TransUnion Will Pay $8M to Settle FCRA Class Action Lawsuit

A class action alleging TransUnion violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by not allowing consumers to contest items on background checks sent to employers and landlords was settled by the company for $8 million.

Lead plaintiff Amit Patel alleged in his 2014 class action lawsuit that TransUnion incorrectly included terrorists or criminal alerts in some individuals’ background reports.

Those reports were sent to employers and landlords, but consumers were reportedly never allowed to contest the alerts. Further, alleged the TransUnion class action, consumers were never notified of the designated alert either, potentially costing them housing and job opportunities.

Patel alleges that his report included an inaccurate alert that cost him a rental; however, the landlord said that the TransUnion consumer report was not the reason Patel did not get the rental.

If granted final approval, the settlement agreement will provide each Class Member $400 for the allegedly incorrect terrorist and crime alerts included in the credit checks. Class Members should receive payments automatically.

The motion for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement points out that the $400 award is well within the statutory limits for an FCRA violation by a company; $100 to $1,000.

Three consumer credit groups will receive any money left in the $8 million settlement fund designated for Class Member payouts.

The court certified a nationwide Class of individuals who were subjects of a TransUnion Rental Screening Solutions SmartMove report containing an item on the “Alert List” from February of 2012 to December of 2013 as well as those who requested a disclosure from TransUnion. According to the settlement agreement, more than 10,000 Class Members and subclass members will be sent notice of the settlement if approved.

The TransUnion class action lawsuit was put on hold so the Supreme Court could rule in another case concerning whether the plaintiff in the class action would have to show material harm to proceed. When a determination came back from the Supreme Court in that case, the class action plaintiff and TransUnion decided to settle the litigation.

“Although plaintiff is and remains confident in the strength of his case and is prepared to litigate it through trial at all times, the risks are numerous and real,” states the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. “The battles would be fought not only at trial but also on appeal.”

Top Class Actions will post updates to this class action settlement as they become available. For the latest updates, keep checking TopClassActions.com or sign up for our free newsletter. You can also receive notifications when this article is updated by using your free Top Class Actions account and clicking the “Follow Article” button at the top of the post.

Patel is represented by Lauren K.W. Brennan, David A. Searles, James A. Francis and John Soumilas of Francis & Mailman PC, and Ingrid M. Evans and Alexandra Valentina Rodriguez of the Evans Law Firm.

The TransUnion FCRA Class Action Lawsuit is Patel v. Trans Union LLC, et al., Case No. 3:14-­cv-­00522, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: November 2017, the TransUnion “Alert List” class action settlement is now open. Click here to file a claim.