On March 25, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a consumer class action on behalf of consumers nationwide who had been the subject of misleading and inaccurate background reports sold by the defendant, RealPage, Inc. to landlords. The plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from Community Legal Services, sued in the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), asking the court for damages and declaratory relief. They alleged that the defendant, RealPage, Inc., adopted and maintained a policy and practice of failing to timely update the criminal record information it maintains so as to eliminate records of cases that have been expunged, thus not accurately reflecting the final disposition of these cases. Moreover, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant systematically violated FCRA by failing to provide complete and accurate disclosures of all information the defendant maintains about consumers to these consumers upon request.
On October 26, 2015, the defendants filed a motion to stay, which was granted in a January 25, 2016 opinion by U.S. District Court Judge John R. Padova. This order further stated that the case would be placed in suspense until the U.S. Supreme Court decided
Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins.
On June 20, 2016, the case was put back on the docket for final disposition. On June 24, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss count two of the plaintiffs' complaint, but this motion was denied in an October 18, 2016 order by Judge Padova.
On June 19, 2017, this case was consolidated with Jenkins v. Realpage, No. 15-cv-3894, for purposes of settlement. On June 30, the parties moved for preliminary approval of settlement, which the court granted on August 3.
The settlement established the following three classes:
"The Chart Settlement Class: All persons residing in the United States of America (including its territories and Puerto Rico) who, from November 5, 2012 through the date when the Court enters its Preliminary Approval Order, requested a copy of their consumer report from Defendant, and received with the disclosure a chart that failed to provide the full address and phone number for every agency responsible for enforcing any provision of the FCRA."
"The Expungement Settlement Class: All persons residing in the United States of America (including its territories and Puerto Rico) about whom, from March 3, 2013 through the date when the Court enters its Preliminary Approval Order, Defendant prepared a consumer report which included information regarding one or more criminal cases which at the time the report was prepared by Defendant had been expunged or sealed and a Lifecycle File identified the record as having been expunged or sealed prior to the date of the report."
"The Source Settlement Class: All persons residing in the United States of America (including its territories and Puerto Rico) who, from November 5, 2012 through the date when the Court enters its Preliminary Approval Order, made a request pursuant to Section 609(a) of the FCRA [15 U.S.C. § 1681g(a)] for a file copy, and received a disclosure containing a criminal record in their file which did not include the identity of the public record vendor which had retrieved the criminal record(s) included in their file disclosure."
For the Chart Settlement Class, the parties agreed to ask the court for an injunction ordering that the "Defendant shall provide the complete chart of federal agencies responsible for enforcing any provision of the FCRA, including the address and any appropriate phone number of each agency."
For the Expungement Class, the parties agreed to move for the court to issue an injunction compelling the defendant to ensure that any criminal records identified as expunged would not be included "in any database used to produce its tenant screening reports." The injunction was to last for two years, and each subclass member was to receive an equal share from the fund up to a maximum of $1,100.
For the Source Settlement Class, the parties agreed to ask the court to issue an injunction ordering that "[w]hen a consumer makes a request...for a copy of that consumer’s file, Defendant agrees to disclose the name of the vendor that retrieved any criminal record information in the consumer’s file at the time of such request." The injunction was to last for two years, and each subclass member was to receive an equal share from the fund up to a maximum of $200.
On February 6, 2018, the court granted final approval of the settlement, issued the requested injunctions, and awarded class counsel $359,733.33 in attorney's fees. The case is now closed, though the court retains jurisdiction over the settlement.
The plaintiffs filed an opposed motion for approval of the second distribution to class members on November 7, 2018. After oral arguments on the motion on February 7, 2019, Judge Padova granted the motion and the distribution proceeded. As of April 17, 2020, there have been no additional entries in the docket.
Saeeda Joseph-Charles - 11/13/2016
Virginia Weeks - 03/15/2018
Alex Moody - 04/17/2020
compress summary
