A complaint filed last Friday asserts that Checkr Inc. violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by reporting to Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc. that the plaintiff was listed as deceased on Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Death Master File. The plaintiff seeks damages for harms stemming from the prolonged and inaccurate background check that Uber and Lyft were allegedly obligated to provide him with a copy of, but did not.
According to the Eastern District of New York complaint, the plaintiff had driven for Uber and Lyft for a number of years before he was required by both companies to provide his social security number for a background check conducted by Checkr. In April 2021, Uber allegedly notified the plaintiff that his check could not be completed, and that he would be barred from driving for the company until it was. Reportedly, from May to July 2021, the man tried repeatedly to contact Checkr, via phone, mail, and online complaints, but to no avail.
In late July 2021, a customer service representative from Checkr informed the plaintiff that the social security number he provided was listed on SSA’s Death Master File, the complaint said. The plaintiff reportedly contacted the SSA and was told that he was not listed as deceased and that it would mail him paperwork to prove he was in fact alive.
The plaintiff purportedly relayed this information to Checkr but contends that he was and remains unable to rectify the situation because his correct social security number is still uploaded to his Checkr portal. The complaint explains that the plaintiff’s experience with Lyft and Checkr was nearly identical.
The filing states three claims for relief against Checkr, for among other things, failing to establish and follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum accuracy in preparing the plaintiff’s consumer report. It states one claim for relief against Uber and Lyft and for failing to provide the plaintiff with a statutorily required copy of his background report and a description in writing of his rights.
The complaint contends that the plaintiff suffered actual damages, “including but not limited to: loss of job opportunity, emotional distress which includes many sleepless nights, mental anguish, embarrassment, stress, and time wasted looking for other employment.” The plaintiff is represented by Daniel Cohen PLLC.
