set forth below.
Plaintiff is an adult individual residing in Kemp, Texas.
Defendant Trans Union, LLC (“Trans Union”) is a consumer reporting agency that regularly conducts business in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has a principle place of business located at 1510 Chester Pike, Crum Lynne, PA.
Defendant Equifax Information Services LLC (“Equifax”) is a consumer reporting agency that regularly conducts business in Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has a principal place of business located at 6 Clementon Road, East, Suite A2, Gibbsboro, NJ.
Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.(“Experian”) is a consumer reporting agency that regularly conducts business in Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has a principal place of business located at 5 Century Drive, Parsippany, NJ.
Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p and 28 U.S.C. §1331.
Defendants are each regulated as a “consumer reporting agency” (“CRA”) under the FCRA. 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(e).
Defendants sell millions of consumer reports (often called “credit reports” or “reports”) per day, and Defendants also sell credit scores. 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(e).
Defendants do not request or require any proof from any data source which advises that a consumer is “deceased” showing that the consumer is, in fact, deceased before placing a “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.
In some cases, in order to assure accuracy, Defendants send letters and/or other communications to consumers when certain information that may be considered suspicious or unreliable is furnished about said consumers to be placed in their consumer credit files, such as in cases where consumers have a freeze or fraud alert on their credit report, or in accordance with certain state laws, such as the consumer laws of Colorado. But Defendants have no similar procedure to notify the consumers (such as a next of kin or executor or administrator of the consumer’s estate) when an “X” deceased code is furnished to Defendants to be placed in said consumer’s credit file or report.
Even in instances where the purportedly deceased consumer communicates directly with Defendants, Defendants employ no procedures which assures that a consumer with a “deceased” mark on his/her report is, in fact, deceased before placing the “deceased” mark on that consumer’s report.
Nevertheless, Defendants routinely sells to third parties credit reports for persons with a “deceased” mark on their reports with no credit score, despite a request by the purchaser of the report for a credit score for that consumer.
Defendants know that living consumers are turned down for credit specifically because Defendants are reporting them as “deceased” and without a credit score.
Defendants know that thousands of consumers are erroneously marked as “deceased” on their credit reports via an erroneous furnishing of the “X” code, but said consumers are not on the Death Master File and are, in fact, alive.
Even consumers who dispute the erroneous “deceased” status on their credit reports continue to be erroneously marked as deceased unless the furnishing source which provided the erroneous “X” code in the first instance decides to change the code.
Defendants have no independent procedure to change an erroneous deceased status on their own and will merely parrot their furnishing source in the case of a reinvestigation into the accuracy of the deceased status upon a consumer’s report, which reinvestigation was triggered by a consumer dispute.
Nor do Defendants employ any procedures to limit or stop the furnishing of reports to third parties for consumers which they have marked as “deceased” under any circumstances.
Defendants will only remove a deceased consumer’s file from their credit reporting database when they are no longer valuable to Defendants – meaning that nobody is continuing to buy that report from Defendants.
Defendants charge third parties a fee for reports with a mark that a consumer is deceased (“reports on the deceased”) as they would for any other report.
Defendants know that the credit information and reports of truly deceased persons are used by criminals to commit identity theft or credit fraud. Indeed, identity theft using the personal identifying information of deceased consumers is known to Defendants to be a common and major source of identity theft.
Indeed, Defendants sell reports on the deceased to third parties in an automated fashion and without any specific or general certification that could reasonably explain a “permissible purpose” for purchasing or using a (supposedly) deceased consumer’s credit history and/or report.
For a period of time since 2012 Plaintiff had been marked by Defendants as “deceased” on his Experian, Equifax and Trans Union credit reports.
Plaintiff was declined for credit for a loan in August 2012. Among other transactions, known and unknown, Defendants sold a credit report marking Plaintiff as deceased to Citizens State Bank on, or around, August 28, 2012 when Plaintiff applied for a personal loan through that business.
As a result, Defendants made it practically impossible for Plaintiff to obtain credit, and Plaintiff was indeed turned down for a personal loan in August 2012 as a result of Defendants’ reports erroneously marking Plaintiff as deceased. Plaintiff also suffered harm to credit reputation and emotional distress as a result of Defendants’ conduct. Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the form of lost credit opportunities, harm to credit reputation and credit score, and emotional distress, including humiliation and embarrassment.
At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants were acting by and through their agents, servants and/or employees who were acting within the course and scope of their agency or employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the Defendants herein.
At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants were each a “person” and a “consumer reporting agency” as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681a(b) and (f).
Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n and 15 U.S.C. § 1681o, Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for willfully and negligently failing 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).

References: § 1681
 §1331
 § 1681
 § 1681
 § 1681
 § 1681
 § 1681