Get a Full Refund Chase Bank Credit Card Debt Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

Class members of the Chase Bank Credit Card Debt Settlement include “all individuals (i) who maintained a Credit Card Account with CBUSA; (ii) whose account CBUSA charged off and then sold to a Debt Buyer on or after January 1, 2008, and (iii) who post-sale sought and obtained a discharge of the debt as a result of his/her bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, through April 4, 2018.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $11,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • Full Refund + Pro Rata Share of Settlement Funds

If you made a payment on your sold CBUSA credit card account after you received a Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge, you may be entitled to a full refund of that amount.  In addition, all Class Members, whether or not they paid on a discharged account, may be entitled to receive an equal portion of the remaining Settlement Fund.


Proof of Purchase

  • In order to file a Reimbursement Claim, you must be able to provide documentation confirming the amount of those payments, such as cancelled checks, account statements, or similar proof.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Chase Bank Credit Card Debt Settlement Notes

  • Rusty Haynes v. Chase Bank USA, N.A.
  • Case No. 18 CV 3307 (VB)
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Plaintiff Rusty Haynes brought this consolidated complaint to challenge Chase Bank’s alleged illegal practice of selling and attempting to collect discharged debts. Additionally, the complaint claims that Chase Bank failed to update and correct credit information to credit reporting agencies to show that consumers’ debts are no longer due and owing because they have been discharged in bankruptcy.

Specifically, Haynes alleges that despite the fact that Chase Bank has received notice of the discharge of a consumer’s credit card debt Chase deliberately fails to notify credit reporting agencies that credit card debts are no longer “charged off” or currently still due and owing because they have been discharged in bankruptcy.

“As result of Chase’s refusal to make such updates to credit reporting agencies, debts that have been discharged in bankruptcy are listed on Class Members’ credit reports as “past due” and/or “charged off.”

Chase Bank denies that it attempted to collect discharged debts or otherwise violated bankruptcy discharge injunctions but agreed to settle the case to the tune of $11.5 million. Complete details are provided in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and other related documents are available on the Chase Bank Credit Card Debt Settlement website.

Class members who wish to opt out or object to the terms of the Chase Bank Credit Card Debt Settlement must do so by July 18, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit a Claim Form by July 18, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 7/18/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 7/18/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 8/20/18: Final Hearing at 2:00 pm ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.HaynesSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Haynes v. Chase Settlement Administrator, c/o Rust Consulting Inc. – 6032, PO Box 44, Minneapolis, MN 55440-0044
  • Phone: 1-877-896-6933

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Claim Up To $2,000 TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Class Action Settlement

UPDATED 11/5/2018: Claim Forms are now available for the TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Settlement!

Who is a Class Member

You are Class Member of the TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Settlement if “you

a. requested and received a copy of your credit report from TransUnion between May 20, 2009 and March 23, 2018, and the credit report contained a tax lien, civil judgment, or bankruptcy, but the identity of the vendor who provided the information to TransUnion was not disclosed;

AND/OR

b. between July 5, 2014 and March 23, 2018, TransUnion communicated your credit report to a third party (such as a lender or employer) and the credit report contained a tax lien or civil judgment that was not accurately described or did not belong to you. The Settlement includes state tax liens, federal tax liens, and civil judgments and includes claims that TransUnion misreported those liens or judgments as unpaid, when they had in fact been paid.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Estimated Award

  • Automatic Payment of $1,500 or $2,000 & Removal of Civil Judgments and Tax Liens From Your Credit Report

Under the terms of the settlement, TransUnion will  remove civil judgments and tax liens from your credit reports for a period of time and will provide a means for you to learn the identity of the vendor who provided TransUnion with such records.

Additionally, TransUnion has agreed to create an expedited process (ADR Program) for consumers to submit a claim and request for payment up to $2,000 if they have suffered any “Adverse Action” as a result of a TransUnion credit report that contained an inaccurate judgment or tax lien.


Proof of Purchase

  • N/A

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Settlement Notes

  • Clark v. TransUnion LLC
  • Case No. 3:15-cv-0039-MHL
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division

This consumer class action lawsuit alleges TransUnion willfully violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to disclose its third-party vendor through whom it collected public record information and reported inaccurate and out-of-date public record information, including tax liens and civil judgments.

According to the complaints, for several years, TransUnion has obtained its information about bankruptcies, civil judgments, and tax liens (i.e. public records information) from other private businesses it calls “vendors” rather than actual public records from courthouses or actual government offices. However, on its credit reports that it provides to consumers, TransUnion falsely lists the names and addresses of courthouses or other government offices as the sole “source” of its public records information.

These records reportedly have frequent numerical and other factual errors, do not contain the most updated status of the public records, invert the debtor and creditor, and/or are placed on the wrong consumer’s report.

“[TransUnion] thus deprives consumers of valuable congressionally-mandated information and makes it more difficult for consumers, such as Plaintiff and the putative class members, to correct errors relating to these public records that are caused by Defendant and/or its private vendor sources,” the lawsuit states.

TransUnion disputes any liability and contends that it acted lawfully and in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act at all times.

Complete details are provided in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and other related documents are available on the TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to the terms of the TransUnion Inaccurate Credit Reports Settlement must do so by July 31, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement do not need to do anything at this time.

UPDATED 11/5/18: The Settlement has been given final approval and the TransUnion ADR Program is now active. You may be eligible to request an automatic payment of up to $2,000. Claimants have until March 20, 2020 to file a claim.


Important Dates

  • 3/20/20: Claim Form Deadline (*Updated 11/5/18)

Contact Information

  • Mail: TransUnion Settlement Class Counsel, 763 J. Clyde Morris Blvd., Suite 1A, Newport News, VA 23601
  • Phone: 1-844-718-2692
  • Email: transunion@clalegal.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Claim Between $137-$275 Wells Fargo FCRA Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Wells Fargo FCRA Settlement Class if your mortgage account was one of 78,000 mortgage loan accounts “not excluded from one or more of the quarterly account reviews Wells Fargo undertook in the second, third, or fourth quarters of 2015 or the first, second, or third quarters of 2016, inclusive (the “Quarterly Account Reviews”), and had a balance of $0.00 at the time of such Quarterly Account Review as reflected in Wells Fargo’s business records.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $2,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • Between $137 and $275

The amount of your payout will depend on the total number of valid claims received. It is estimated that if 5-10% of Settlement Class Members submit a valid claim form, payments would fall between $137 and $275 per person. This is only an estimate; the actual amount of any payments may be higher or lower.


Proof of Purchase

  • Claimants will need to provide their 12-digit Class Member ID founds on your Postcard Notice or Claim Package.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Wells Fargo FCRA Settlement Notes

  • Martin v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  • Case No. 1:16-cv-09483
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

In October 2016, plaintiff Nicholas Martin brought this class action lawsuit alleging Wells Fargo violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by obtaining and using consumer reporst without a permissible purpose. Specifically, the Wells Fargo FCRA class action lawsuit claims that the bank got this consumer reports for consumers who credit obligation or balance owed to Wells Fargo was paid off.

In Martin’s case, a short sale agreement in 2009 discharged any obligation he had with Wells Fargo. However, in March 2016 and again in June 2016, Wells Fargo obtained and used Martin’s consumer report. Martin sent a letter to Wells Fargo requesting what permissible purpose they had to access his credit report. In July 2016, Wells Fargo admitted in a letter to Martin that it has no permissible purposes to procure his consumer reports after 2009.

In agreeing to settle the FCRA class action lawsuit for $2.5 million, Wells Fargo admits to no wrongdoing. Complete details about the case and settlement can be found on the Wells Fargo FCRA Settlement website.

Class members who wish to exclude themselves or object to the Wells Fargo FCRA settlement must do so by April 16, 2018. Class members who wish to receive a cash payment from the settlement must submit their claim form on or before April 16, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 4/16/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 4/16/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 6/29/18: Final Hearing at 10:00 a.m. CT* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.MartinvWellsFargoSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Martin v. Wells Fargo Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 4349, Portland, OR 97208-4349
  • Phone: 1-844-551-1730

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

DirectTV Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Unauthorized Hard Credit Pulls

DirectTV is facing a proposed class action lawsuit over allegations the direct-to-home digital TV service provider routinely conducts hard credit pulls on its customers without their knowledge or permission.

Plaintiff Jon Wulf Amadeus Adler brought this class action lawsuit against DirectTV last week in California federal court, claiming violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

The FCRA was by passed by Congress in 1970 to ensure fair and accurate reporting of credit and protect consumers’ privacy. In line with this, the FCRA prohibits users of a person’s credit report from obtaining consumer reports unless the user has a permissible purpose for running the report.

Adler contends he never had any prior interaction or relationship with DirectTV and doesn’t even subscribe to the cable service. He was shocked to discover that he was subject to an unauthorized hard credit pull by the company, which adversely impacted his credit score.

Upon learning of the unauthorized hard pull by DirectTV, Adler contacted the company in the hopes of resolving the issue, removing the inquiry, and resolving the negative effects on his credit score. The lawsuit notes that Adler spoke with DirectTV’s service representatives and complained about the issue. Therefore, DirectTV was aware of the hard credit pulls not initiated by consumers.

According to the DirectTV class action lawsuit, this seems to be a common business practice for DirectTV. Many consumers, including Adler and the proposed Class, often are not even aware of the hard credit pulls until they view their own credit reports, which is a little too late, since these DirectTV hard credit pulls have already negatively affected their credit scores.

“Plaintiff and the Proposed Class Members were shocked, embarrassed, and felt a sense of personal and identity insecurity due to [DirectTV]’s willful conduct,” the complaint states.

Sadly, DirectTV is not the only company who has been recently accused of unauthorized hard credit pulls. Similar cases have been brought against Comcast Corporation and Social Finance, Inc. for improperly running credit checks on customers. Social Finance, a student loan refinancing company, settled the FCRA violation allegations against them in August 2016 for $2.4 million.

The DirectTV class action lawsuit seeks justice for all persons who were subject to a hard credit inquiry by DirectTV or its affiliates and did not authorize such an inquiry during the last 5 years. Among statutory and punitive damages, the class action lawsuit seeks to recover injunctive relief requiring DirectTV to stop conducting unauthorized credit inquiries.

Adler and the proposed Class are represented by Eric B. Kingsley, Kelsey M. Szamet, and Arthur N. Four of Kingsley & Kingsley APC.

The DirectTV Class Action Lawsuit is Adler, et al. v. DirectTV, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-01665, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.