FCRA Plaintiff Is Prejudiced by Verizon’s Late Arbitration Notice, Judge Told

The late timing of Verizon’s anticipated motion to compel plaintiff Israel Mertz’s Fair Credit Reporting Act claims to arbitration prejudices Mertz because discovery in the case has already begun, his counsel wrote U.S. District Judge Kenneth Karas for Southern New York in White Plains in a letter Monday (docket 7:22-cv-10938). Mertz alleges Verizon violated the FCRA by improperly sending his wireless service account to collections and inaccurately reporting his account to credit reporting agencies (see 2302240023). Mertz filed his complaint Dec. 28 and his counsel wasn’t told of a relevant arbitration clause that would have any bearing on the case until Verizon’s counsel first mentioned arbitration at the April 24 initial conference, said the letter. Mertz remains unaware of any binding Verizon arbitration clause and hasn’t had the opportunity to inspect any “allegedly relevant contract” under which he would have agreed to arbitrate this dispute, it said. Mertz’s counsel already served discovery demands on Verizon, and Mertz is entitled to discovery responses before making a decision on the application of an arbitration clause that’s not yet available to Mertz’s counsel, said the letter. Mertz asks that discovery be allowed to continue, “pending any decision on Verizon’s anticipated motion to compel,” it said. The judge later Monday ordered Verizon to give Mertz and his counsel the contract that purportedly contains the arbitration clause and reply to their letter by Monday.