Case Background
A Santa Clara County woman won a multimillion-dollar jury verdict against BMO Bank after the bank reported her husband's entire mortgage balance as her own debt and, she said, failed to fix the error even after admitting it was wrong.
Solmaz Dehcheshmeh sued BMO Bank National Association and Trans Union LLC in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on December 19, 2024. Her complaint accused the Defendants of violating the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCCRAA) by furnishing or reporting inaccurate information to the credit bureaus and then failing to correct it.
According to the complaint, Dehcheshmeh's husband, Alireza Masjedi, took out a mortgage solely in his own name, and she mistakenly signed some of the loan paperwork. A second, corrected mortgage loan later replaced the first, and that corrected loan listed only her husband. In August 2024, she checked her Credit Karma account and discovered that the full amount of her husband's mortgage was showing up on her own credit report.
Cause
The case centered on what happened after Dehcheshmeh tried to get the mistake fixed. She emailed BMO on August 15, 2024, to report the bad reporting. After exchanging messages with several BMO representatives, the bank acknowledged the mistake on August 22, 2024, and drafted paperwork to straighten things out. BMO's proposed fix called for her husband to re-sign various mortgage documents, which he did.
Even so, the complaint stated, the erroneous tradeline stayed on her credit reports. After more than 90 days passed without the bank's promised solution taking effect, she sent formal disputes and supporting documents to BMO, Equifax, Experian, and Trans Union. On November 27, 2024, Trans Union notified her that the Defendants had verified the disputed reporting rather than removing it. She argued that BMO never reasonably investigated her dispute and kept submitting the inaccurate information to the bureaus.
Injury
Dehcheshmeh said the false debt did real damage. Her credit score dropped from 755 to 695. On September 24, 2024, a lender denied her a small business credit line because of the large debt showing on her credit, and other loan denials followed as she tried to grow a start-up. The complaint stated she had been seeing a medical specialist for almost a year for panic attacks and severe anxiety tied to the credit damage and the harm to her business, and that her treatment included medication for insomnia and stress. She also described ongoing frustration, embarrassment, and lost sleep, saying the inaccurate reporting painted her as someone who overextends herself financially.
Damages Sought
Dehcheshmeh asked the Court for actual damages, statutory damages, and punitive damages under both statutes, plus attorneys' fees and costs. Under the FCRA, she sought actual damages and punitive damages for willful noncompliance. Under the CCCRAA, she sought actual damages and punitive damages of $100 to $5,000 per willful violation, along with equitable and injunctive relief. She also demanded a jury trial.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Solmaz Dehcheshmeh
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Matthew M. Loker | Nicholas J. Enns | Jacqueline D. Serrao
Defendants: BMO Bank National Association | Trans Union LLC
· Counsel for BMO: Mancy Pendergrass
· Counsel for Trans Union: Ritika Singh | Kyle Pietrzak | Paul W Sheldon | Donald E. Bradley
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Dehcheshmeh brought two counts. The first, under the FCRA, ran against both Defendants and accused them of failing to conduct a reasonable investigation after she disputed the reporting and of continuing to report information they knew or should have known was inaccurate. She pointed to specific FCRA duties for furnishers, arguing that BMO failed to review the relevant information she provided and failed to correct or update the account.
The second count, under the CCCRAA and brought only against BMO, claimed the bank furnished information to consumer reporting agencies that it knew or should have known was incomplete or inaccurate. She argued that BMO had every record it needed to recognize the error, including her formal dispute and the corrected mortgage paperwork, yet kept reporting the debt anyway.
Defense
Both Defendants answered and denied the core allegations. Trans Union answered first, on January 21, 2025. It admitted it is a consumer reporting agency with its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois (the complaint had described it as located in Pennsylvania), but denied any wrongdoing. Trans Union said it followed reasonable procedures to assure accuracy, reasonably reinvestigated everything Dehcheshmeh disputed, and never published false information about her. It also argued she lacked standing, that the Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the claims against it, that some claims fell outside the statute of limitations, and that she failed to mitigate her damages.
BMO answered on March 3, 2025. It admitted it is a national banking association headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, and that it furnishes information to credit reporting agencies, but it denied wrongdoing. BMO argued the complaint failed to state a valid claim, that the state-law CCCRAA count was preempted by the FCRA, and that it maintained reasonable procedures and reinvestigated the dispute. The bank also raised contributory negligence, failure to mitigate, unclean hands, and lack of standing, claimed any FCRA statutory damages were capped at $1,000 per action, and argued any punitive award would violate due process.
Jury Verdict
Trial began on June 22, 2026, before the Honorable Noël Wise, and the jury returned its verdict on June 24, 2026. The trial and judgment ran between Dehcheshmeh and BMO only; the documents provided do not show how Trans Union left the case.
On the CCCRAA claim, the jury found that Dehcheshmeh suffered actual damages from BMO's negligent violation and awarded $115,000. It also found that the bank acted maliciously, oppressively, fraudulently, or in reckless disregard of her rights, and awarded $105,000 in punitive damages.
On the FCRA claim, the jury found she suffered actual damages from BMO's negligent violation and awarded $150,000. It then found that BMO willfully violated the FCRA through conduct that was malicious, oppressive, or in reckless disregard of her rights, and awarded $4,000,000 in punitive damages.
The Court entered judgment in Dehcheshmeh's favor and against BMO on June 29, 2026, for a total of $4,370,000.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
