Case Background
Solmaz Dehcheshmeh, a resident of Santa Clara County, California, filed a federal lawsuit against BMO Bank National Association and Trans Union LLC on December 19, 2024, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case, assigned docket number 5:24-cv-09225, centered on allegations that BMO erroneously reported her husband's mortgage debt on her personal credit reports and failed to correct the error despite acknowledging its mistake. The case was assigned to District Judge Noel Wise.
Cause
Dehcheshmeh's husband, Alireza Masjedi, took out a mortgage solely in his name. Dehcheshmeh mistakenly signed some of the original mortgage documents. A second, corrected mortgage loan later superseded the original, and the corrected loan was placed only in Masjedi's name.
In August 2024, Dehcheshmeh discovered through her Credit Karma account that the full amount of her husband's mortgage appeared on her personal credit report. On August 15, 2024, she emailed BMO to report the erroneous tradeline. After several exchanges with BMO representatives, BMO acknowledged the mistake on August 22, 2024, and drafted paperwork to address the situation. The bank's proposed fix required Masjedi to re-sign various mortgage documents.
Despite Masjedi completing the paperwork BMO requested, Dehcheshmeh's credit reports continued to reflect the erroneous tradeline. More than 90 days after BMO first acknowledged the error, Dehcheshmeh sent formal disputes and supporting documentation to BMO, Equifax, Experian, and Trans Union. On November 27, 2024, Trans Union notified Dehcheshmeh that the Defendants verified their credit reporting as accurate.
Injury
The complaint alleged that the erroneous reporting caused Dehcheshmeh's credit score to drop from 755 to 695. On September 24, 2024, she was denied a small business credit line because of the large debt appearing on her credit. She was in the process of growing a start-up business at the time, and additional loan denials followed. The complaint further alleged that Dehcheshmeh sought medical treatment for panic attacks and severe anxiety stemming from the credit damage and its impact on her business. Her treatment included medications for insomnia and stress.
Damages Sought
Dehcheshmeh sought actual damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, and costs under both the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1785.1 et seq.). The complaint requested punitive damages of $100 to $5,000 per willful violation under the CCCRAA, punitive damages as the Court may allow under the FCRA, and equitable and injunctive relief.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Solmaz Dehcheshmeh
· Counsel for Plaintiff: Matthew M. Loker | Nicholas J. Enns | Keeley Fries
Defendants: BMO Bank National Association | Trans Union LLC
Counsel for BMO: Mancy Ancy Pendergrass (withdrew March 27, 2025) | Jacqueline D. Serrao (substituted March 27, 2025; represented BMO through trial)
Counsel for Trans Union: Ritika Singh (withdrew February 25, 2025) | Kyle Pietrzak (withdrew March 26, 2025) | Paul W. Sheldon | Donald E. Bradley
Claims
The complaint asserted two causes of action. Count I alleged violations of the FCRA against both BMO and Trans Union. Dehcheshmeh contended that BMO, as a furnisher of credit information, failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of her dispute, failed to review the relevant information she provided, and continued to report inaccurate account information every 30 days despite having acknowledged the error. She also alleged that Trans Union failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of the disputed information.
Count II alleged violations of the CCCRAA against BMO only. Dehcheshmeh contended that BMO furnished information to consumer credit reporting agencies that BMO knew or should have known was inaccurate, in violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 1785.25(a). The complaint characterized the Defendants' conduct as knowing, willful, and intentional.
Defense
BMO filed its answer on March 3, 2025, and denied the material allegations. BMO asserted multiple affirmative defenses, including failure to state a cause of action, federal preemption of the CCCRAA claim by the FCRA, compliance with reasonable procedures under the FCRA, contributory negligence, failure to mitigate damages, and unclean hands. BMO also argued that its conduct was not negligent and that Dehcheshmeh's punitive damages claim failed because BMO did not act with malice or reckless indifference.
Trans Union filed its answer on January 21, 2025, and denied the material allegations. The parties participated in mediation on August 29, 2025, and the case partially settled. On October 7, 2025, the Court granted a stipulation to dismiss Trans Union with prejudice.
Jury Verdict
The case proceeded to a jury trial against BMO Bank N.A. beginning June 22, 2026, before District Judge Noel Wise in San Jose. The trial ran from June 22 through June 24, 2026.
On the CCCRAA claims, the jury found that Dehcheshmeh proved she suffered actual damages as a result of BMO's negligent violation of the statute. The jury awarded $115,000 in actual damages for the period of August 15, 2024, through November 26, 2024. The jury further found that BMO's conduct was malicious, oppressive, fraudulent, or in reckless disregard of Dehcheshmeh's rights under the CCCRAA. The jury awarded $105,000 in punitive damages under the CCCRAA.
On the FCRA claims, the jury found that Dehcheshmeh proved she suffered actual damages as a result of BMO's negligent violation of the statute. The jury awarded $150,000 in actual damages for the period after November 26, 2024. The jury further found that BMO willfully violated the FCRA through conduct that was malicious, oppressive, or in reckless disregard of Dehcheshmeh's rights. The jury awarded $4,000,000 in punitive damages under the FCRA, separate from and in addition to the punitive damages awarded under the CCCRAA.
The total jury award against BMO Bank N.A. was $4,370,000, comprising $265,000 in actual damages and $4,105,000 in punitive damages. Judge Wise signed the judgment on June 29, 2026.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
