Jackson v. Trans Union, LLC
4:24-cv-00184
S.D. Tex.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Nona Jackson purchased a used BMW through a retail installment contract with Momentum BMW, which was assigned to BMW Financial Services.
- Jackson agreed to make 72 monthly payments beginning in January 2021; after April 2023, she stopped making payments.
- BMW Financial Services repossessed and sold the vehicle at a loss after Jackson’s default, then sought to recover the deficiency.
- Jackson, representing herself, sued BMW Financial Services and others, alleging illegal repossession, failure to update her credit, and credit reporting violations.
- BMW Financial Services counterclaimed for breach of contract, seeking recovery of the deficiency and costs from Jackson.
- BMW Financial Services moved for summary judgment on both Jackson’s claims and their counterclaim; the court granted summary judgment for BMW.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fair Credit Reporting Act claim | BMW reported inaccurate credit information | Reporting was accurate and responded to all disputes | No evidence of FCRA violation; claim dismissed |
| Texas Finance Code § 348.110, § 348.111 claim | Did not receive required contract documents | Jackson received the contract at signing | Jackson received contract; claim dismissed |
| Wrongful repossession | Illegal repossession & lack of notice | Jackson defaulted and received notices | Repossession followed contract and law; claim dismissed |
| Counterclaim for contract deficiency and breach | Not liable, made timely payments | Jackson defaulted, owes balance after auction sale | Judgment for BMW; Jackson owes $9,597.01 pursuant to contract |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for summary judgment—genuine issue of material fact)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment movant’s production burden)
- Thomas v. Tregre, 913 F.3d 458 (5th Cir. 2019) (materiality and genuine dispute in summary judgment)
- Ion v. Chevron USA, Inc., 731 F.3d 379 (5th Cir. 2013) (court must view evidence in light most favorable to nonmovant)