Identity Theft Claims in New York That Were Won by Consumer Attorneys

  • Blog
  • Identity Theft Claims in New York That Were Won by Consumer Attorneys
Contact Us
1
2
3
30 Apr, 2024
5 min
731
New York landscape with Identity Theft sign

The Empire State Strikes Back! Consumer Attorneys Leads New Yorkers to Identity Theft Victories

Whether you’re thriving in the bustle of the Big Apple or nestled comfortably in upstate wine country, identity theft can strike. Of all the top ten lists that New York ranks highly in, being a state with an outsized amount of identity theft is not a brag. But the team at Consumer Attorneys keeps helping consumers recover with big wins!

It Started as One Unknown Charge - Identity Theft in Eastern District of New York

An $85,000 Settlement for the Win

M.B., a Brooklyn resident, suffered significant harm and distress when she was the victim of identity theft in August 2020 when someone made an unauthorized purchase of $224.94 using her Capital One credit card at a Walmart in New Jersey. The trouble is that M.B. was in New York with her credit card at the time of the purchase. When she discovered the transaction in September, it quickly became apparent to M.B. that she had been the victim of identity theft.

To combat this, she promptly disputed the charge with Capital One and expected a quick resolution. There was no way a company like Capital One would question this, right? Wrong. Even though M.B. followed all the rules and expected others to do the same, Capital One failed to respond or take any action to investigate the fraud. As one might expect, the problem didn’t just disappear.

Capital One not only neglected M.B.’s dispute, they compounded her difficulties. Capital One imposed additional fees and interest on the fraudulent charge and reported her account as delinquent to the big three Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs), Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. Despite her efforts to fix things through a detailed dispute and an Identity Theft Affidavit filed with the Federal Trade Commission, the CRAs either conducted inadequate investigations or failed to investigate at all. And they all kept the inaccurate account information.

The repercussions of the collective neglect by Capital One and the CRAs on M.B. were profound. M.B. suffered the financial strain that a tarnished credit report brings someone. The persistent inaccuracies in her credit report led to credit denials from reputable institutions, severely restricting her access to essential financial services and subjecting her to less favorable credit terms.

The emotional and psychological toll was equally devastating. The negligence of Capital One and the CRAs in addressing and rectifying the fraudulent activity on her account not only damaged her financial standing but also took a significant toll on her mental health. The constant worry over her creditworthiness and the fear of further credit denials led to sleepless nights, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression, all of which severely impacted her quality of life.

Rather than let the companies treat her this way, M.B. contacted Consumer Attorneys. In September 2021, NYC identity theft attorney Levi Eidelman filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against Capital One, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, all of which were represented by some of the most prominent law firms in the world. After the initial exchange of documents, Mr. Eidelman negotiated a settlement nearing six figures with all four defendants.

M.B. was a victim of identity theft; she was also the victim of apathy by four companies that we all rely on and assume they will follow the law. M.B.’s experience highlights that companies do not always follow the law. We were proud to represent M.B. and get her the compensation she deserved.

Attorney: Levi Eidelman

Region: Eastern District of New York

Practice Area: Identity Theft

Fraudulent Furniture Fiasco Spirals - Identity Theft in Eastern District of New York

$105,000 Compensation Helped Make Things Right

Y.L. started receiving bills from a furniture store in February 2018 for furniture he had never bought through an account he had never opened. The bills totaled $1,843. At first, Y.L. thought it was a mistake that would be quickly fixed. But then, this wrong account appeared on his credit reports from Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs), Equifax and Experian. Y.L. soon discovered he had been the victim of identity theft and informed the CRAs. The CRAs removed the account from his credit report, and Y.L. thought the problem was solved.

In approximately December 2018, Y.L. began receiving debt collection letters from Simon’s Agency, Inc. (Simon’s) a debt collector, on behalf of the furniture store. Y.L. did not think much of it until the fall of 2020 when he was suddenly denied a mortgage application due to a low credit score. Upon a review of his consumer reports, he noticed the Raymour debt was now reporting  as a collections account by Equifax, and as a Simon’s collections account by Experian. This reporting caused Y.L.’s credit score to plummet.

In December 2020, Y.L. submitted disputes to Experian and Equifax, notifying them that this account did not belong to him. Those disputes, upon belief, were forwarded to Simon’s, as required by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Experian failed to investigate or respond to Y.L.’s dispute, violating the FCRA. Equifax simply confirmed that, upon consultation with Simon’s, the account “belongs to [Y.L.].” Neither credit bureau removed the account from his consumer reports, and all Defendants failed to investigate the dispute, again, in violation of the FCRA.

Y.L. was diligent in trying to correct the problem. He followed protocols, prepared an official affidavit with the Federal Trade Commission regarding the identity theft, wrote letters, and disputed the collections with Simon’s and the CRAs repeatedly. However, Equifax and Experian failed to investigate and fix their mistakes- omissions and failures that blatantly violate the FCRA. They kept saying the debt was his, even though he had proof it wasn't. This pattern of Y.L. sending letters and disputes to Experian and Equifax and Experian and Equifax disregarding those letters happened repeatedly until March 2021.

Because of this, Y.L. did not get the mortgage he wanted, suffered from anxiety and depression, and faced the stress of debt collection for three years.

Y.L. contacted Daniel Cohen of Consumer Attorneys. Dan filed suit against Experian, Equifax, and Simon’s in August 2021 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Two of the most prominent law firms in the world represented Experian and Equifax. But litigation is a battle of strategy, not size, and courts consider cases on their merits, not the firm's size. Soon, Dan had negotiated a six-figure settlement with all three defendants.

This case shows how people suffer when big companies don’t respond to people’s concerns. Y.L. suffered. But the case also shows how the right advocate can create accountability for the companies that ignored you.

Attorney: Daniel Cohen

Region: Eastern District of New York

Practice Area: Identity Theft

Daniel Cohen is the Founding Partner of Consumer Attorneys
About the author
Daniel Cohen
See more post

Daniel Cohen is the Founder of Consumer Attorneys. Daniel manages the firm’s branding, marketing, client intake and business development efforts. Since 2017, he is a member of the National Association of Consumer Advocates and the National Consumer Law Center. Mr. Cohen is a nationally-recognized practitioner of consumer protection law. He has a wealth of proven legal experience in the US in: collective claims, representing visually impaired people who believe their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act have been violated in both the physical and digital environments, corporate governance and dispute resolution. Read more

Contact Us
INVESTIGATIVE ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT

You, (“Client,” “you”), and Consumer Attorneys PLC (“CA” or “we”), located at 8095 N. 85th Way, Scottsdale, AZ 85258 (“CA”) , hereby enter into this limited scope retainer agreement whereby you agree to grant CA the exclusive authority to investigate your potential consumer law claim(s), including but not limited to potential violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), Electronic Funds Transfer Act “EFTA”), Fair Credit Billing Act (“FCPA”), and/or the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA”) (collectively referenced as “consumer protection statutes”). 1Please read carefully before signing:

Authorization

You authorize CA to investigate your potential consumer law claim(s) under state and federal consumer protection statutes. You authorize CA to contact third parties on your behalf for the limited purpose of investigating your potential consumer law claims. “Third parties” include but are not limited to consumer reporting agencies, creditors, lenders, debt collectors, rental agencies, employers, courts, and law enforcement agencies.

CA’s Exclusive Investigative Period

CA agrees to investigate your potential consumer law claims in good faith. By signing this agreement, you agree to give CA the exclusive right to investigate your potential consumer law claim(s) for the next 180 days (“Exclusive Investigative Period”). For the duration of the Exclusive Investigative Period, you agree that you will not communicate with any other law firm or legal representative about your potential consumer law claim(s). You agree to forgo any previously scheduled consultation or case review until CA’s Exclusive Investigative Period concludes.

Termination of Exclusive Investigation Period

CA agrees that the Exclusive Investigative Period may not extend beyond 180 days without your prior written consent.

At any time between the date of this agreement and the expiration of CA’s Exclusive Investigative Period, CA may inform you of the outcome of its investigation. If CA’s investigation reveals that you have an actional consumer law claim, CA may ask you to sign a formal retainer agreement. If CA’s investigation does not reveal an actionable consumer law claim, you will receive an e-mail that states CA will not represent you in any further pursuit of your potential claim(s).

The relationship between you and CA automatically terminates at 5pm on the 180th day of the Exclusive Investigative Period or your receipt of CA’s written notice to decline representation, whichever comes sooner. At the conclusion of the Exclusive Investigative Period or upon receipt of CA’s written declination of representation, you are permitted to seek alternative legal counsel without penalty.

Nothing in this agreement should be construed as a promise or guarantee that CA will represent you in a consumer lawsuit at any point in time. CA reserves the right to decline to represent you for any reason permitted by relevant laws and ethical rules.

Your Involvement and Promises to us

You agree to meaningfully participate and cooperate in CA’s investigation of your potential consumer law claim(s). You agree to immediately inform CA if your mailing address, e-mail address, or phone number changes at any point during the Exclusive Investigative Period.
You agree to provide all relevant information, communications, documents, materials, and all other similar instruments to CA and its representatives during the Exclusive Investigative Period. You understand that your failure to provide all relevant information, communications, documents, and materials to CA during the Exclusive Investigative Period may hinder, delay or otherwise frustrate CA’s investigation of your potential consumer law claim(s).

You agree, under penalty of perjury, to provide complete, accurate, and truthful information to CA. All documents and communications, oral or written, past or future, provided to CA during the Exclusive Investigative Period and anytime thereafter are presumed by CA to be true, complete, and accurate.

Fees and Costs Incurred During Exclusive Investigative Period

CA agrees that you will not incur any out-of-pocket fees or costs during CA’s Exclusive Investigative Period. However, if CA agrees to represent you in a consumer lawsuit, CA may recover the fees and costs incurred during the Exclusive Investigative Period from the Defendant pursuant to a future settlement or judgment.

You agree that CA has a right to place a lien on any future monetary recovery obtained by client related to the claims identified during CA’s Exclusive Investigative Period or as a result of CA’s investigative efforts. If you refuse to cooperate with CA in the formal pursuit of the consumer law claim(s) it identifies during or after the Exclusive Investigative Period, you agree that CA has the right to recover the fees and costs it incurred while investigating your potential consumer law claim(s).

Authorization to Use Your Electronic Signature

CA will send you any and all documents that require your signature. You authorize CA to affix your electronic signature to requests, disclosures, or other forms that CA deems reasonably necessary to the investigation of your potential consumer law claim(s) upon receipt of your approval or after the 7th day after the document was sent to you, whichever comes first. Your electronic signature will be used on any and all other subsequent documents that will need signature, affirmation, acknowledgment, or any other forms of authentication in reference to this matter under the above referenced procedure.

1You also agree to give CA the exclusive authority to investigate potential violations of state-specific consumer protection statutes.

All Rights Reserved. Without Prejudice. CONSUMER ATTORNEYS

FORM # INV2024CA119

Attorney Advertising, Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome. This website is for informational purposes only and does not contain legal advice. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

© 2024 Consumer Attorneys PLC. All Rights Reserved.