Sherfield v. Trans Union, LLC
Decision Date | 18 July 2019 |
Docket Number | Case No. CIV-19-001-R |
Parties | YALONDA SHERFIELD, Plaintiff, v. TRANS UNION, LLC, et al. Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma |
Before this Court is Defendant Trans Union, LLC's ("Trans Union" or "Defendant") Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). See Doc. 29. Plaintiff's claims against Trans Union, a consumer reporting agency ("CRA"),1 turn on her contention that Wilson-Breit, Inc., d/b/a Signature Loans on May; Ginny's, Inc.; Seventh Ave, Inc.; Camelot Financial Services d/b/a Anchor Finance of Bethany, d/b/a Access Loans, d/b/a Approved Loans of OKC; Sun Loan Company; Capital One Bank USA; and Quick Loans, Inc.—together, the "Furnishers"—inaccurately reported their tradelines2 on Plaintiff's Trans Union credit disclosure without the correct notation of "bankruptcy discharge" or "discharged in bankruptcy." See Doc. 22, at 3.3 Plaintiff claimsthat Trans Union's failure to include this notation on her credit report violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. Id. at 3-5, 23-25. Having considered the parties' filings, see Docs. 29-1, 39-40, the Court grants Defendant's motion.
The Court takes as true all well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint, views them in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, and draws from them all reasonable inferences in Plaintiffs' favor. See Burnett v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 706 F.3d 1231, 1235 (10th Cir. 2013). On April 3, 2013, Plaintiff filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Dkt. No. 13-11493. See Doc. 29-2.4 Plaintiff received an Order of Discharge from the Bankruptcy Court on July 9, 2013. See Doc. 22, at 4; Doc. 29-3. On August 22, 2018, Plaintiff reviewed her Trans Union credit file and found that the Furnishers' tradelines described the status of heraccounts with the notation, "Account Included in Bankruptcy," rather than with a notation specifying that the accounts had been "discharged" in bankruptcy. Doc. 22, at 4. Thereafter, on or about September 4, 2018, Plaintiff sent a letter to Trans Union disputing these tradelines. Id. In her letter, Plaintiff explained that the Furnishers "Errant Tradelines were discharged in her bankruptcy," attached her bankruptcy case history, and requested that Trans Union report these tradelines as having been discharged in bankruptcy. Id. Trans Union forwarded this letter to the Furnishers. Id. When Plaintiff later obtained her Trans Union credit disclosure on October 21, 2018, she saw that the tradelines continued to be reported without a notation of bankruptcy discharge. Id.5
Based on these allegations, Plaintiff brings claims against Trans Union for negligent and willful violations of Sections 1681e(b) and 1681i of the FCRA. See Doc. 22, at 23-25. Therein, Plaintiff alleges that Trans Union's credit report "contained information about Plaintiff that was false, misleading, and inaccurate," that Trans Union negligently and/or willfully "failed to maintain and/or follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information it reported," and that Trans Union negligently and/or willfully "failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required [by law]." Id. Plaintiff argues Trans Union's "failure to perform its duties under the FCRA" has directly and proximately caused her to suffer "actual damages," "credit and emotional damages,""undue stress and anxiety," "mental anguish and suffering, humiliation, and embarrassment." Id. at 5, 24-25.
Trans Union attaches to its motion to dismiss Plaintiff's credit file, including the results of Trans Union's reinvestigation. See Docs. 29-5, 29-6. The "Public Records" section of the file reflects Plaintiff's Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge. See Doc. 29-5, at 4. The Furnishers' tradelines list "Account Included in Bankruptcy" as the pay status of Plaintiff's accounts, no account balances due, and the accounts as closed. Id. at 5-7. As well, under "Remarks," the tradelines report, "Chapter 7 Bankruptcy." Id. Trans Union's reinvestigation results show no change in how the tradelines were reported. See Doc. 29-6. Plaintiff does not dispute that the Public Records section of her credit file reports her Chapter 7 Bankruptcy as discharged. Plaintiff also does not allege that any creditors have been misled by the notation "included in bankruptcy." And while Plaintiff vaguely alleges damage to her credit from Trans Union's actions, she does not allege that she was denied credit based on her credit report.
"To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (). While a complaint "need only give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests," Khalik v. United Air Lines, 671 F.3d 1188, 1191-92 (10thCir. 2012) (ellipsis, internal quotation marks, and citations omitted), "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. "Thus, the mere metaphysical possibility that some plaintiff could prove some set of facts in support of the pleaded claims is insufficient; the complaint must give the court reason to believe that this plaintiff has a reasonable likelihood of mustering factual support for these claims." Ridge at Red Hawk, L.L.C. v. Schneider, 493 F.3d 1174, 1177 (10th Cir. 2007) (emphasis omitted).
Plaintiff brings claims against Trans Union under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i.6 Section 1681e(b) requires Plaintiff to plead that (1) Trans Union published an inaccurate report; (2) Trans Union failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure the accuracy of its reports; (3) Plaintiff sustained actual damages; and (4) Trans Union's failure to follow reasonable procedures caused Plaintiff's damages. See Wright v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., 805 F.3d 1232, 1239 (10th Cir. 2015); Stewart v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 320 F. Supp. 3d 1186, 1207 (D. Kan. 2018). Section 1681i requires Plaintiff to plead that (1) her credit file contained inaccurate information; (2) she notified Trans Union of the alleged inaccuracy; (3) Trans Union failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in response toher notice; and (4) she suffered damages caused by Trans Union. See Wright, 805 F.3d at 1242 (). Thus, the existence of a factual inaccuracy is an essential element of both claims Plaintiff asserts against Trans Union. See Pinson v. Equifax Credit Info. Servs., Inc., 316 F. App'x 744, 751 (10th Cir. 2009) (); Kuehling v. Trans Union, LLC, 137 F. App'x 904, 908 (7th Cir. 2005) ; see also Lewis v. Midland Credit Mgmt., No. CIV-15-1052-R, 2016 WL 4747414, at *2 (W.D. Okla. Sept. 12, 2016) ( . "A report is inaccurate when it is patently incorrect or when it is misleading in such a way and to such an extent that it can be expected to have an adverse effect on the consumer." Skanes v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. CIV-19-0003-F, 2019 WL 2372624, at *2 (W.D. Okla. June 5, 2019) (citing Dalton v. Capital Associated Indus., Inc., 257 F.3d 409, 415 (4th Cir. 2001)).
Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under Sections 1681e(b) and 1681i. Plaintiff's sole ground for asserting that Trans Union's credit report was inaccurate is that the Furnisher's tradelines on the report stated Plaintiff's accounts as included in bankruptcy, instead of discharged in bankruptcy. See generally Docs. 22, 39. But this alleged notational error is insufficient to establish an inaccuracy in Plaintiff's credit report. Numerous courts have concluded that there is no meaningful difference between an "included in bankruptcy" notation and a "discharged in bankruptcy"/"bankruptcy discharge" notation—and, more broadly, that an "included in bankruptcy" notation is neither inaccurate nor misleading. See Diaz v. Trans Union LLC, No. 1:18-cv-01341-DAD-EPG, 2019 WL 2389937, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June 6, 2019) ( ); Smith v. Trans Union, No. 18-CV-13098, 2019 WL 2074594, at *4 (E.D. Mich. May 10, 2019) (collecting cases) () ; Butler...
To continue reading
Request your trial