On April 9, 2014, attorneys with the Legal Action Center, a 41 year old 501 (c)(3) organization located in New York City, filed a class action lawsuit against CoreLogic SafeRent LLC in the U.S. Court Southern District of NY, alleging violations of the NY Fair Credit Reporting Act. Lead plaintiff in the complaint, Abdullah James George Wilson, applied for an apartment at Eastchester Heights in the Bronx and was accepted pending an approved credit check. The apartment complex purchased a Lease Decision Report issued by CoreLogic Inc.'s, multi-family housing solution called "SafeRent", which included Mr. Wilson's credit history, credit report, criminal background information, and race. Two different sections of the report, one called "Report Summary" and the other "CrimSafe Result" reported Wilson's race as "Black". CoreLogic SafeRent LLC is the multi-unit housing and tenant rental screening arm of CoreLogic Inc, a $1.41 billion corporation with nearly 5,000 employees that provides "...property, financial and consumer information services to mortgage originators, financial institutions and government organizations."

According to the complaint, Mr. Wilson's credit rating was well within the range for an individual seeking to lease from Eastchester Heights, but he was denied based on a prior robbery conviction from 1995. That conviction was vacated, dismissed, and the file sealed in October of 2009. Wilson tried calling CoreLogic's headquarters based in Irvine, CA at least four times, leaving messages disputing the accuracy of the report, but was never contacted back by the company. Not only did CoreLogic inaccurately report the status of the case, but the report misidentified the case number, the file date, the state ID number, and the disposition date as well.

The NY Fair Credit Reporting Act as codified in NY General Business Law Sec. 380-j(a)(2) provides that "....no consumer reporting agency shall report or maintain in the file on a consumer information…relative to a consumers race, religion, color, ancestry, or ethnic origin." The complaint alleges that CoreLogic "willfully violated this section by reporting and maintaining information in the files of New York consumers". Taking into consideration that CoreLogic is known to keep comprehensive consumer, credit and criminal background profiles on most individuals in the U.S., it's not much of a stretch to argue that race is reported not only in New York, but across all states in the U.S. and may even come into play for international clients seeking similar services.

In the complaint, Counts II-IV address issues of failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure accuracy in the preparation and sale of consumer reports including criminal backgrounds, failure to follow or establish procedures of the like for sale of Lease Decision Reports, and failing to reinvestigate the accuracy of a report once a dispute has been lodged with the consumer reporting agency. All of which are enormously damaging to those that have been convicted of a crime, and have then had that conviction expunged, vacated, sealed or dismissed prior to the sale and/or dissemination of their consumer report.



“Too many background screeners make mistakes that create havoc in the lives of people applying for jobs and housing,” said Sally Friedman, Legal Action Center’s Legal Director

Also troubling is CoreLogic's close relationship with Bank of America, whose Countrywide subsidiary was found by the U.S. Department of Justice to have racially discriminated against African-Americans and Latinos in the issuance of home mortgage loans, settling out of court for $335 million in 2011. The suit against CoreLogic is still pending, but the Legal Action Center's website reports that parties to the suit came to an agreement to dismiss alleged violations stemming from the reporting of race detailed in the Report Summary and CrimSafe sections. When asked about the dismissal Freidman responded that, "There was no agreement. Race was definitely on the consumer report CoreLogic ran for his housing application. The case now focuses on the inaccurate reporting of criminal record information."