Wilcox v. Trans Union, LLC
- James Oetken
- 1:20-cv-04730
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Wilcox v. Trans Union, Judge Oetken granted Trans Union’s motion, ruling the report was not plausibly inaccurate under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and dismissed Wilcox’s complaint with prejudice.
Monique Wilcox and Trans Union, LLC; the court dismissed Wilcox’s complaint with prejudice as to Trans Union and terminated Trans Union as a party.
What happened
In Wilcox v. Trans Union, LLC, Monique Wilcox claimed that Trans Union violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by reporting her previously paid account as “30 Days Past Due” after she disputed that information. The report also showed a zero balance, a paid and closed date of December 12, 2016, and a past delinquency in December 2016 and January 2017.
Trans Union asked for judgment based on the complaint and answer. The court ruled that Wilcox had not plausibly alleged that the report was plainly incorrect or misleading. Considered as a whole, the report showed a past delinquency rather than a currently overdue account. The court granted Trans Union’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied Wilcox’s request to amend as futile, and dismissed her complaint against Trans Union with prejudice.
Judge James Oetken issued the decision on July 26, 2022. The order directed the Clerk of Court to close Trans Union’s motion and terminate Trans Union as a party.
The detailed version
- Wilcox v. Trans Union, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04730
- James Oetken
- July 26, 2022
Background
Monique Wilcox sued Trans Union, LLC and American Heritage Credit Union under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a federal law governing consumer credit reporting. She alleged that she fully paid her American Heritage account on December 12, 2016, but Trans Union reported the account’s payment status as “30 Days Past Due.” She alleged that she sent Trans Union a dispute letter on October 10, 2017, but that Trans Union continued reporting the payment status as “30 Days Past Due” as of June 21, 2018.
The credit report submitted by Trans Union stated that the account had a zero balance, a paid date and closed date of December 12, 2016, and a maximum delinquency of 30 days in December 2016 and January 2017. It also identified the delinquency as a past event.
Motion and legal standard
Trans Union moved for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). This type of motion uses the same standard as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim: the complaint must contain enough factual matter, accepted as true, to make the requested relief plausible. The court could consider undisputed documents referenced by the complaint, but could not resolve genuinely disputed factual allegations at this stage.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that an FCRA claim requires the challenged credit information to be incomplete or inaccurate. Information may be inaccurate if it is plainly wrong or misleading enough that it could adversely affect credit decisions.
The court held that Wilcox had not plausibly alleged either type of inaccuracy. Although a creditor reading the “Pay Status” entry alone might think the account was currently past due, the rest of the report showed a zero balance, a closed account, and paid and closed dates from December 12, 2016. The report also described the 30-day delinquency as a past event and gave dates for that event. The court concluded that a creditor could only reasonably understand the report to show a prior delinquency, not a currently delinquent account.
Disposition
The court granted Trans Union’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. It denied Wilcox’s request to amend the complaint as futile and dismissed Wilcox’s complaint with prejudice as to Trans Union. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion at Docket Number 29 and terminate Trans Union as a party.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.