Hamilton v. Equifax Information Services, LLC

          ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS [#30; #35]

          DENISE PAGE HOOD Chief Judge

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. Procedural Background

         On September 26, 2018, Plaintiff Valarie Hamilton (“Hamilton”) commenced this action in the 47^th District Court in Oakland County, Michigan alleging Negligent and Willful Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 (Counts 1-10) against Defendants Equifax Information Services, LLC (“Equifax”), Trans Union, LLC (“Trans Union”), Synchrony Bank (“Synchrony”), Michigan First Credit Union (“Michigan First”), and Capital One Bank (USA), N.A (“Capital One”). (Doc # 2-2) Trans Union removed this action to federal court on November 5, 2018. (Doc # 1) Equifax was dismissed from this case on December 10, 2018. (Doc # 18) Capital One was dismissed from this case on February 11, 2019. (Doc # 34) Synchrony Bank was dismissed from this case on February 26, 2019. (Doc # 37) Trans Union and Michigan First are the only remaining defendants in this action.

         On January 16, 2019, Trans Union filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc # 30) Hamilton filed her Response on February 6, 2019. (Doc # 33) Trans Union filed its Reply on February 20, 2019. (Doc # 36)

         On February 18, 2019, Michigan First filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc # 35) Hamilton filed her Response on March 11, 2019. (Doc # 40) Michigan First filed its Reply on March 15, 2019. (Doc # 42)

         These two Motions are currently before the Court.

         B. Factual Background

         On August 30, 2017, Hamilton filed Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in Bankruptcy Court in the Eastern District of Michigan. (Doc # 2-2, Pg ID 13) On December 5, 2017, the Bankruptcy Court issued Hamilton an Order of Discharge. (Id.) On May 23, 2018, Hamilton received her Trans Union credit disclosure and noticed that the Synchrony and Michigan First trade lines inaccurately failed to include the correct notation indicating her bankruptcy discharge. (Id.) According to Hamilton, the Synchrony and Michigan First Trade lines should be reported as closed and with the notation of “bankruptcy discharge.” (Id.) Hamilton claims that the lack of this notation will cause creditors to falsely believe that those two accounts are active when they are closed. (Id.)

         On or about July 7, 2018, Hamilton submitted a letter to Trans Union disputing the incorrect trade lines. (Id.) Hamilton asked Trans Union to correctly note her bankruptcy discharge. (Id.) Hamilton was led to believe that Trans Union forwarded her dispute to Synchrony and Michigan First. (Id.)

         After not receiving any information from Trans Union, Hamilton obtained additional credit disclosures from Trans Union on August 22, 2018. (Id. at 14-15.) Upon obtaining these credit disclosures, Hamilton realized that no changes were made since she initially gained access to her credit disclosures on May 23, 2018. (Id. at 15.)

         Hamilton contends that as a direct and proximate result of Defendants Trans Union and Michigan First's (collectively, “Defendants”) negligent and/or willful failure to comply with the FCRA, she has suffered credit and emotional damages. (Id.) Hamilton also claims that she has experienced undue stress and anxiety due to Defendants' failure to correct the alleged errors. (Id.)

         II. STANDARDS OF REVIEW

         A. ...