Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mott v. Trinity Financial Services, LLC

United States District Court, D. Nevada

March 21, 2019

RODNEY MOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, AND TRINITY RECOVERY SERVICES, LLC, Defendants.

          ORDER

          RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Before the Court are Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 27), Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 28), Motion to Seal (ECF No. 30), and Motion to Strike (ECF No. 42). For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions is granted in part and denied in part, and Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Motion to Seal, and Motion to Strike are denied.

         II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         On June 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with Jury Demand against Trinity Financial Services, LLC and Trinity Recovery Services, LLC, alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (“FCRA”). ECF No. 1. Each Defendant filed an Answer on August 4, 2017. ECF Nos. 4, 5. On September 18, 2017, Plaintiff sought leave to file an amended complaint. ECF No. 8.

         The Court entered a scheduling order on October 10, 2017. ECF No. 17. Discovery closed on July 11, 2018. ECF No. 26.

         On August 10, 2018, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Sanctions, Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and Motion to Seal. ECF Nos. 27, 28, 30. On September 27, 2018, the Court denied Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint, which sought to pursue the claim on a class-wide basis, on grounds of futility. ECF No. 38.

         On October 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Strike, which also served as a Reply to his Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. ECF No. 42. On October 25, 2018, Plaintiff filed notice that Defendants had not filed an opposition regarding his Motion to Strike. ECF No. 43. Defendants filed a declaration denying that Plaintiff's filing constituted a Motion to Strike. ECF No. 44.

         III. UNDISPUTED FACTS

         The Court finds the following facts to be undisputed.

         Plaintiff incurred a debt in December 2005 to First Franklin Loan Services, which was secured by a deed of trust encumbering his home in Las Vegas. In 2007 the debt was split into senior and junior portions, with First Franklin Loan Services retaining the junior portion. Plaintiff alleges that his debt was forgiven and cancelled in full in June 2009.[1] Plaintiff did not subsequently enter any new credit relationships with First Franklin Loan Services.

         In March 2015, Trinity Financial purchased Plaintiff's loan. Trinity Financial purchased approximately 159 other loans simultaneously.

         On approximately April 15, 2015, Plaintiff received notice that the loan would be transferred to Trinity Financial Services, LLC effective April 30, 2015. On October 8, 2015, Plaintiff sent Trinity Financial a cease and desist letter. He requested that Trinity Financial cease and desist any attempts to collect the debt and asserted that he did not have a business contract with Trinity Financial. He warned that he would prosecute Trinity Financial's publishing of any derogatory information about him to any unauthorized third party.

         On August 12, 2015, Plaintiff's loan was transferred from Trinity Financial to Trojan Capital Investments, LLC (“Trojan”). Trojan acquired over 75 loans total in this transaction. On approximately October 14, 2015, Plaintiff received notice that the loan would be transferred to Trojan effective October 30, 2015.

         Upon accessing his reports from credit reporting agencies, Plaintiff discovered that Defendants made several pulls on his credit occurring before, during, and after Defendants' asserted financial relationship with Plaintiff from April 2015 to October 2015.

         Specifically, Credco provided Trinity Financial and/or Trinity Recovery with Plaintiff's information from Experian on at least 14 occasions: on May 29, 2015; August 19, 2015; November 11, 2015; December 7, 2015; January 26, 2016; March 8, 2016; April 20, 2016; October 12, 2016; December 8, 2016; January 9, 2017; February 15, 2017; April 12, 2017; July 28, 2017; and November 20, 2017. Credco also provided Trinity Financial with Plaintiff's information from Trans Union on at least six occasions: February 25, 2015; August 19, 2015; September 24, 2015; November 2, 2015; November 11, 2015; and January 19, 2016. Trinity Financial also apparently pulled Plaintiff's credit report directly from Trans Union on September 20, 2016, January 3, 2017, and February 1, 2017.

         Trinity Financial additionally requested Plaintiff's credit information from Trans Union LLC on November 11, 2015; September 9, 2015; August 19, 2015; February 25, 2015; and January 19, 2016.

         Plaintiff's credit report from Experian Information Solutions, Inc. lists soft pulls from Trinity Financial and/or Trinity Recovery on the following dates: February 26, 2015; April 1, 2015; May 29, 2015; August 19, 2015; November 11, 2015; May 29, 2015; December 7, 2015; January 26, 2016; March 8, 2016; April 20, 2016; June 6, 2016; October 12, 2016; December 8, 2016; and January 9, 2017.

         IV. DISPUTED FACTS

         The parties dispute whether Defendants had an authorized purpose under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(f) to obtain Plaintiff's credit report.

         V. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.