Troubled Houston Lawyer Bill Ramey as Counsel for Wife Kelly Ramey Vexatiously Sue JPMorgan Chase

Ramey v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA

(4:23-cv-03356)

District Court, S.D. Texas, Judge Al “Bent” Bennett

SEP 8, 2023 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: SEP 20, 2023

PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

COMES NOW Plaintiff, KELLY RAMEY (“Plaintiff”) who files this Original Complaint, against Defendant, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, NA (“Chase” or “Defendant”) and for cause of action would respectfully show the Court as follows:

PARTIES/SERVICE OF PROCESS

1.                  The Plaintiff is an individual residing in Harris County, Texas.

2.                  Defendant, JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA is a National Banking Institution organized under laws of the state of Delaware and may be served with the instant complaint at C T Corporation System 1999 Bryan St., Ste. 900 Dallas, TX 75201.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3.                  The Court further has diversity subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, as Plaintiff and Defendant reside in different states.

4.                  This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because:

(i) Defendant is present within or has minimum contacts within the State of Texas and this judicial district;

(ii) Defendant has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting business in the State of Texas and in this judicial district;

and

(iii) Plaintiff’s cause of action arises directly from Defendant’s business contacts and other activities in the State of Texas and in this judicial district.

5.                  Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) because Defendant conducts substantial business in this forum, directly or through intermediaries, including: (i) at least a portion of the acts alleged herein; and (ii) regularly doing or soliciting business, engaging in other persistent courses of conduct and/or deriving substantial revenue from goods and services provided to individuals in Texas and this District.

FACTS

6.                  The Houston Wellness Project (“HWP”) was a non-profit organization based in Harris County, Texas with a mission of improving the health and wellness of all through physical activity and education. The HWP performed numerous community driven events to foster health and wellness, including organizing and running a system of free 5-K race events on a monthly basis in multiple locations across the greater Houston metropolitan area.

7.                  The HWP developed a faithful group of participants and had well over 5000 Facebook followers in 2019 with race attendance averaging several hundred per race.

8.                  Organizing, permitting, and supplying the activities of the HWP required substantial funds (“business operating expenses”). The HWP raised funds solely through donations, most coming from the race participants themselves.

9.                  To facilitate paying business operating expenses, the HWP obtained a credit card from Defendant (“Chase Credit Card”). Plaintiff was an authorized user on the Chase Credit Card but did not provide any guarantee of the Chase Credit Card.

10.              During the Covid-19 pandemic, activities of the HWP were severely restricted and all races were stopped. Consequently, the donations to the HWP dropped sharply. As a result of the drop in donations, HWP was forced to cease operations in 2020.

11.              The HWP continued to make its monthly credit card payments on the Chase Credit Card for many months but eventually ceased making payments and sought to resolve the account with Defendant.

12.              However, rather than seeking to resolve the account with the HWP, Defendant reported Plaintiff to the credit agencies as being the responsible party for the HWP’s Chase Credit Card. Plaintiff’s credit has been negatively affected by Defendant’s false reporting.

13.              Plaintiff’s attorney reached out to Defendant on numerous occasions seeking Defendant’s factual basis for alleging Plaintiff is responsible for the HWP’s Chase Credit Card.

14.              Defendant responded by letter with copies of various credit card statements but never produced any form of a guarantee by Plaintiff of the HWP’s Chase Credit Card.

15.              In light of the fact that Defendant could not produce a guarantee of the HWP’s credit card, Plaintiff requested that Defendant remove the negative reporting to the credit agencies. However, Defendant has not removed the negative reporting.

16.              Plaintiff also formally disputed the incorrect information directly with the credit reporting agencies. However, after being contacted by the reporting agency, Defendant falsely maintained that the information was correct. The credit agency informed Plaintiff that it could not remove the information because Defendant affirmed that it was correct.

17.              Further, Defendant continues to wrongfully demand payment from the Plaintiff.

CAUSES OF ACTION

A.                 Defamation of Credit.

18.              Plaintiff incorporates the preceding allegations herein by reference as if fully set forth.

19.              Defendant falsely reported to the credit agencies that Plaintiff was responsible for the HWP’s Chase Credit Card.

20.              Plaintiff informed Defendant that she was not a guarantor of the Chase Credit Card.

However, Defendant purposely disregarded Plaintiff and continues to this day to publish that Plaintiff is responsible for the HWP’s Chase Credit Card.

21.              Defendant’s false statements have lowered Plaintiff’s credit score and caused her to be ineligible for credit at an affordable rate. Namely, Plaintiff has not been able to apply for a Small Business Loan.

22.              Defendant’s acts are more than negligent as Defendant has been asked to produce the guarantee but has failed to do so and has maintained the false reporting.

23.              Defendant’s acts have caused damage to Plaintiff at least through the inability to access affordable credit or apply for a loan through the Small Business Administration.

24.              Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages for economic loss and for emotional damage, statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

25.              Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages of at least 100 times the compensatory and statutory damages awarded given the egregious nature of Defendant’s conduct.

B.     Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

26.              Plaintiff incorporates the preceding allegations herein by reference as if fully set forth.

27.              The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCPA) requires that all parties reporting to a credit bureau must provide accurate information. Chase has deliberately reported false information.

28.              Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681, furnishers of information may not knowingly provide inaccurate information to consumer reporting agencies.” Smith, 2010 WL 3338537, at *14 (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1681s–2(a)). Once a furnisher is notified by a consumer reporting agency that the consumer has disputed the completeness or accuracy of information pursuant to § 1681i(a)(2), the furnisher must conduct its own investigation with respect to the disputed item, correct any inaccuracy, and notify the agency of the results of its investigation. 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681s–2(b).

29.              Plaintiff has a right to recover against Defendant for violations of § 1681s–2(b),20:

(1)    Plaintiff disputed the accuracy or completeness of information with a consumer reporting agency;

(2)  the agency notified Defendant of the consumer’s dispute;

(3)  and Defendant failed to conduct an investigation, correct any inaccuracies, or notify the agency of the results of the investigation.

30.              Defendant’s false statements have lowered Plaintiff’s credit score and caused her to be ineligible for credit at an affordable rate. Namely, Plaintiff has not been able to apply for a Small Business Loan.

31.              Defendant’s acts are willful as Defendant has been asked to produce the guarantee but has failed to do so and has maintained the false reporting.

32.              Defendant’s acts have caused damage to Plaintiff at least through the inability to access affordable credit or apply for a loan through the Small Business Administration.

33.              Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory damages for economic loss and for emotional damage, statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.

34.              Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages of at least 100 times the compensatory and statutory damages awarded given the egregious nature of Defendant’s conduct.

DECLARATORY RELIEF

35.              Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Plaintiff seeks a declaration that Plaintiff is not responsible for the charges on the Chase Credit Card.

ATTORNEYS’ FEES

36.              Plaintiff seeks recovery of her reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees and court costs for trial and upon appeal, if applicable, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2202 and/or as otherwise allowable by law or statute.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

37.              All conditions precedent to Plaintiffs’ right to recovery have occurred, have been performed or have been waived.

JURY DEMAND

38.              Plaintiff requests a trial by jury.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that Defendant be cited to appear and answer herein, and that Plaintiff be granted judgment against Defendant for the following:

1.                  all declaratory described above, including any equitable or ancillary relief;

2.                  all actual, consequential, special, incidental, and other types of damages;

3.                  all equitable and just and/or reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees through the time of trial, and such further attorneys’ fees in the event this matter is appealed;

4.                  all costs of court;

5.                  pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law; and

6.                  all such other and further relief, both general and special, legal and equitable, to which Plaintiff may show herself to be justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

Ramey LLP

/s/William P. Ramey
William P. Ramey, III

Texas Bar No. 24027643
5020 Montrose Blvd., Suite 800
Houston, Texas 77006
(713) 426-3923 (telephone)
(832) 900-4941 (fax)
wramey@rameyfirm.com

Texas Sen. Bryan Hughes: I’m All For Attorney Fees Against Any Person in Texas https://t.co/T6fcI0ZS4v #txlege #txwhorehouse

— lawsinusa (@lawsinusa) September 19, 2023

v