|

Scott E. Mollen Scott E. Mollen

Landlord-Tenant—Plaintiff's Putative Class Action Alleged Credit Reporting Agency Violated Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and NYS Fair Credit Reporting Act—Failing to Insure Accuracy of Tenant Data Before Selling Tenant Data to Landlords—Court Certified a Class

A plaintiff, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated, filed an action against a defendant, alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C § 1681 et seq., and under the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act (NYFCRA), General Business Law (GBL), Art. 25, §380 et seq. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant failed to "insure the accuracy of bulk tenant data before selling the data and resulting reports to prospective landlords, who rely on them to assess and screen potential clients." Plaintiff contended that "because of delays and deficient practices in collecting and updating the status of New York Housing Court (Housing Court) records reported to landlords, the defendant inaccurately reported that housing suits against tenants were ongoing, when in fact the suits had been favorably resolved in favor of the tenant." The plaintiff sought statutory and putative damages, plus legal fees.

The plaintiff had moved for class certification. The proposed class included "all persons who within two years prior to the commencement of this action (1) were the subject of a credit report prepared by (defendant); (2) prior to the issuance of the credit report, were a party in a Housing Court proceeding filed in New York State court, which had a disposition of dismissed, discontinued, or withdrawn; and (3) the (defendant's) credit report referenced the Housing Court proceeding but failed to include such disposition." The court granted the plaintiff's motion to certify class.

One source of the defendant's data consists of purchased electronic records from the NYS Office of Court Administration (OCA), relating to Housing Court proceedings, including proceedings based on nonpayment of rent and holdovers following termination of tenancy. The defendant described the collection as a "manual process, in which records are individually obtained by (defendant's) researchers and then updated for six months following collection."