FCRA Credit Report Dispute Complaint - Minnesota

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT AND MINNESOTA CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW

OPTION A — FEDERAL FORUM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case No. [____________]

OPTION B — STATE FORUM

STATE OF MINNESOTA
DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF [________________________________]
[________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Court File No. [____________]

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF FULL LEGAL NAME] ("Plaintiff"), by and through undersigned counsel, brings this action against Defendant [CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCY] (the "CRA Defendant") and Defendant [FURNISHER NAME] (the "Furnisher Defendant") (collectively, "Defendants"), and alleges as follows:

I. NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action for damages brought by an individual consumer against a consumer reporting agency and a furnisher of information arising under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. ("FCRA"), the Minnesota Access to Consumer Reports law, Minn. Stat. § 13C.01 et seq., and the Minnesota consumer fraud and unlawful-practices statutes, Minn. Stat. §§ 325F.69 and 8.31.

2. The CRA Defendant prepared and disseminated consumer credit reports containing inaccurate information concerning Plaintiff and, after Plaintiff disputed that information, failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy and failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i and Minn. Stat. § 13C.01.

3. The Furnisher Defendant, after receiving notice of Plaintiff's dispute from the CRA Defendant, failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and continued to report inaccurate information, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b).

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction (Federal Forum). This Court has federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 15 U.S.C. § 1681p, which provides that an action to enforce liability under the FCRA may be brought in "any appropriate United States district court ... or in any other court of competent jurisdiction." This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the Minnesota claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

5. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction (State Forum). Alternatively, the Minnesota District Court has jurisdiction because 15 U.S.C. § 1681p confers concurrent jurisdiction on any court of competent jurisdiction, and the District Court is a court of general jurisdiction under Minn. Const. art. VI, § 3.

6. Personal Jurisdiction. Each Defendant regularly conducts business in Minnesota and committed the acts and omissions complained of in Minnesota, and therefore is subject to jurisdiction under Minnesota's long-arm statute, Minn. Stat. § 543.19.

7. Venue. For a federal filing, plead facts satisfying one specific 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) route: (1) a district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the forum State; (2) a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions occurred; or (3), only if no district is otherwise available, a district where a defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction for the action. Plaintiff's residence or a generic statement that a defendant transacts business in the forum is not enough by itself. For a state filing, separately apply Minn. Stat. § 542.09.

III. PARTIES

8. Plaintiff. Plaintiff is a natural person residing in [CITY], [________________________________] County, Minnesota, and is a "consumer" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c) and Minn. Stat. § 13C.001.

9. CRA Defendant. Defendant [CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCY] is a [corporation/LLC] organized under the laws of [STATE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS]. It is a "consumer reporting agency" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(f) and Minn. Stat. § 13C.001 because, for monetary fees, it regularly assembles and evaluates consumer credit information for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties.

10. Furnisher Defendant. Defendant [FURNISHER NAME] is a [corporation/LLC/bank/collection agency] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS]. It is a "furnisher" of information that regularly provides information about consumers, including Plaintiff, to one or more consumer reporting agencies for inclusion in consumer reports.

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

11. The Inaccurate Item. Plaintiff's consumer file maintained by the CRA Defendant contains the following inaccurate item of information (the "Disputed Item"):
    - Creditor/Furnisher Name: [________________________________]
    - Account Number (last 4): [____]
    - What the report inaccurately states: [DESCRIBE — e.g., account reported as charged-off/late/open with balance of $[AMOUNT]]
    - What is true and accurate: [DESCRIBE — e.g., account was paid in full / never belonged to Plaintiff / discharged in bankruptcy]

12. Type of inaccuracy (check all that apply):
    ☐ Account does not belong to Plaintiff (mixed file / identity theft)
    ☐ Balance, payment history, or account status is incorrect
    ☐ Account was paid, settled, or discharged in bankruptcy and is reported otherwise
    ☐ Obsolete information being reported beyond the period allowed by 15 U.S.C. § 1681c
    ☐ Duplicate reporting of the same debt
    ☐ Other: [________________________________]

13. The Written Dispute to the CRA. On or about [__/__/____], Plaintiff sent a written dispute to the CRA Defendant identifying the Disputed Item, explaining why it is inaccurate, and enclosing supporting documentation. The dispute was sent by [certified mail / the CRA's online portal] and received by the CRA Defendant on or about [__/__/____].

14. The CRA's Failed Reinvestigation. Upon receiving Plaintiff's dispute, the CRA Defendant was required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(1) to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, free of charge, within the statutory period, and by Minn. Stat. § 13C.01 to honor the consumer's right to dispute and correct errors consistent with the federal FCRA procedures. The CRA Defendant failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and instead [parroted the furnisher's verification / "verified" the item without meaningful review / failed to forward all relevant information to the furnisher / failed to respond]. The CRA Defendant continued to report the Disputed Item as accurate.

15. Notice to and Failure by the Furnisher. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(2), the CRA Defendant forwarded notice of Plaintiff's dispute to the Furnisher Defendant. Upon receiving that notice, the Furnisher Defendant was required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) to conduct its own investigation, review all relevant information provided by the CRA, report the results, and correct or delete information found to be inaccurate or incomplete. The Furnisher Defendant failed to do so and continued to furnish the inaccurate Disputed Item.

16. Harm to Plaintiff. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff suffered harm, including: ☐ denial of credit, ☐ a higher interest rate or less favorable credit terms, ☐ denial of [employment/housing/insurance], ☐ damage to credit score and creditworthiness, ☐ out-of-pocket costs, and ☐ emotional distress, humiliation, frustration, and lost time spent disputing the inaccuracy.

V. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I — Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b) (CRA Defendant)

Failure to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy

17. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1–16.

18. Section 1681e(b) provides: "Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates."

19. The CRA Defendant prepared and published consumer reports concerning Plaintiff that contained the inaccurate Disputed Item and failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy.

20. The CRA Defendant's violation was willful (15 U.S.C. § 1681n) or, in the alternative, negligent (15 U.S.C. § 1681o), entitling Plaintiff to the damages set forth below.

COUNT II — Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681i (CRA Defendant)

Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation

21. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1–16.

22. Upon receiving Plaintiff's dispute, the CRA Defendant was required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681i to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, to forward all relevant information to the Furnisher Defendant, and to delete or modify information that could not be verified.

23. The CRA Defendant failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and failed to delete or correct the inaccurate Disputed Item, in willful or negligent violation of § 1681i.

COUNT III — Violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) (Furnisher Defendant)

Failure to investigate after notice of dispute

24. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1–16.

25. After receiving notice of Plaintiff's dispute from the CRA Defendant pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(2), the Furnisher Defendant was required by 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b) to investigate, review all relevant information, report the results, and correct or delete inaccurate or incomplete information.

26. The Furnisher Defendant failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and continued to furnish the inaccurate Disputed Item, in willful or negligent violation of § 1681s-2(b).

COUNT IV — Violation of the Minnesota Access to Consumer Reports Law, Minn. Stat. § 13C.01 et seq., and Minnesota Consumer Fraud Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 325F.69, 8.31 (Both Defendants)

27. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1–16.

28. The Minnesota Access to Consumer Reports law, Minn. Stat. § 13C.01, requires a consumer reporting agency to honor the consumer's right to dispute and correct errors consistent with the federal FCRA procedures. The CRA Defendant violated this duty as alleged above. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13C.04, the public and private remedies of Minn. Stat. §§ 8.31 and 325F.70 apply to a violation of Chapter 13C.

29. If an MCFA theory is asserted, identify the specific fraud, unfair or unconscionable practice, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, misleading statement, or deceptive practice; the facts showing intent that others rely on it; and the sale of merchandise to which it connects. Inaccurate reporting after a dispute, without those additional facts, does not by itself plead the elements stated in Minn. Stat. § 325F.69, subd. 1. Here: [PLEAD THE SPECIFIC PRACTICE, INTENT, RELIANCE AUDIENCE, MERCHANDISE, AND SALE CONNECTION OR DELETE THE MCFA THEORY].

30. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a, Plaintiff, as a person injured by Defendants' violations, is entitled to recover damages, together with costs and disbursements, including costs of investigation and reasonable attorney's fees, and to obtain injunctive relief. Plaintiff's action serves the public benefit by deterring inaccurate credit reporting affecting Minnesota consumers.

VI. DAMAGES

31. As a result of the willful FCRA violations, Plaintiff is entitled under 15 U.S.C. § 1681n to actual damages or statutory damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000, punitive damages, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

32. In the alternative, for negligent FCRA violations, Plaintiff is entitled under 15 U.S.C. § 1681o to actual damages and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

33. Under Minnesota law, Plaintiff is entitled to damages, costs of investigation and litigation, and reasonable attorney's fees under Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a (incorporated for Chapter 13C by § 13C.04), plus injunctive relief.

34. This action is timely under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p (the earlier of two years after discovery or five years after the violation) and under the applicable Minnesota limitations period, Minn. Stat. § 541.05, for the state-law claims.

VII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment against Defendants and award:

A. Actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
B. Statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 under 15 U.S.C. § 1681n;
C. Punitive damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1681n;
D. Injunctive relief directing deletion or correction of the inaccurate Disputed Item;
E. Reasonable attorney's fees, costs of investigation and litigation, and disbursements under 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681n and 1681o and Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a;
F. Pre- and post-judgment interest as allowed by law; and
G. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

VIII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (or Minn. R. Civ. P. 38 in state forum), Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

IX. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: [__/__/____]

________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME], Minnesota Attorney Reg. No. [____________]
[LAW FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]
Counsel for Plaintiff

X. VERIFICATION

I, [PLAINTIFF FULL LEGAL NAME], declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of Minnesota that I have read the foregoing Complaint and that the factual allegations contained therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Executed on [__/__/____] at [CITY], Minnesota.

________________________________
[PLAINTIFF FULL LEGAL NAME]

Sources and References

• 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b) — Compliance procedures / accuracy of report: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681e
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681i — Procedure in case of disputed accuracy: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681i
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2 — Responsibilities of furnishers of information: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681s-2
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681n — Civil liability for willful noncompliance: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681n
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681o — Civil liability for negligent noncompliance: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681o
• 15 U.S.C. § 1681p — Jurisdiction of courts; limitation of actions: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681p
• Minn. Stat. § 13C.01 — Access to consumer reports: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13C.01
• Minn. Stat. § 13C.04 — Enforcement; remedies: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13C.04
• Minn. Stat. § 325F.69 — Consumer fraud; unlawful practices: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/325F.69
• Minn. Stat. § 8.31 — AG enforcement; private remedy (subd. 3a): https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/8.31
• Ly v. Nystrom, 615 N.W.2d 302 (Minn. 2000) (public-benefit requirement for § 8.31 private actions)
• U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota Local Rules: https://www.mnd.uscourts.gov/local-rules