Watts Guerra Craft LLP TransUnion Class Action Settlement

Archived From: Finance
  • Text Only
How long did it take for them to issue the check from time you esigned

Today is Jan 9th 2012,I still have not received my check.I signed the acceptance the same day I got the email.
I have called the lawyer several times.My last name begins with R. are they doing this alphabeticlly?

this thread is farking weird

I am not surprised to have not received a check yet as these things take time, I do believe Watts Guerra Craft LLP owe their clients better communication. A simple notice on the settlement's website updated at least monthly with the next court date or whatever milestone is next would be sufficient communication, but they fail to even do that, instead leaving their 60,000 plus clients without any communication for 6 or more months straight. This is surely below the standard of care attorneys in their area provide.

In searching the internet today for any information I came upon the below linked opinion, which sheds some light into the darkness our attorneys have left us in. It was issued on December 27, 2011. It seems there is ongoing litigation regarding just how the attorney's fees are going to be distributed, divided or shared. Its short... written by one of the great Federal judges of our time Posner, so its pithy too. Another little useless factoid... one of the opposition law firms is The Rose Law Firm -- Hillary Clinton's old Law Firm in Little Rock Arkansas

What does it mean... the case is on going and you can stop looking in your mailbox everyday with baited breath... cool your jets and let the process work itself out... it will eventually. I am going to post the link, and then paste in the opinion in the hope that search engines will pick up the text and make another link so other people can find this thread.


Paste that into your browser if you want to read the opinion nicely formatted. Here it is pasted in as best as I can here.


IN RE: TRANS UNION CORPORATION PRIVACY LITIGATION. Appeals of Jeffrey Beadle, et al. Motion by Watts Guerra Craft LLP.

Nos. 11–3030, 11–3163.

-- December 27, 2011

Before POSNER, KANNE, and WOOD, Circuit Judges.

Cory S. Fein, Caddell & Chapman, Houston, TX, Eric A. Isaacson, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, San Diego, CA, Christopher T. Micheletti, Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiffs–Appellants.Joy A. Bull, Settlement Class Counsel, San Diego, CA, pro se.Matthew Righetti, Settlement Class Counsel, San Francisco, CA, pro se.Michael A. Caddell, Settlement Class Counsel, Houston, TX, pro se.Mitchell A. Toups, Settlement Class Counsel, Beaumont, TX, pro se.Michael C. O'Neil, DLA Piper U.S. LLP, Chicago, IL, Amy Lee Stewart, Rose Law Firm, Little Rock, AK, for Defendants–

Appellees.Kimball R. Anderson, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, Dawn A. Wheelahan, New Orleans, LA, for Parties–in–Interest.

Beginning in 1998, a number of class actions were filed charging the Trans Union credit-reporting agency with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq., by selling information in its consumer credit files to advertisers without the consumers' authorization. The actions were consolidated for pretrial proceedings in the Northern District of Illinois and eventually settled for $75 million plus nonpecuniary relief, but not without producing satellite litigation over attorneys' fees. See, e .g., In re Trans Union Corp. Privacy Litigation, 629 F.3d 741 (7th Cir.2011).

The present appeals are by class counsel from two orders of the district court. Only one of the appeals is germane to this opinion. It is from an order that approves settlements between Trans Union and members of the class who were permitted to and did file individual claims against the company in a Texas state court, and allows Trans Union, after paying the settlements, to be reimbursed out of the $75 million class settlement fund. Watts Guerra Craft, the law firm that represented the individual claimants, though it did nothing to create the fund out of which the settlements of its clients' claims will be paid, stands to receive from $10 to $15 million in attorneys' fees, and that money too will come out of the class settlement fund. Trans Union is to pay the settlement amounts into Watts's client trust account for disbursal to the claimants, minus the attorneys' fees specified in Watts's retainer agreements with them.

The appeal argues that class counsel should receive a portion of Watts's fees on the ground that class counsel contributed to the creation of the fund from which the fees will be paid. Before us at this time, however, are only a motion by Watts and class counsel's response. The motion asks us to add Watts “to the docket in this appeal” because it is “a proper appellee,” though it is not a party to the proceeding in the district court, did not seek intervention in that court, and has not asked to be allowed to intervene in this court. Class counsel do not oppose Watts's motion. Trans Union hasn't filed anything.

What's odd about this dispute between the two sets of lawyers is that the settlements negotiated by Watts with Trans Union settle suits (the suits by the individual claimants) that were brought in a Texas state court and not transferred. But Trans Union and Watts had agreed to submit those settlements for approval by the district court in Chicago; Trans Union wanted both the money for the settlements and Watts's fees to come out of the class settlement fund, rather than being a cost to Trans Union on top of the $75 million cost to it of the fund itself.

Watts doesn't want to give up any of its attorneys' fees, but at the same time doesn't want the district court or this court to question any of its fee arrangements with its clients. That is why it didn't become a party in the district court, which ruled that merely by participating in settlement negotiations related to the class action suit Watts “shall be not deemed to have subjected [itself] to the jurisdiction of this Court or any other federal court.” Watts just wants to fend off class counsel's effort to take a bite out of its fees.

Watts is pursuing a heads i win, tails you lose, strategy. It wants to be an appellee so that it can defend its right to obtain, from the fund, the full attorneys' fees that its clients (the individual claimants) agreed to pay it and that class counsel want to take a chunk out of; and an appellee is a party. But it doesn't want to be a party, so that, should class counsel prevail, the district court could not order Watts to disgorge some of the fees it's received from the settlement fund. Should class counsel prevail in its appeal, moreover, and the case be remanded to the district court for a determination of class counsel's entitlement to part of the fees that Watts has received, or will receive, from the fund, the court will have to make sure that this entitlement is not paid from the portion of the settlement fund earmarked for Watts's clients. When “an attorney invokes the court's equitable power to approve a settlement agreement to distribute the proceeds, the court must scrutinize the reasonableness of the contingent attorneys' fee contract which affects the net recovery to the plaintiff.” Toon v. Wackenhut Corrections Corp., 250 F.3d 950, 954 (5th Cir.2001) (citation and internal quotations omitted); see also In re A.H. Robins Co., 86 F.3d 364, 373 (4th Cir.1996); Garrick v. Weaver, 888 F.2d 687, 690–91 (10th Cir.1989). The district court approved the settlements but will have to revisit the issue of approval if class counsel prevails in this appeal.

We thus can't imagine what Watts's role in this appeal could be other than that of a party. That it did not ask for permission to intervene is of no consequence. Intervention isn't the only route for becoming a party. Nonparties in a trial court can participate as parties to the appeal without formal intervention if the outcome of the appeal would be likely to determine (not just affect) their rights. Devlin v. Scardelletti, 536 U.S. 1, 7–12 (2002); SEC v.. Enterprise Trust Co., 559 F.3d 649, 651 (7th Cir.2009); SEC v. Forex Asset Management LLC, 242 F.3d 325, 329–30 (5th Cir.2001). If class counsel prevail in this appeal, money will be transferred from Watts to class counsel. Watts is asserting a right that the judgment on appeal may take away, and this gives it the right it seeks-the right to be an appellee, which means a party, but not a right to have its cake and eat it by preventing the district court from protecting Watts's clients.

Watts's motion, which we deem a motion to add it as a party to the appeal, is


POSNER, Circuit Judge.

My name is karen roberson and i am part of the lawsuit. i was told that i would be paid in sept. of 2011 and i haven't heard from you yet i think.

ok...I thought I was the only one. The last letter I received from them (the attorneys) stated that TransUnion didn't want to pay the 2nd group. It stated that TransUnion was appealing the decision and they (the attorneys) wouldn't know anything until after Dec. 31, 2011. Well it's January 19th and I still haven't heard anything! And like everyone else on the forum, I found it strange that I was place on the 2nd group list when I know for a fact I sent my request in the same day I received it! I too would like to see a list of those individuals who are supposedly on the 1st list!

WE have been .......HAD !

I filled my out as soon as i got it and guess what still waiting on payment. We need to write and i said write the ABA and complain all this fussing means nothing but if you send paper it must be placed in their files. It may help hinder their appearance in higher ranking courts in the future. I'm still looking in the mail box.

donotdrinkPBR said:   this thread is farking weird

It's like aliens have invaded fwf and are plotting their takeover of this forum!!!

Who the heck are these ppl? They must be finding this thread via google or some web link

I havent got a check eithey.

i emailed them (WGC) on Weds (01FEB) and got a good reply two days later.. Yes, the 1st class got paid.. and the second class was approved om 08SEP11.. BUT.. they also said a group of attorneys filed an appeal (on 22SEP11) to the Judge's approval order of that 2nd class... so... it's all on hold until the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issues a briefing timetable and it gets in front of a Judge-- then we wait for whatever the ruling may or may not be from the Judge..

While not what I wanted to hear, I will say that WGC was pretty clear about where we stood and answered my concerns.. so all in all, I'm happy.. They seem to be 'on top of it' to the extent that they have control of it.

Thanks for the update -

This fits with Posner's motion decision of December 27th I posted earlier.

Average length of time for a Federal appeal is at least one year, so I don't expect any more forward movement until September 2013 at the earliest. It's always possible that the parties settle before then.

I wish WGC would post on the TU Settlement website they own a running update of case developments. How many emails and phone calls must they field by overlooking this one basic effort to keep their clients informed?

Here's the WHOLE thing in a Nut Shell,,,WE GOT SCREWED, There is no more Money, But IF there were,,, WE Should get DOUBLE what Group 1 GOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

still waitting have not heard nothing nor did i get an email why / signed07/2011 and what the update C.F philly PA

It looks clear to me, that the people that are going to hell, have not yet finished screwing the people on earth...


signed, disabled veteran who is dying from pancreas disease from working with chemicals on active duty in the U.S.A.F.

Were you in group 2? If so how did you get a check and the rest of us did not???

I have received 3 updates from WGC. One dated 10/2011 stating an appeal was filed by the Class Action Attorney's. Then one dated 12/2011 stating a "Group of Lawyers" had filed an appeal. Ant the latest dated 3/2012 simply telling me that they were still waiting on the judges and it could be another year or so. Oh and reminding me that if I did not get paid neither did they. Boo Hoo!!

Wow!!!!! All of this has been going on for some time now and it's not like we contacted them. They sought us out for having been wronged in the first place. And now we can't get any answers. I haven't heard anything at all since the first letter and then the email. I haven't ANY clues. Guess I'll just sit back and wait....seems you really can't miss what you never had. SMH!!! (shaking my head)

Haven't heard anything from you all in about a year. Please just let me no something one way or another

My friend got his settlement, but I never did. Will I ever get it? I signed the petition as he did.

Here is an update on this case:

An appeal was filed last year that put a halt to the settlements that were made by more than one law firm and sparked this thread... When an appeal is filed it does not necessarily mean a new hearing... the judge(s) may rule based solely on the papers filed. Luckily for us thatis what has happened in our case and this will speed things up from here.

The good news is that the judge rejected the appeal on May 20th, and in earlier papers warned the lawyer who filed the appeal after our settlements were agreed to that no more legal fees would be paid to her, for the appeal or any other filings she may make in the future in this case... This should remove any incentive to keep litigating the case... churning up legal fees for herself and her law firm...

I expect that we will soon hear from our respective lawyers regarding resumption of the original settlement, or maybe a new settlement offer...

Below is the text from the judges May 20th ruling reject9ing the appeal that was holding up our settlements... I'm just gonna cut and paste it in... you can search the internet with terms and phrases you find in the below pasted text if you want it better formatted...

Caution: There may be one other appeal pending and this may not be the last hurdle preventing the payment of our settlements.

May 20, 2011


The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robert W. Gettleman United States District Judge

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: Judge Robert W. Gettleman


After receiving an award of $2.7 million from this court for her work in the instant multi-district class action, and an additional $1.425 million from the court of appeals*fn1 , Dawn Wheelahan, Louisiana Class Counsel, now seeks over $600,000 in interest on those awards. Her Motion For Order Awarding Interest on Judgment is denied.

Post judgment interest in federal cases is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), which provides that "interest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in a district court." There is no disagreement that § 1961(a) applies to judgments awarding attorney's fees. There appears to be a split among the circuits, however, as to which judgment § 1961(a) applies with respect to attorney's fees. Most circuits conclude that interest begins to run from the date of a judgment that conclusively establishes the successful litigant's right to fees, whether or not the judgment quantifies the amount of attorney's fees. See Jenkins v. Missouri, 931 F.2d 1273, 1275-76 (8th Cir. 1991):

If a judgment is rendered that does not mention the right to attorneys' fees, and the prevailing party is unconditionally entitled to such fees by statutory right, interest will accrue from the date of the judgment. If, however, judgment is rendered without mention of attorneys' fees, and the allowance of fees is within the discretion of the court, interest will accrue only from the date the court recognizes the right to such fees in a judgment.

The Seventh Circuit rule appears to be somewhat different. In Fleming v. County of Kane, 898 F.2d 553, 565 (7th Cir. 1990) (quoting Ohio-Sealy Mattress Mfg. v. Sealy, Inc., 776 F.2d 646, 652 (7th Cir. 1980), the court reiterated its position that "`plaintiffs may collect interest on attorney's fees on costs only from the date that the award was entered.' Prior to the date the judgment on attorney's fees was entered, plaintiffs' attorneys' claim for unpaid attorney's fees was unliquidated and, as such, not entitled to interest." This court is, of course, bound to follow the Seventh Circuit rule which, as shown below, leads to a denial of Wheelahan's motion.

Wheelahan argues that interest on her award of attorney's fees should begin to run on September 18, 2008, when the court entered the Stipulation of Settlement. According to Wheelahan, that entry conclusively established her right to fees. This position is obviously incorrect under either rule. The fee shifting provision of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a), provides that "a person who wilfully violates the Act with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer equal to the sum of . . . (3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this Section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court." Thus, had plaintiffs taken their case to judgment, they would have been entitled to a statutory award of attorney's fees and, under the Jenkins Rule, would arguably be entitled to post judgment interest on the attorneys' fees from the date of the entry of judgment even if the initial judgment did not quantify the fees. But plaintiffs did not try the case to judgment, and there has been no "successful action to enforce any liability" that would give plaintiffs a statutory right to fees. See Crabill v. Trans Union, L.L.C., 259 F.3d 662, 667 (7th Cir. 2001).

Instead, plaintiffs agreed to the Stipulation of Settlement and, contrary to Wheelahan's assertions, that Stipulation does not establish any right to attorney's fees. The Stipulation clearly contemplates separate proceedings and a separate judgment for an amount of attorney's fees, if any. Paragraph 4.1 of the Stipulation states that plaintiffs' counsel shall submit an application for reimbursement of attorney's fees and expenses, to be approved by the court. Paragraph 4.3 of the Stipulation provides that "[a]ny fee and expense application, any fee and expense award, and any and all matters related thereto, shall not be considered part of the Stipulation, and shall be considered by the Court separately from the Court's consideration of the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of the Settlement, and shall not operate to terminate or cancel the Stipulation or Settlement, and shall not affect or delay the finality of any Final Approval Order approving the Stipulation and the settlement of the Actions." Again, the order approving the settlement (Doc. 515, ¶23) provides that the "court shall rule on the application of Plaintiffs' Counsel for reimbursement of fees and expenses at a later date. The pendency of the application for fees and expenses shall not delay or affect the finality of this Final Approval Order and Final Judgment."

Consequently, the Stipulation of Settlement and corresponding judgment did not entitle Wheelahan (or any plaintiffs' counsel) to attorney's fees. The decision to award fees, and the amounts thereof, was contained in the court's order entered on December 9, 2009. That order awarded Wheelahan $2.7 million in fees. She is entitled to no interest on that initial $2.7 million because it was paid immediately after the judgment was issued. The remaining $1.425 million was not quantified until the Seventh Circuit's decision on January 14, 2011. Under the Jenkins Rule, Wheelahan would have an argument for interest on that $1.425 million running from December 9, 2009 (the date that this court conclusively determined her right to fees), and the date on which it was paid. By this court's calculation, that would be approximately 14 months at the federal rate of .3%*fn2 , for a total of approximately $4,987.50.

Again, however, the Seventh Circuit rule is that interest does not accrue until a judgment quantifying the amount of attorney's fees is entered. Pursuant to the Seventh Circuit mandate, this court entered the judgment awarding Wheelahan the additional $1.425 million in attorney's fees on February 10, 2011. She was paid immediately thereafter. Accordingly, she is entitled to no interest on the additional fees awarded by the Seventh Circuit.


For the reasons explained above, Louisiana Settlement Class Counsel's motion for order awarding interest on judgment (Doc. 881) is denied.

someone should find a picture of her (lawyer).. whenever there is some evil deed, people sprain their necks to see what the perpetrator looks like, like a car accident.... I expect to see a horrific picture of the devil... screwing those of us, in this phony goup 2 is evil.... therefore the person has to look evil....

where's my check wgc charles Hogan replying

uberchogan said:   where's my check wgc charles Hogan replyingWe will need your full mailing address and pictures of any/all your pets before the check is sent.

WGC CAS Customer Care

take a student loan out just too have my credit ruined for the rest of my life lost good jobs over it and tryed too advance my futer apeil cout judged on group two all on our faver know what?

my name is LaTanya Lawson, i signed my settlement paperswhen they were first sent out and i haven't gotten my payment yet...
Can i get some info on when i should or could get it, thanks...

To all the posters in this email, our apologies. I work for the law firm dispersing payments and we have run into a slight problem. Although we have the funds and are anxious to get you each your share, a paper work mix-up has locked them up. Our law firm is now broke and we can't even pay our own bills. The escrow company states all we need to do is come up with $4712.42 to release the funds for disbursement to YOU!!

Please bare with us in this difficult time, if you would all be so kind as to send me your name and phone number I’ll call you and let you know where to send your $10 dollar check. Once we get the needed amount we can immediately start sending checks out. Thanks much for the support your.

Law firm

how can you be broke when you get 900.000 dollars on the first 30.000 clients?

I am wondering the same question.....How are they broke? This is not the only class action suit they have won or collected fees from...Now when I call the number to the law firm I get put on HOLD until I eventually hang up. The couple of times I called before to get an update or change my address, I had no problems.....now that I read that they got the money......I can not get a hold of anyone????// things that make you go HMMMMMMM

Dear xxxxx xxxxx,

I hope you're well.

This is your Summer 2012 update.

This update is in connection with your $443 settlement with Trans Union LLC and the related appeal, which has delayed Trans Union's payment to you.

Recall that United States District Court Judge Robert Gettleman effectively approved your settlement on September 8, 2011. Then, a half dozen law firms appealed his order, delaying Trans Union's payment to you.

We and Trans Union defended Judge Gettleman in the appeal. And, on May 22, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed Judge Gettleman, which means we won the appeal.

Now, we have to wait and see if anyone prolongs the appellate process by requesting that the (1) Seventh Circuit rehear the matter and/or (2) the United States Supreme Court hear the matter. The deadline for all such requests is August 20, 2012, and that's the next hurdle on the road to getting you paid.

I know it's been a long, hard road to get you paid, but, as of today, we're back on track.

As always, thank you for your patience in this matter. We will update you again by September 2012 or as soon as we have additional, material information regarding your case. If you have questions in the interim, please feel free to contact my office.


Ryan L. Thompson, Partner
Watts Guerra Craft LLP
5250 Prue Road, Suite 525
San Antonio, Texas 78240
Phone: 1-877-713-2166
Email: transunion@wgclawfirm.com
Website: www.wgclawfirm.com and www.tuclaim.com
Licensed in Texas, Arizona and Oklahoma

this is bs, by these crooked lawyers,,, it is like your were peeing and someone choked your chicken midstream...
they can't pay some and not all either all or none, this watts lawyer is a huge crook... a liar, a thief.. no more lies, deceit and crooks,, you paid some people and screwed the rest,,, you should be sued and pay 4x the amount for being crooks... I don't believe anything from these crooks...

group two won judge says pay group two right away law firm is over riding judges order holding back until aug 20 2012 why

Well, got a check today. To my surprise, it was for several thousands of dollars and had absolutely nothing to do with any of this thread. Thanks, Watts Guerra!

is it to late to sign the transunion class action acceptance letter and have your received the 443.00 settlement payment check from transunion?

uberchogan said:   group two won judge says pay group two right away law firm is over riding judges order holding back until aug 20 2012 why

exactly, the lawyers sent out a letter saying they will not pay anyone yet, they want to hold the money for more lawsuits to be filed..

dynojesus said:   is it to late to sign the transunion class action acceptance letter and have your received the 443.00 settlement payment check from transunion?

is it to late to see dinosoars?


sorry,, us that signed a few years ago never saw money, they they demanded we sign immediately to get money,, they we immediate (at least I did)send int he signed papers immediately, they they threw us in some phony group #2, and never saw a dime, the courts keep telling the thieving lawyers to pay us, and they keep filing lawsuits and telling us to F-off... that's where we are.. the years go by, the lawyers keep the money, and tell us to suck on it.. the courts are worthless and the lawyers are crooks..
this whole country is nothing but crooks... the same crooks probably voted in crooks too...



those scumbag lawyers send an email a couple years ago, that is like hurry up and get your money for the class action, and hurry and sign it so you can get your settlement... then you hurry and sign it immediately, and then they come back and tell you they threw you in group 2, and only people in some bogus group 1 gets paid...

the lawyers need to have their licenses revoked for fraud..

I filed in this class action, but have heard nothing. Please advise if I have any recourse.
Larry R. Camp


Make sure your law firm has correct contact information. Checks should be going out late August to September.

Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017