McInnis v. Midland Credit Management Inc., Case No. 4:26-cv-02401

Primary Source: View Original Complaint (PDF)

Facts as Alleged in the Complaint

The following is taken verbatim from the complaint filed in federal court. These are allegations; no finding of fact has been made.

The Parties

9. Plaintiff, Charles E. McInnis, is a resident and citizen of the State of South Carolina, Marlboro County, and is over the age of twenty-one (21) years. Plaintiff is a consumer as that term is defined by the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. §1681a(c).
10. Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. (“MCM”) is a Kansas corporation with its principal place of business in San Diego, California. Defendant regularly conducts business in South Carolina. Defendant is a consumer reporting agencies. Defendant may be served with process through its registered agent for service of process, Corporation Service Company, 100 Coastal Drive, Suite 210, Charleston, South Carolina 29492.
11. regularly engaged in the collection of debts.

Factual Allegations

12. In December 2025, Defendant sued Plaintiff on two consumer credit card accounts which originated with Credit One Bank, N.A., and were then sold to Defendant for collection. 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1
13. The credit card accounts did not belong to Plaintiff.
14. Plaintiff never applied for nor received a credit card from Credit One Bank, NA.
15. After being served with the lawsuit, Plaintiff went online to check his credit reports and discovered he was the victim of identity theft.
16. On or about December 9, 2025, Plaintiff obtained a copy of his Trans Union and Equifax credit reports.
17. On or about December 9, 2025, when Plaintiff attempted to obtain a copy of his Experian credit report, Experian denied his request. However, in reviewing his Equifax and Trans Union credit reports, Plaintiff discovered numerous accounts had been opened in his name without his knowledge. Additionally, there were addresses, phone numbers, and other personal information reporting that did not belong to him.
18. On or about December 10, 2025, Plaintiff sent Trans Union a dispute letter Trans Union First stating he had received a lawsuit for collection accounts that did not belong to him. After being served the lawsuit, Plaintiff discovered he had been the victim of identity theft. Plaintiff specifically disputed Midland Credit Management Inc., Acct. No. 32764****; and Midland Credit Management Inc., Acct. No. 32804**** as fraudulent accounts opened in his name without his knowledge or permission. In addition, Plaintiff disputed hard inquires by Midland Credit Management as Plaintiff did not have any accounts with Defendant and he had not authorized Defendant to access his credit file. Trans Union dispute on December 16, 2025, and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
19. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 On or about December 10, 2025, Plaintiff sent Experian a dispute letter stating he had just been served with a lawsuit for collection accounts that did not belong to him. Thereafter, Plaintiff discovered he had been the victim of identity theft. Upon reviewing his credit reports, Plaintiff discovered the Accounts were reporting as collection accounts belonging to him. Plaintiff disputed the Accounts as fraudulent and requested they be removed. Plaintiff also disputed six (6) addresses at which he had never lived, and five (5) phone numbers he had never used. Experian , and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant.
20. On or about December 10, 2025, Plaintiff sent Equifax a dispute letter stating he had been served with a collection lawsuit and thereafter discovered he had been the victim of identity theft. Plaintiff learned multiple fraudulent accounts, including the Accounts, and other incorrect information were reporting on his credit reports. Plaintiff specifically disputed the Accounts being reported by Defendant. Plaintiff also disputed five (5) addresses at which Plaintiff has never lived. Equifax
21. On December 11, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Answer to the collection lawsuit denying all liability. With his Answer, Plaintiff attached a copy of the police report he filed regarding the theft of his identity.
22. On December 11, 2025, Defendant agreed to dismiss the collection lawsuit with prejudice. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
23. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 On or about December 19, 2025, Equifax sent Plaintiff a letter requesting Plaintiff provide two documents verifying his identity.
24. On or about December 27, 2025, Trans Union sent Plaintiff Investigation Results wherein Trans Union informed Plaintiff that Defendant had verified the reporting of the Accounts as belonging to Plaintiff as accurate. With the Investigation Results, Trans Union provided an updated credit report which confirmed that Defendant continued to report the fraudulent Accounts as derogatory Accounts belonging to Plaintiff.
25. On or about January 7, 2026, Experian sent Plaintiff Dispute Results to his December 10, 2025, dispute, wherein Experian informed Plaintiff that Defendant had verified the Accounts as accurate. As a result, both of the fraudulent Accounts continued to be reported as collection accounts belonging to Plaintiff on his Experian credit report.
26. On January 12, 2026, the Court dismissed the collection lawsuit with prejudice.
27. On or about February 4, 2026, Plaintiff sent Trans Union a second dispute letter Trans Union wherein Plaintiff informed Trans Union he had received its Investigation Results, but the fraudulent Accounts continued to be reported as derogatory accounts belonging to Plaintiff. Plaintiff asked Trans Union to remove the fraudulent Accounts from his credit report. Plaintiff informed Trans Union that Defendant had sued him and dismissed the case due to fraud. Plaintiff provided a copy of the case dismissal with his dispute. Trans Union February 9, 2026, and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant.
28. On or about February 4, 2026, Plaintiff sent Experian a second dispute letter 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 wherein Plaintiff informed Experian he had received the Dispute Results, but several incorrect items continued to be reported as belonging to him on his credit report. Plaintiff specifically disputed the Accounts as fraudulent accounts opened in his name without his knowledge or permission. Plaintiff also disputed the address of 829 Antioch Church Rd, Bennettsville, SC 29512, as an address linked to the fraudulent Accounts.
29. On or about February 4, 2026, Plaintiff sent Equifax a letter providing Equifax with previous December 10, 2025, February 17, 2026
30. On or about February 12, 2026, Trans Union sent Plaintiff Investigation Results and an updated credit report wherein the fraudulent Accounts were still reporting as belonging to Plaintiff.
31. On February 19, 2026, Experian sent Plaintiff Dispute Results, stating the disputed Accounts were not currently reporting on his credit reports.
32. On or about April 1, 2026, Plaintiff sent Trans Union a third dispute letter Trans Union . In his letter, Plaintiff informed Trans Union the Accounts were still reporting as belonging to him on his credit report. Plaintiff asked for the fraudulent Accounts be removed. Plaintiff also disputed the account review inquires by Defendant. With his letter, Plaintiff provided a copy of the police report he filed regarding the fraud, as well as the Stipulation of Dismissal of the collection lawsuit with prejudice. Trans Union 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 , and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant.
33. On or about April 1, 2026, Plaintiff sent Equifax a second dispute letter Second . In his letter, Plaintiff again informed Equifax he had been the victim of identity theft and that he had previously sent proof of his identity to Equifax. Plaintiff again disputed the Accounts as fraudulent accounts, opened in his name without his knowledge or permission. Plaintiff also disputed five (5) addresses at which he never lived. With his letter, Plaintiff provided a copy of the police report he filed regarding the fraud, a copy of the Stipulation of Dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice filed by Defendant, a , and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant.
34. On or about May 15, 2026, Plaintiff sent Equifax a third dispute letter Third . In his letter, Plaintiff again informed Equifax he had been the victim of identity theft. Plaintiff disputed the Accounts as fraudulent accounts opened in his name without his knowledge or permission, as well as five (5) addresses at which he never lived. With his letter, Plaintiff provided another copy of the police report he filed regarding the fraud, a copy of the Stipulation of Dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice filed by Defendant, and a copy of his Social Security card and Equifax received May 19, 2026, and thereafter forwarded same to Defendant.
35. To date, despite notice that the Accounts were fraudulent Accounts opened in 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 and dismissal of the collection lawsuit with prejudice, Defendant has continued to report the Accounts as derogatory accounts belonging to Plaintiff to the national credit reporting agencies and to third parties.
36. While Defendant has continued to report false, fraudulent, and inaccurate information on Plaintiff’s credit reports, those credit reports have been viewed by Capital One, Synchrony Financial, Credit Fresh Marketing, Axcess Financial/CNGO, Cap One Auto, Security Finance Corporation, AF Holdco LLC, TBOM/Vervent-Total Visa, CB Indigo, Warehouse Home Furnishing Distributions, Mission Lane WebBank, Syncb/Syncb, Syncb/Car Care Discount Tire, Portfolio Recovery Associates, Shellpoint Mortgage Svc, Avante USA, Radius Global Solutions, American Coradius Intl, Medical Debt Resolution via ECMedical Debt Resolution, Cavalry Portfolio Service, CPC Credit Vision,, Constar Financial Srvcs, Synergetic Communication Inc, and Lockhart Morris Montgo.
37. Reporting a debt to a credit reporting agency (CRA) is an attempt to collect the debt alleged therein. See, e.g., Edeh v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., 748 F. Supp. 2d 1030 threatening to report and reporting debts to CRAs is one of the most commonly-used ; see also Smith v. Encore Capital Group, Inc., 966 F. Supp. 2d 817 (E.D. Wis. 2013).
38. Credit reporting is recognized as a powerful tool used to extract payment from consumer debtors. Purnell v. Arrow Fin. Servs., LLC, 303 Fed. Appx. 297, 304, n.5 (6th Cir. 2008); see also Malone v. Cavalry Portfolio Servs., LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 158310, 2015 WL 7571881 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 24, 2015); Quale v. Unifund CCR Partners, 682 F.Supp.2d 1274 (S.D. Ala. 2010); Sullivan v. Equifax, Inc., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7884, 2002 WL 799856 (E.D. PA. Apr. 19, 2002).
39. -created rights to be free from McCamis v. Servis One, Inc., No. 8:16-CV-1130-T-30AEP, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99492 (M.D. Fla. July 29, 2016); see also Church v. Accretive Health, Inc., 654 Fed. Appx. 990, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12414, 2016 WL 3611543 (11th Cir. 2016).
40. An injury-in- Church, at 993, quoting Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363, 373, 102 S.Ct. 1114, 71 L.Ed.2d 214 (1982).
41. Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to false, deceptive, unfair, and unconscionable means to collect a debt. COUNT ONE Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
42. Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 41 hereinbefore as if fully set forth herein.
43. Defendant negligently violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(A) by failing to conduct an investigation after receiving notice that the Plaintiff disputed the information said Defendant had provided to a consumer reporting agency. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
44. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 Defendant negligently violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(B) by failing to review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to §1681i.
45. Defendant negligently violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(C) by reporting inaccurate, incomplete, false, and misleading results of the alleged investigation, if any, to the consumer reporting agencies.
46. Defendant negligently violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(D) by failing to notify all Account was inaccurate, incomplete, false, and misleading.
47. Defendant negligently violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(E) by failing to delete the information or permanently block the reporting of the disputed information when the information disputed by Plaintiff could not be verified after Defendant’s alleged reinvestigation.
48. to his reputation and credit reputation, had a substantial drop in his credit scores, delayed applying for credit, and suffered lost time and enjoyment of life, anxiety, fear, loss of sleep, anger, fright, physical pain and sickness and mental anguish, as well as damages for attorneys’ fees, costs, certified mail expenses, and other out of pocket losses. COUNT TWO Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
49. Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 48 hereinbefore as if fully set forth herein. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
50. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 Defendant willfully violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(A) by failing to conduct an investigation after receiving notice that the Plaintiff disputed the information said Defendant had provided to a consumer reporting agency.
51. Defendant willfully violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(B) by failing to review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to §1681i.
52. Defendant willfully violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(C) by reporting inaccurate, incomplete, false, and misleading results of the investigation, if any, to the consumer reporting agency.
53. Defendant willfully violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(D) by failing to notify all consumer reporting agencies that the reporting of the Account the subject of this action was inaccurate, incomplete, false, and misleading.
54. Defendant willfully violated 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)(1)(E) by failing to delete the information or permanently block the reporting of the disputed information when the information disputed by Plaintiff could not be verified after Defendant’s alleged reinvestigation.
55. harm to his reputation and credit reputation, had a substantial drop in his credit scores, delayed applying for credit, and suffered lost time and enjoyment of life, anxiety, fear, loss of sleep, anger, fright, physical pain and sickness and mental anguish, as well as damages for attorneys’ fees, costs, certified mail expenses, and other out of pocket losses. COUNT THREE Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 4:26-cv-02401-JD
56. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 55 hereinbefore as if fully set forth herein.
57. Defendant is engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts from consumers and is
58. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §1692e(2)(A) by falsely representing the character, amount, and/or legal status of an alleged debt.
59. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §1692e(8) by communicating information to the credit reporting agencies which it knew, or should have known, to be false.
60. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §1692e(10) by using false representations and/or deceptive means to collect an alleged debt, even after dismissing the collection lawsuit with prejudice.
61. Defendant violated §1692f by using unfair and/or unconscionable means to attempt to collect a debt.
62. Due to Defendant’s violations of the FDCPA, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including loss of his personal time, harm to his credit and credit score, worry, anxiety, physical sickness, physical pain, stress, headaches, loss of sleep, distress, frustration, embarrassment, and humiliation. Plaintiff is entitled to statutory damages, and actual damages in an amount to be determined by the jury.
63. Plaintiff also and costs due to Defendant’s violations of the FDCPA pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692k. 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 COUNT FOUR Defamation, Libel, Slander
64. Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 63 hereinbefore as if fully set forth herein.
65. Defendant willfully, wantonly, recklessly, and/or maliciously published and communicated false and defamatory statements regarding Plaintiff to third parties and the caused Plaintiff physical sickness, loss of sleep, fear, worry, mental anguish and emotional distress.
66. Said communications and statements were false in that Plaintiff was not indebted to Defendant and Plaintiff did now owe any balance on the Accounts that are the subject of this action.
67. continued to report the Accounts as belonging to Plaintiff and verifying the accuracy of the information it reported to the credit reporting agencies and to third parties.
68. At the time Defendant made said communications and statements, Defendant knew or should have known the falsity of the communications and statements, or recklessly disregarded the potential inaccuracy of the information, yet knowingly, willfully and maliciously communicated the falsity. The Accounts were not Plaintiff’s and said fact was known to Defendant as Plaintiff had informed Defendant directly that the Accounts were fraudulently opened in his name without his knowledge or permission and provided Defendant a copy of his police report regarding the theft of his identity. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
69. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 The defamatory statements were willfully, recklessly, and maliciously published by Defendant to Plaintiff’s creditors and potential creditors, and other third parties. The Accounts were reported by Defendant to the national credit reporting agencies for dissemination therefrom throughout the country. Indeed, the Accounts were viewed by multiple entities after said entities reviewed Plaintiff’s credit reports.
70. The defamatory statements referenced Plaintiff. Defendant reported said defamatory statements to Plaintiff’s credit reports. Said false and defamatory statements have harmed the reputation and credit reputation of Plaintiff and/or deterred third persons from associating with him. Specifically, Defendant reported two derogatory Accounts as belonging to Plaintiff, having a past due balance, and being charged off and/or collection Accounts.
71. As a proximate consequence of Defendant s willful and malicious conduct, false, embarrassing, misleading and negative information concerning Plaintiff was published and disseminated to third parties, including the national credit reporting agencies, current creditors, and potential credit grantors multiple times.
72. As a result of Defendant s willful and malicious conduct, Plaintiff was caused to have negative credit reports, to be held up to public ridicule or shame, to suffer injury to his reputation, and suffer economic loss due to the actions of Defendants. Additionally, Plaintiff was caused to suffer embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, loss of sleep, anger, physical pain and sickness, worry, mental anguish and emotional stress for which he claims compensatory damages. 4:26-cv-02401-JD
73. Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 Due to the intentional or reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s rights as set forth herein, Plaintiff is entitled to and seeks punitive damages against Defendant for its libelous conduct. COUNT FIVE Negligent Training and Supervision
74. Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 73 hereinbefore as if fully set forth herein.
75. Defendant knew or should have known of the conduct set forth herein which was directed at and visited upon Plaintiff.
76. Defendant knew or should have known that said conduct was improper and in violation of multiple Federal and State laws, including the FDCPA and FCRA.
77. Defendant negligently failed to train and supervise its agents and employees in order to prevent said improper and unconscionable conduct.
78. Defendant negligently failed to train and supervise their agents and employees on the Federal and State laws asserted herein.
79. As a result of Defendant s negligence, Plaintiff suffered damages, including embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, loss of sleep, anger, physical pain and sickness, worry, mental anguish and emotional stress for which he claims compensatory damages. COUNT SIX Reckless and Wanton Training and Supervision
80. Plaintiff hereby adopts, to the extent same are consistent with the allegations contained herein, the averments and allegations of paragraphs 12 through 79 hereinbefore 4:26-cv-02401-JD Date Filed 06/18/26 Entry Number 1 as if fully set forth herein.
81. Defendant knew or should have known of the conduct set forth herein which was directed at and visited upon Plaintiff.
82. Defendant knew or should have known that said conduct was improper and in violation of multiple Federal and State laws, including the FDCPA and FCRA.
83. Defendant recklessly and wantonly failed to train and supervise their agents and employees in order to prevent said improper and unconscionable conduct.
84. Defendant recklessly and wantonly failed to train and supervise their agents and employees on the Federal and State laws asserted herein.
85. As a result of Defendant s reckless and wanton conduct, Plaintiff suffered damages, including embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, loss of sleep, anger, physical pain and sickness, worry, mental anguish and emotional stress for which he claims compensatory damages.
86. s in an amount to be determined by the jury. AMOUNT OF DAMAGES DEMANDED

Frequently Asked Questions

Has regularly conducts business in South Carolina. Defendant been found liable in this case?

No. This is a complaint — a legal filing that contains allegations made by is a consumer as that term. regularly conducts business in South Carolina. Defendant has not been found liable for any wrongdoing. A finding of liability requires a court proceeding where evidence is presented and evaluated by a judge or jury.

What does the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibit?

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.) prohibits third-party debt collectors from using abusive, unfair, or deceptive practices. It requires collectors to send a debt validation notice and prohibits harassment, false representations, and unfair practices. Statutory damages can reach $1,000 per lawsuit plus actual damages and attorney fees.

What does the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) require?

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) regulates how consumer reporting agencies collect and use credit information. It gives consumers the right to access and dispute their credit reports. Willful violations carry statutory damages of $100–$1,000 plus actual damages and attorney fees; negligent violations allow only actual damages.

What is the current status of this case?

This case was recently filed. See the CourtListener docket linked at the bottom of this page for the complete filing record. This page is updated automatically when new documents are filed.

Where can I read the full complaint against regularly conducts business in South Carolina. Defendant?

The full complaint is publicly available on CourtListener. The Facts as Alleged section above reproduces the complaint’s factual allegations verbatim. The complete case record, including all filings, is available through the docket link at the bottom of this page.

Source: CourtListener. Information on this page is taken verbatim from the court complaint. These are allegations only; no finding of fact has been made.