TransUnion Fraudulent Credit Report Block Class Action Lawsuit, Were You Denied an Identity Theft Block on Your Credit Report?

Prepared by the AllAboutLawyer.com Editorial Team and reviewed for factual accuracy against court records and PACER filings for Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-02438. Last Updated: May 13, 2026.

TransUnion is facing a certified class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging the company violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by refusing to block fraudulent transactions from consumer credit reports as required by federal law. The case involves nearly 281,000 people who say TransUnion sent them a standardized denial letter instead of honoring their identity theft block requests. No settlement has been reached, and no claim form exists yet.

Quick Facts — Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC Class Action

Field	Detail
Lawsuit Filed	June 5, 2024
Defendant	TransUnion LLC
Alleged Violation	Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681c-2
Who Is Affected	Consumers who received TransUnion “Letter 775” after requesting a fraudulent transaction block
Class Size	Approximately 280,763 consumers nationwide
Current Court Stage	Class certified — active litigation
Court & Jurisdiction	U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Lead Law Firm	Francis Mailman Soumilas P.C.
Next Hearing Date	TBD — merit discovery closes October 31, 2025; dispositive motions due November 28, 2025
Official Case Website	TBD — no settlement administrator site exists at this stage
Last Updated	May 13, 2026

What Is the TransUnion Lawsuit About? Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC, No. 2:24-cv-02438

Plaintiff Lesley Kaplan is a California resident who discovered in April 2023 that an unknown person used her Wells Fargo credit card to make unauthorized purchases — including over $900 at Target — that Wells Fargo approved. She did everything a victim of identity theft is supposed to do. She filed a police report, submitted a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, and then asked TransUnion to block the fraudulent charge from appearing on her credit report.

TransUnion replied with a form letter acknowledging receipt of her “identity theft block request” but declining to block the information, citing reasons including that the request may have been made in error, involved a misrepresentation of material fact, or that she obtained goods or services as a result of the transaction. That letter is known internally as “Letter 775,” and the lawsuit claims it went out to hundreds of thousands of people in exactly the same situation.

Related article: Snapfish Fake Discount False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit, Did Fake “Original” Prices Trick You Into Buying?

The FCRA, specifically Section 605B (15 U.S.C. § 1681c-2), requires credit reporting agencies to block disputed information within four business days of receiving a proper identity theft report — not reject it first and ask questions later. The lawsuit argues that TransUnion’s process violated the FCRA, which requires credit reporting agencies to first block disputed information upon receiving proper documentation and then investigate the claim — not the other way around. If you ever disputed a fraudulent item on your TransUnion report and received a denial instead of a temporary block, this case may directly involve you. For a broader look at how federal law protects consumers from credit bureau errors, see our guide on the Experian class action lawsuit and FCRA consumer rights.

Are You Part of the TransUnion Class Action Lawsuit?

Here is how to know if this case includes you. U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone certified the class, finding that Kaplan’s claims raise questions common to hundreds of thousands of consumers. The court certified a class of individuals who received similar denial letters from TransUnion within a two-year period, noting that approximately 280,763 such letters were sent nationwide.

You may be part of this class if:

• You submitted an identity theft block request to TransUnion under Section 605B of the FCRA
• TransUnion responded by sending you “Letter 775” denying your request
• The denial occurred within the two-year period covered by the class definition
• You reside in the United States or its territories
• The disputed item on your credit report involved transactions you did not authorize

You are likely not included if:

• You disputed a hard inquiry rather than a fraudulent transaction (that situation is covered under a separate settled case, Norman v. TransUnion)
• TransUnion accepted and processed your block request without sending Letter 775
• Your dispute was resolved in your favor before the denial letter was issued

If you received a denial letter from TransUnion after reporting identity theft and are unsure whether you fall within the class period, you should document everything you have and consult a consumer rights lawyer. Many attorneys who handle identity theft lawsuits work on contingency — you pay nothing unless they recover money for you.

What Are TransUnion Plaintiffs Seeking in This Lawsuit?

This is an active lawsuit, and no money is available to claim right now. No settlement has been proposed, and no claim form exists. That said, here is what the plaintiff is asking the court to award.

Because the FCRA limits private plaintiffs to statutory damages — typically between $100 and $1,000 per violation — the court found a class action is the most practical way to resolve the claims. Kaplan is seeking statutory damages and other relief on behalf of the class. If the case goes to trial and TransUnion’s conduct is found to be willful, the FCRA also allows for punitive damages on top of statutory damages.

The plaintiffs are also seeking injunctive relief — meaning they want the court to order TransUnion to change how it handles identity theft block requests going forward. That matters because a court order would protect every future consumer who reports identity theft, not just the people already in this class. If you have experienced similar harm and want to understand your options for pursuing individual compensation for damages, you can read more about identity theft legal rights and FCRA claims.

What Should You Do If You Were Affected by TransUnion?

Most class members are automatically included and do not need to do anything right now. The court has already certified the class, which means the lawsuit is moving forward on behalf of all qualifying consumers.

Here are the practical steps you can take today:

• Save every document — pull together any letters from TransUnion, your original identity theft police report, your FTC complaint, and any correspondence related to the disputed transaction. These records establish your connection to the case.
• Monitor the case docket — the PACER docket for Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-02438 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is publicly searchable at PACER.gov for new filings and hearing dates.
• Consider a free legal consultation — if you believe you suffered real financial harm — a loan denial, a credit score drop, or a damaged rental application — speaking with a consumer rights lawyer about an individual claim alongside the class action may give you additional options. Class action settlement eligibility alone may not capture the full extent of your losses.
• Do not file your own lawsuit yet — wait to see how the class action proceeds. If a settlement is reached, class members will be notified directly with instructions on how to participate or opt out.

TransUnion Identity Theft Block Lawsuit Timeline

Milestone	Date
Lawsuit Filed	June 5, 2024
TransUnion Motion for Judgment on Pleadings Denied	December 2024
Class Certification Granted by Judge Beetlestone	May 2025
Fact Discovery Deadline	July 31, 2025
Merit Expert Discovery Deadline	October 31, 2025
Dispositive Motions Deadline	November 28, 2025
Next Scheduled Hearing	TBD — check PACER docket for updates
Expected Settlement Timeline	TBD — case is in active litigation phase

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a class action lawsuit against TransUnion for blocking identity theft requests?

 Yes. A Pennsylvania federal judge certified a class of nearly 281,000 consumers in a lawsuit alleging TransUnion failed to properly block fraudulent transactions from credit reports. The case is Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-02438, pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Do I need to do anything right now to be included in the lawsuit?

 No. Class members are automatically included once the class is certified. You do not need to register, file a form, or contact anyone at this stage. The lawsuit is moving forward on your behalf if you meet the class criteria.

When will a settlement be reached in the TransUnion case?

 TBD — the case is still in active litigation. Dispositive motions were due in late 2025. A settlement could come before or after trial, but no timeline has been announced. Sign up for court docket alerts on PACER or check back here for updates.

Can I file my own lawsuit against TransUnion instead of waiting? 

Yes. Class membership does not prevent you from opting out and pursuing an individual claim. If you experienced specific financial harm — a denied mortgage, job rejection, or measurable credit score damage — speaking with a class action lawsuit attorney about an individual FCRA case may result in higher compensation than a class settlement.

How will I know if the TransUnion lawsuit settles? 

If a settlement is reached, the court will require direct notice to all class members by mail or email. You can also monitor PACER or set a Google alert for “Kaplan v. TransUnion settlement.” Do not rely on social media posts or unofficial sites for deadlines — always verify against the official court record.

Does the FCRA cover identity theft disputes specifically?

 Yes. Section 605B of the FCRA requires credit reporting agencies to block information resulting from identity theft within four business days of receiving a police report or FTC complaint. The Kaplan lawsuit argues TransUnion skipped that required step and sent denial letters instead.

Is this case related to the $23 million TransUnion settlement?

 No. The $23 million Norman v. TransUnion settlement — which received final approval in July 2025 — covered consumers who disputed hard inquiries and received a “502 Letter.” The Kaplan case is a separate lawsuit involving consumers who received “Letter 775” after requesting identity theft blocks. These are two distinct claims under the FCRA.

Sources & References

• PACER Docket, Kaplan v. TransUnion LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-02438, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania — pacermonitor.com
• FindLaw Case Record, Kaplan v. Trans Union LLC (December 2024) — caselaw.findlaw.com
• CFPB Enforcement Actions against TransUnion — consumerfinance.gov

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a particular situation, consult a qualified attorney.