A consumer is alleging the purchaser of a defaulted credit card account and the law firm it hired to file a lawsuit against the consumer to collect on the unpaid debt violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by seeking to collect court costs from the consumer, even though it indicated in an affidavit that it was not seeking to collect more than what was owed.
A copy of the complaint in the case of Morris v. Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC and Mandarich Law Group, LLP can be accessed by clicking here.
The plaintiff received a summons and a copy of a complaint filed in Illinois state court. The complaint included the following claim:
Amount Claimed: $994.44 plus costs.
However, in an affidavit that was attached to the complaint, one of the defendants checked “no” to this entry:
3. ADDITIONAL ACCOUNT INFORMATION AFTER CHARGE-OFF Plaintiff is seeking additional amounts after the charge-off date.
The affidavit is a required component of filing a lawsuit against an individual to collect on an unpaid debt in Illinois.
The contradiction between saying it was seeking costs in the complaint but also saying it was not seeking to collect additional amounts in the affidavit amounts to a violation of Section 1692e of the FDCPA, the plaintiff claims. Section 1692e prohibits the use of false or misleading representations in connection with the collection of a debt. The plaintiff was “confused by the conflicting statements,” according to the complaint, and did not know whether the defendant was seeking to collect court costs or not.
The plaintiff claims she would have “likely” settled the debt had there not been contradictory statements regarding how much she owed.
Not satisfied to sue on her own, the plaintiff is seeking to include anyone else who received similar documents from the defendant as part of the class action.
