A proposed class action has been filed against the “Big Three” credit bureaus and Goldman Sachs over what an Apple Pay user alleges to be their failure to properly investigate disputes of consumers’ credit report information.
According to the 15-page case, defendants Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; Trans Union, LLC; Equifax Information Services, LLC; and Goldman Sachs Bank USA have violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by failing to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information contained in consumer reports.
The plaintiff, an Apple Pay user who disputed Goldman Sachs’ assertion that his payments were late, claims to have suffered damage to his credit as a result of the defendants’ refusal to properly investigate his dispute and correct the allegedly inaccurate information on his credit report. According to the case, the plaintiff’s experience is a reflection of the defendants’ business practices as they apply to all consumers.
“The Defedants’ [sic] failure to investigate disputed account information is a result of its [sic] standard policies and practices adopted in reckless disregard of consumers’ rights under the FCRA,” the complaint summarizes.
The plaintiff says he set up an Apple Pay account in April 2021 and received a call from Goldman Sachs at the end of June informing him that he had not paid his Apple Pay bills. Per the case, the plaintiff replied that he had never received any bills, but after investigating further the man discovered that the bills had been received in his junk/spam email folders. According to the case, the plaintiff informed Goldman Sachs and the credit bureau defendants that the bills had gone to his spam email.
The lawsuit stresses that “[i]t is not reasonable” to expect that a consumer checks their spam email regularly given “important emails should be sent to one’s inbox.”
According to the case, the plaintiff disputed the late payments that appeared on his credit report with Experian, Trans Union and Equifax and informed the credit bureaus and Goldman Sachs via telephone that the information was inaccurate. The suit says a Goldman Sachs representative informed the plaintiff that “a dispute would be entered to remove the late payments,” and the credit bureaus allegedly indicated they would investigate the dispute.
The plaintiff asserts, however, that the late payments were never removed from his report and that his credit has been harmed as a result. More specifically, the suit says the plaintiff applied for a mortgage and was offered “$100,000 less than he wanted” due to the defendants’ alleged failure to remove the inaccurate information from his credit report.
The lawsuit claims the defendants failed to follow the procedure detailed in the FCRA for responding to a consumer dispute in a credit file. Instead of conducting a proper investigation of the dispute, the three credit bureaus “have completely abdicated their obligations under federal and state law,” the filing claims, and instead chosen to “parrot” Goldman Sachs, according to the suit. The bank, for its part, has “willfully, maliciously, recklessly, wantonly, and/or negligently” failed to conduct its own reasonable investigation as required by the FCRA, the case attests.
“If Goldman Sachs had performed a reasonable investigation of Plaintiff’s dispute, Plaintiff’s matter with Goldman Sachs would have been removed as GoldmanSachs [sic] had represented to the Plaintiff via telephone,” the complaint alleges.
Per the case, the plaintiff and “hundreds or thousands” of other consumers have suffered “particularized and concrete harm” as a result of the defendants’ conduct.
The plaintiff looks to represent anyone who, according to the defendants’ records, resided in New York and disputed with the three credit bureau defendants an account concerning Goldman Sachs that was not properly corrected within the last two years and until the time judgment is entered.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s newsletter here.
Camp Lejeune residents may soon have the opportunity to claim compensation for harm suffered from contaminated water.