Oregon woman awarded $18.6 million after Equifax failed to fix errors on her credit report

[FourScore]

Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 02:51 PM PDT
Oregon woman awarded $18.6 million after Equifax failed to fix errors on her credit report
by Christian Dem in NCFollow

Back in 2009, Julie Miller of Marion County, Oregon (Salem), was denied credit by a bank due to an erroneous credit rating from Equifax. She spent almost three years trying to get Equifax to fix the mistake, but Equifax refused. So naturally, Miller sued. Yesterday, a federal jury in Portland ordered Equifax to pay Miller $18.6 million in damages--$18.4 million in punitive damages and $180,000 in actual damages. It is believed to be one of the largest judgments ever imposed against a major credit bureau.

(Miller) contacted Equifax eight times between 2009 and 2011 in an effort to correct inaccuracies, including erroneous accounts and collection attempts, as well as a wrong Social Security number and birthday. Yet over and over, the lawsuit alleged, the Atlanta-based company failed to correct its mistakes.

"There was damage to her reputation, a breach of her privacy and the lost opportunity to seek credit," said Justin Baxter, the Portland attorney who teamed on the case with his father and law partner, Michael Baxter. "She has a brother who is disabled and who can't get credit on his own and she wasn't able to help him."

The Oregonian got its hands on Miller's original complaint. Read it here. It alleges that on at least three occasions, Equifax failed to even investigate Miller's claims of errors on her report. On the times it did investigate, it failed to make changes despite the obvious errors. Miller also charged that Equifax failed to send her a copy of her credit report at least twice, even though credit bureaus are required by law to provide one free credit report per year to a customer upon request. Miller claimed she was denied credit at least one other time due to the errors, and was also unable to help her disabled brother.

As it turned out, the errors came because someone at Equifax placed information from another Julie Miller into the plaintiff's record. Apparently Equifax was so lazy that it sent the plaintiff's financial information to companies asking about the other Julie Miller. Although Equifax is appealing, now it's staring down the barrel of having to pay several times what it would have cost to simply fix the problem--though more than likely it'll be less than the initial bill for $18.6 million.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/27/1227071/-Oregon-woman-awarded-18-6-million-after-Equifax-failed-to-fix-errors-on-her-credit-report

[Zorra]

1. Good for her! Credit reporting agencies should be illegal.

That is all.

[meow2u3]

3. The entire credit rating SYSTEM should be illegal

It serves no purpose other than to discriminate against the poor.

[Dawson Leery]

4. +1

[mbperrin]

16. Correct!

Thank you!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

27. It needs to be abolished. It has become a bully system, hasn't it? nt

[rwsanders]

30. Exactly, I think one of the quick fixes for many of our economic problems would be to...

make it illegal to offer a different interest rate to different people.

These reports are also being used for employment decisions, car and homeowners insurance rates, and security clearances (even though most of the real spying cases that I remember have been people with plenty of money that just wanted more).

Once one of them refused to investigate a mistake a second time (it took longer than I thought for the creditor to correct the mistake), so I told the person on the phone I would sue their agency and them personally if they didn't correct it. I got it fixed.

[mbperrin]

15. Yep.

Thanks!

[Demeter]

19. It is these credt agencies that will be deciding your eligibility for Obamacare

Good luck with that.

[customerserviceguy]

33. If that were the case

then we'd all be paying loan shark rates. On the other hand, it should be fair, and follow the rules. The punitive damages here are sufficient to get the message across.

I have excellent credit, and have always paid my bills. Why should I be charged the same interest rate as someone who's shown that they're a deadbeat?

[juajen]

59. Why are you calling hard working people "deadbeats"?

You are a job away from being classified yourself as a "deadbeat". Your smugness puts you in a category. Guess which one?

[customerserviceguy]

66. I'm not talking about "hard working people"

I'm talking about people who don't take responsibility for paying their bills, or at least notifying a creditor when they have a financial problem. And, yes, I've been through periods of joblessness where I was able to do one or both of the above.

A credit score is an attempt to evaluate how well or poorly an individual can perform those tasks in both good times and in bad. Without them, everybody would be assumed to be of roughly equal risk, and loan rates would reflect that. Maybe you're fine with people you envy having to pay more in interest rates, but I'm not.

And I'm not alone. For starters, I believe that a credit score has nothing to do with whether or not you're a good driver. I would have voted "yes" on Oregon's Ballot Measure No. 42 back in 2006, had I been a resident there instead of neighboring Washington, but nearly two-thirds of voters in a blue state voted against it:

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oregon_Ballot_Measure_42,_Use_of_Credit_Score_to_Determine_Insurance_Premiums_(2006)

If that large of a majority in a fairly progressive place thinks it's fair to use credit scores in things like insurance (and probably employment decisions) then they're not going away any time soon.

[Arugula Latte]

61. An accident, a serious illness, a layoff, etc. can turn people into "deadbeats" pretty quickly.

[customerserviceguy]

69. I know

I had to file for bankruptcy myself in 1996. It took years of working with high-interest cards, gradually lowering rates to get myself back to a top credit standing. One can file a statement with credit bureaus explaining circumstances, and I did that, stating that the bankruptcy was caused by a ruinous custody battle with my ex-wife, when she went to marry a convicted child rapist.

I used to do taxes back in the 1980's, and I quickly learned how peoples' money attitudes get them into financial trouble. The credit score is just a way to figure out who deals well with money in good times and in bad.

[Liberal_in_LA]

37. i hate them and what they do to people

[treestar]

57. That would violate the First Amendment

Very clearly.

[limpyhobbler]

67. +1

[warrant46]

2. The Judge will most certianly "Reduce" remitter the Verdict

Its bad for business for a "Job Creator" </sarcasm>

OOPS forgot the sarcasm tag

[rhett o rick]

7. Either that or Equifax will tie up the complete settlement for years until

the victim is willing to settle for less.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

28. This is true, but that's not the important thing here

The important thing here is that people will now begin to sue the pants off these 3 agencies, and more than a few things will have to change with them.

[rhett o rick]

41. I am sorry, I dont understand. These agencies wield a lot of power. If that power is

misused they deserve to get sued.

[Kennah]

43. I disagree. There have been numerous lawsuit wins against the Big Three. They don't change.

[jberryhill]

51. It's just a cost of doing business for them

18M is a drop in the bucket for them.

[Kennah]

90. Zachary!

[Curmudgeoness]

5. With this sort of things happening all the time,

I am surprised that someone finally got justice. Her lawyer is brilliant.

It is a no-brainer for credit reporting agencies to have the most accurate records. I have always been at a loss to understand why they refuse to do it. In my job, I do accounting, and we have had the same problems with errors on credit reports. One agency actually told me that they don't care if we are satisfied with their reports, since we are not the customers.

[Liberal_in_LA]

38. they keep super accurate records of the elites . politicians, celebrities, and the 1%

Their accounts are separated out and no mistakes allowed. That's why the elite cant identify with the problems of the little people with respect to credit companies

[Gormy Cuss]

60. They only care to the extent the law requires it.

Additional consumer protections are long overdue not just for credit reporting agencies but with all private data aggregators.

[SunSeeker]

6. K & R

[Sherman A1]

8. K&R

Glad she fought back and won!

[dipsydoodle]

9. Today's really good news story.

There's always one and this is it. I will sleep well.

Goodnight !

[MotherPetrie]

10. Good!!!!

[Egalitarian Thug]

11. How about a new law that requires substantial or compelling reasons for a court to adjust jury

dictated penalties?

Restraining the courts for a change would put some real fear into theses corporate parasites.
& R

[Sarah Ibarruri]

29. Yes!! nt

[tonekat]

13. Finally, a Victory for Consumers

Those companies have way too much power, and not enough accuracy to hold the cards they do in people's financial lives.

I hope she gets most of the money and quickly!

[forestpath]

14. K&R

[Thor_MN]

17. My father and I have the same name. Just after my parent's divorce, his credit was awful.

This was around 1987, not much info available online. I was denied for a credit card and when I got the report used, they had a bunch of my father's bad accounts on it. After several hours of fruitless phone calls (and hold music) with moron account managers, I tracked down where their building was - which was not published anywhere.

I showed up in their office and asked for the last person I had talked to by name. Ten minutes later, a head slowly and cautiously peeked around a corner. I said "Hi, we talked on the phone yesterday!!" She came out into the lobby area and we sat down to look at the report that we were both supposedly looking at the day before. I pointed to my SSN on one account and said "This is me." I pointed at my father's SSN on the next account and said "This is my father." We allegedly had done the same thing the day before on the phone. This time because she couldn't say she was looking at the report while reading a magazine, she said "That's not your account!!!"

I wanted to smack her upside the head, but just nodded and smiled. They did fix the report, but I didn't get any settlement money...

[mbperrin]

18. And a nice beating for the CEO!

Please???

[Snake Plissken]

20. Somewhere right now on Right Wing Talk Radio ...

the Baby Jesus is crying.

[lost-in-nj]

21. This is great!!!

but I doubt she will see a penny of the money


I really hope I'm wrong

[LittleGirl]

22. my husband just got a letter that

his credit card app was denied and they sent his credit report to him. His score was 745! They apologized but WTF?

[Matariki]

23. Nice

maybe that will motivate them to fix their complacency.

[VPStoltz]

24. I had a similar experience. It led me to the conclusion that credit scores are total BS.

They are nothing more than capricious red lining, basically.
I read that a full 50+% of scores have MISTAKES serious enough to effect credit.
Have you every tried to understanding the explanations given for your credit score?
They are meant to be confusing for a purpose.
I agree - they should be eliminated and outlawed.

[customerserviceguy]

34. There's a process for fixing errors

And it's extremely favorable to the consumers. All you have to do is challenge an error in writing, and if it cannot be proven to be correct, it comes off.

We've got some really good laws in this country regarding credit reporting, all it takes is for people to know and use them. When a screwup occurs, such as with this Oregon case, large damages can result.

All abolishing the credit bureaus will do is drive up interest for everyone who is indeed creditworthy.

[hobbit709]

36. You obviously never had to deal with them in fixing errors.

Otherwise you wouldn't be an apologist for the status quo.

[2ndAmForComputers]

39. "I've got mine, fuck you" seems to be their mantra.

[HiPointDem]

47. kind of his m.o.

[customerserviceguy]

65. If my "m. o."

is not tearing down entire structures within our economy just to fix some solvable problems, then, yes, that's what I believe in.

[customerserviceguy]

63. Actually, I have

And while it worked for me, I suppose it doesn't work all the time for everybody as easily.

Your alternative is to do away with them completely, and that means we're all potential deadbeats to lenders and will get charged accordingly. Sorry if I think a reputation should mean something.

[SoCalDem]

40. We get downgraded because we have ONE credit card that we pay in full each month

We pay cash for our cars.. According to their norms we should have waaaay more than one credit card//


everything else is A+, but the F they give us in the credit card department drags down their approval-calculator number thingie//

Lucky for us, we do not need credit or want credit//.

[HiPointDem]

46. never been in debt except for a mortgage, don't use credit, never had even a late bill. but

supposedly i have poor credit. my sibling, who has gone through 2 bankruptcies, has better credit than me, who is meticulous about such things.

who knows what a good credit score is based on.

[customerserviceguy]

64. If you don't need credit

then why are you concerned about a credit score? Good job on your part, paying cash for your car, it doesn't make any difference what the interest rate is in that case, right?

[SoCalDem]

68. Not "concerned".. just was curious (when we looked into doing a re-fi)

and annoyed that responsibility creates a downgrade, and irresponsibility gets rewarded.. Our bank was not concerned a bit, but then we procrastinated and have not yet re-fied anyway.. We are just keeping at paying down principal , and may be moving to Oregon within a year, so selling is now more important to us.

[customerserviceguy]

71. Credit scores

are about people who use credit. Lenders just want a way to figure out who has been able to do so wisely.

Here's the best analogy I can think of: If you have a person who never had access to hard beverages, could you say that they were definitely not an alcoholic? Of course not, it would be how they handled exposure to the availability of those drinks that would give observable behaviors that could lead to a diagnosis.

[hueymahl]

25. Fuck these companies

They are lazy, incompetent, beholden to their customer (the big banks) and completely incompetent. I fight them for a living. In a sense, it is like shooting fish in a barrel.

I cheered the award, and hope it survives appeal. Have to admit, there is a little professional jealousy, but I love, love, love to see them take it in the shorts. These guys are the modern day witch-hunters, the proponents of the scarlet letter, the Macarthyites (well, maybe that last one is a little overboard.

Regardless, they have far to great a power in our society with far to little oversight. We saw what happened with the credit agencies on the macro level. These guys are the same, but on a micro level.

[JI7]

26. GOOD, they ignored her when she attempted to fix the problems

fuck them

[AnotherMcIntosh]

31. Good. But they will immediately move for the judge to reduce the award or for a new trial.

If the defendant doesn't get a new trial, and if the reduced award is not reduced enough to their satisfaction, they will take an appeal. About a third of all federal cases taken on appeal are reversed.

[SheilaT]

32. I worked for a credit bureau in the late 1960's

well before computerization, although even then they were planning on computerizing records.

To say all credit bureaus are incompetent is simply dumb. Let's just say everyone everywhere is incompetent, shall we? Because there certainly are incompetents in every organization that has more than one or two employees.

Anyway, while failure to fix Ms. Miller's report in a timely manner absolutely deserves this judgement, keep in mind that millions of credit records are accurate.

I also understand how this sort of thing happens. Very few first and last names are a unique combination. Generally throwing in the birth date clarifies which person is which, but that's not always useful, especially in the case of common name combinations.

During my time at the credit bureau I became utterly opposed to ever naming a child after his father. Or her mother, although that is far less likely. It was my experience that around the time Junior went out and started establishing his own credit, he generally lived at home and so had the same address as Senior. If they weren't real consistent about using the junior and senior, almost invariably their credit records would become confused. Especially is some clerk somewhere along the line wasn't paying close attention. So what often happened was that one or the other wasn't real good about paying his bills on time and thoroughly screwed up the other one's credit rating.

Multiply this problem by the fact that in a large city there will be any number of people with the same first and last name, possibly even born on the same date, and you've got a recipe for disaster.

Credit bureaus are a necessary evil. When a company of some kind is going to extend you credit it needs to have a clue what your bill paying history is. But the employees need to be scrupulous about making sure the always know exactly which Julie Miller, for instance, is the one being inquired about.

I just hope this verdict does not get substantially reduced. That would be unjust.

[HiPointDem]

45. yes, let's not name children after their parents because that makes life harder for the incompetent

lazy credit & vampirish credit rating agencies.

forget society, forget tradition. corporations rule.

[SheilaT]

54. It can also make life difficult for those children themselves.

If you want to name your child Frederick Asswipe Fotheringay VI that's of course up to you. However, the roman numeral after the name never impresses me, just reminds me that it's an indication of a severe lack of original ideas for five or so generations. I happen to think each kid ought to be given a different first name from the parent's first name. That's just me.

And yeah, everyone needs to be very careful about exactly what information is used and so on, but trust me, to simply blame incompetent credit agencies absolutely misses the larger point. Again, I am NOT defending what Equifax did, and I sincerely hope the award stands, because they deserve it. But every single person with a non-unique name, of whom there are plenty even if no one ever again named a kid exactly after Dad or Mom, can be faced with that problem.

This wasn't such a big problem when the population was significantly smaller, even fifty years ago. Even then credit bureaus could screw up and combine files because of the same or similar names. Computerization has just made this process possible to occur faster and on a larger scale. Thinking that if we get rid of credit bureaus the problem will be magically solved is, well it's just magical thinking.

[HiPointDem]

80. no, corporations like equifax make life difficult for those children.

[bettyellen]

53. "a recipe for disaster" because they hire careless workers- or have poor checks and balances?

it seems they err on the side of the corporations and opt to fuck up people lives rather than be diligence.

[Gormy Cuss]

62. Credit bureaus are in the business of keeping Jr. & Sr.'s records straight.

If they can't or won't do that they shouldn't be selling their service as legitimate.

I've used credit bureau records in my work and saw first hand how useless the data are for low income people, for people with little credit history, and for people with common names.

I disagree that they're a necessary evil. Without credit bureaus lending would be more localized and dependent on building relationships with lenders. Community banking, community lending, community accounting for creditworthiness.

[SheilaT]

74. Yes, they are.

But what I observed was an equal careless on the part of Junior and Senior themselves.

On this theme of same names, several years ago I was doing the outpatient registration for a patient at the hospital I work at. Verified his name, date of birth, and residence. He'd moved. I fixed it. Then I said, "This person is your wife." He said, "No, that's my brother's wife".

It took a few minutes for me to understand that he and his brother had the same English first name. They're members of a native American Pueblo here in New Mexico. Their Indian names, the ones they used in everyday life were different. But same first name, DOB, and address for much of their lives. Fortunately they did have different Social Security numbers, so I was unable to untangle their records. But if I had not happened to mention the wife's name, and there was actually no good reason for me to have done so, he'd have wound up having this test/procedure hopelessly intermingled with his brother's records.

So it's not always the employees who screw it up.

Here in New Mexico there's a huge problem because of a dearth of Hispanic surnames, and nearly the same dearth of first names. More than once we will have two people with the same first and last names in as patients. If they're at least five years apart in age, I can figure out who it is the person wanting to visit should go to. But you'd be surprised how many people have no idea how old someone is to within the correct decade. Last week we had two, I'll say Juan Lopez because that's NOT the name, who were the exact same age.

[davidpdx]

35. Interesting

My half-sister recently told me her mother (not mine, we share the same father) had a credit report and my name showed up as her child. I did live with them for a short period of time around the time I was 18 and may have been on a health insurance policy (though I am not 100% sure). She and my dad divorced in the last 90s and my dad passed away 10 years ago. Any connection I had with her is so minute and old. The only kicker is that she and my mom had the same identical name both first, middle, and last after my dad married her with the exception of her middle name having one extra letter at the end (I'll let someone try to figure that one out).

[eppur_se_muova]

42. If you're going to run a gossip sheet for bankers, you'd better check your facts. nt

[HiPointDem]

44. good.

[davidohenry]

48. Finally

a WIN for the little guy! or in this case a women lol

[davidohenry]

49. note

i should note, iv had horrible experiences with credit reports and errors so im a bit biased.

[Dustlawyer]

50. I had this happen when I applied for the loan you get for the 3 month period between the end of law

school and the Bar exam, called a Bar Bell loan. We were told to apply a week before we needed the money. I was working 2 jobs and going to night law school with a wife and 2 kids (glutton for punishment)! They denied my loan because they said I had defaulted on real estate in another part of Texas. Turns out only the 1st and last names were the same, the middle initial was different as was SSN, and DL, but that did not stop them. It took me a week working full time on the issue and driving 300 miles to get it straight when I should have been studying. I have a common name but damn, they didn't even try or care whether they got it right or not!
Glad she got their asses! Maybe they will care a little from now on?

[DFW]

52. Considering what she went through and the indifference of Equifax

I hope the award is held inadequate and then doubled!

[valerief]

55. They'll appeal and pay nothing. That's how things work in the USA. nt

[ctsnowman]

58. Yup.

But we will never hear about that and companies will call on this case as evidence that these lawsuits need to be stopped because of these outrageous awards. It's a lose lose.

[NorthCarolina]

56. Great! But I seriously doubt she will ever receive her judgement in that amount. nt

[railsback]

70. Credit rating agencies ARE a violation of our 4th Amendment rights

People waste so much energy on speculative Armageddons when the ones actually doing it in broad daylight get a collective 'meh'.

All Guts Grayson, here's a REAL cause for you to champion.

[customerserviceguy]

72. If the government was running them, you'd have a point

Buried in the fine print of every loan contract you sign is a clause allowing the creditor to send reports on how you're paying your bills. Don't like that? Save up and pay cash.

[railsback]

73. The system isn't built to work on 'cash'

And government sets the rules.

[customerserviceguy]

77. Exactly

It's meant to have people use credit to get what they don't feel like saving up for. Credit bureaus are a way to see who's worthy of being lent to, and at what terms.

As for government setting the rules, have you ever gone through the rights you have as a consumer under the Fair Credit Act? You'll find that at least part of the deck is stacked your way.

And if they break the rules, cha-ching, you could get a multi-million dollar payday, like the person in the story behind the OP. Being as there's very little gray area in those laws, you wouldn't have too much trouble finding an attorney to grab a third of a hefty punitive damage.

[railsback]

84. How is the decked stacked in ANY consumer's way

when a credit rating agency can delay ANY discrepancies for extended amounts of time? Jobs, rentals, all kinds of shit get gauged on credit ratings. What if you need that job right away? Need to move within a couple of weeks?

[tritsofme]

75. No, they are not.

Credit agencies are not part of the government, so there are obviously not 4th Amendment issues.

Even so, the information that they have comes from public records or information you agreed to release.

[railsback]

76. Did I say Credit agencies are part of government?

No, I did not, but the laws written for them ARE.

[customerserviceguy]

78. Why don't you spell out

Which part of the Fair Credit Act that you find particularly unfair? I've found the legislation to be quite beneficial to people who have incorrect information on their credit files.

[tritsofme]

79. Then I have no idea what you are talking about.

The 4th Amendment doesn't apply to private entities.

[railsback]

81. So private entities make their own laws.

Interesting.

[tritsofme]

82. No, it just sounds like you are confused.

You might have a problem with the laws that regulate credit agencies, but that doesn't mean there are any 4th Amendment implications.

[railsback]

83. I have no confusion

Take, for instance, a job application, requiring a credit report, that is in error, yet may take a couple years to fix because current laws don't regulate the time needed to fix the errors IF deemed errors. Sucking up to credit agencies, as if they are on the up and up and can do no wrong - while screwing you over - is no different than sucking up to the Koch empire.

[tritsofme]

85. Ok, but again, there is not a Fourth Amendment issue, and you do not seem to be arguing otherwise.

Perhaps you understand now?

[railsback]

86. Why would a job depend on my credit rating?

Or anything related, especially when credit agencies log errors that could take years to clear up?

[tritsofme]

87. I repeat once again, what does this have to do with the 4th Amendment? Thanks.

I am responding to your incorrect statement:
Credit rating agencies ARE a violation of our 4th Amendment rights

This is not a hard concept.

[cliffordu]

88. Fuck. I live in Salem right now.

Wonder if she wants to marry a 61 year old gold digging pervert.....

[Scurrilous]

89. K & R