Complaint Accuses Collector of Violating Reg F, FDCPA For Not Deleting Disputed Tradeline

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is part of a series that is sponsored by WebRecon. WebRecon identifies serial plaintiffs lurking in your database BEFORE you contact them and expose yourself to a likely lawsuit. Protect your company from as many as one in three new consumer lawsuits by scrubbing your consumers through WebRecon first. Want to learn more? Call (855) WEB-RECON or email admin@webrecon.net today! Thanks to WebRecon for sponsoring this series.

A collector has been accused of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Regulation F and three credit reporting agencies have been accused of violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act with respect to attempts to collect a debt that was allegedly not incurred by the individual in question, but by someone who has the same first and last name as the individual, and who lives in the same town in California.

A copy of the complaint in the case of Tyler v. Rash Curtis & Associates, Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian can be accessed by clicking here.

The collection agency attempted to collect on an unpaid healthcare debt that the plaintiff claims did not belong to him. The plaintiff contacted the three credit reporting agencies, who purportedly notified the agency that the account was being disputed. The dispute was never noted on the plaintiff’s credit report and the tradelines were never deleted, leading the plaintiff to contact an attorney and file the suit in question.

The plaintiff was forced to purchase a full and complete copy of his credit report and was denied credit after applying at two retail locations. He accused all the defendants of violating the FCRA, specifically the collection agency for not reviewing the information it allegedly received from the credit reporting agencies after the account was disputed, and for failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of the “blatantly obvious” errors in the plaintiff’s credit report. The credit reporting agencies were sued for not ensuring the maximum accuracy of the plaintiff’s credit reports and failing to conduct a reasonable investigation.

The agency was also accused of violating the FDCPA, Reg F, and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by making false or misleading representations when attempting to collect on a debt. “Defendant falsely attempted to collect the alleged subject debts from Plaintiff despite Plaintiff not owing the alleged subject debts due to Defendant’s misleading and deceptive attempts to collect debts owed by another Gary Tyler,” according to the complaint.

Check Also

Appeals Court Vacates Dismissal of TCPA Class Action, Remands Case to Determine Standing

The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has vacated the dismissal of a Telephone …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

X