Clements v. TRANS UNION, LLC – S.D. of Texas

A Court in the Southern District of Texas released an lengthy Fair Credit Reporting Act opinion recently in Clements v. TRANS UNION, LLC (Civil Action No. 3:17-CV-00237).  The case involved:

Plaintiffs … claim Trans Union and Experian (collectively, the “Credit Reporting Defendants”) reported old and obsolete information on credit reports about delinquent accounts Plaintiffs previously had with TXU Energy Retail Company, LLC (“TXU”). According to the Third Amended Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (“Complaint”), each of the TXU accounts was more than seven-and-a-half years old, beyond the time period that the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. (“FCRA”) permits these accounts to be reported. Plaintiffs allege that the Credit Reporting Defendants “have failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in its reporting of antedated TXU trade lines. If [the Credit Reporting Defendants] had proper procedures in place, they would not allow antedated trade lines to report . . . on credit reports over seven years and six months from the original delinquency date.” Dkt. 59 at 2.

One important distinction the Court made:

Plaintiffs’ section 1681i claims are premised on the idea that the consumer reporting agencies violated the statute by failing to remove outdated information from the credit reports provided to third parties. The problem with Plaintiffs’ position is that section 1681i does not apply to credit reports. It only applies to credit files. There is no requirement anywhere in FCRA that requires a consumer reporting agency to remove outdated information from a credit file.

Finally, the Court held:

In a nutshell, the Credit Reporting Defendants contend that the Complaint contains boilerplate recitations of legal standards and fails to provide any specific facts indicating how and when the Credit Reporting Defendants acted negligently and/or willfully. The Court fully agrees with the Credit Reporting Defendants that a mere assertion that the Credit Reporting Defendants willfully or negligently violated the FCRA, without more, is not enough to survive dismissal. See Thomas v. City of Galveston, 800 F. Supp. 2d 826, 845 (S.D. Tex. 2011). Here, however, Plaintiffs have, by the skin of one’s teeth, set forth sufficient factual allegations to withstand dismissal.