The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-2361Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. United Collection Corporation, Defendants. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No.: Q F P,3 ? 1 G a v < < ?'`` NOTICE TO PLEAD TO THE DEFENDANT NAMED HEREIN: You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint, or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street, Carlisle, PA 1-800-990-9108, 717-249-3166 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la Corte. Si usted quire defenderse de estas demandas expuetas en las paginas siquientes, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo ai partir de la fecha de la excrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la Corte en forma excrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demande, la Corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y por c-ualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Unted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGAD00 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIEN?E DE PAGAR TAL SERVICION, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE PUEDECONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No.: 6 $-- ? 3 United Collection Corporation, Defendants. COMPLAINT GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted under the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. §2270 et seq. 2. Plaintiff is a consumer located within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant is a business entity engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts in this Commonwealth with a mailing address of 1026 C Street, Hayward, CA, 94541-5125. 4. On or about January 2007 through September 2007, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by telephone and letter. 5. On or about January 2007 through September 2007, Defendant contacted Plaintiff's mother and discussed the alleged debt, in detail. 6. Plaintiff never gave Defendant permission to discuss the alleged debt with his mother. 7. Defendant contacted Plaintiff at his proper telephone number, as such, there was no reason for the Defendant to call Plaintiff's mother. 8. During the course of the conversations between Defendant and the Plaintiff and Plaintiff's mother, the Defendant's agents threatened to sue the Plaintiff. 9. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant does not have a valid assignment and is therefore, unlawfully attempting to collect the alleged debt. 10. Plaintiff does not owe the alleged debt and so informed the Defendant. 11. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendants failed to review the contract creating the alleged debt. 12. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant violated federal and state laws. COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 73 P.S. &2270 et seq. 13. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 14. The FDCPA states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCPA. 15 U.S.C. § 1692n. Pennsylvania law applies to this Action. 18 Pa.C.S. §7311 et seq. 15. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant violated 18 Pa.C.S. §7311(a) and (b), by not having a valid contract and written assignment for the alleged debt. 16. Plaintiff further believes that Defendant violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as alleged in the General Allegations and the other Counts of this Complaint, as such, Defendant violated the Pennsylvania FCEU, 73 P.S. §2270.4(a). 17. That Defendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by FCEU and the regulations, including but not limited to, violations of 37 Pa.Code §§303.3(3). 303.')(14),303.3(l8),-3)03),6 and 73 P.S. §201-2(4). 18. Defendant's acts as described herein were done with malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and wanton disregard for Plaintiffs rights with the purpose of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt. 19. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs, in an amount of not less that $30,000.00. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on his behalf and against Defendant for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §2270.5. COUNT II - PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 20. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the forgoing as if fully set forth herein. 21. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P. S. §201-1 et seq. 22. That defendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by UTPCPL. 23. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on Plaintiffs behalf and against defendant for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §201-902. COUNT III - FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICE ACT 15 U.S.C. §1692 ET SEQ. 24. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. ("FDCPA"), particularly 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. §1337. 25. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). 26. Plaintiff is an individual and consumer pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692a(6). 27. Defendant is a debt collector as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(3). 28. Defendants contacts are "communications" relating to a "debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(2) and 1692a(5). 29. At all pertinent times hereto, the Defendant was hired to collect a debt relating to a consumer transaction. (Hereinafter the "alleged debt.") 30. Defendant communicated with plaintiff on or after one year before the date of this action, in connection with collection efforts, by letters, telephone contact or other documents, with regard to plaintiffs alleged debt. 31. FDCPA requires debt collectors to comply with all state laws. 15 U.S.C. §1692n. Defendant violated Pennsylvania law states, 18 Pa.C.S. §7311(a) and (b) for failing to properly review the contract creating the alleged debt and for failure to have a valid assignment of the alleged debt. 32. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692£ Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 33. The Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) by contacting a third party, without the Plaintiffs prior consent. 34. The Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A), (5) and (10) by misrepresenting the imminence of legal action by Defendants. 35. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(7) by implying, during the course of the conversation, that the consumer was "committing fraud." 36. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692f, by threatening and/or filing suit without proper legal authority in Pennsylvania. 37. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(2) by using profane and abusive language towards the Plaintiff and his mother. 38. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5) by causing the phone to ring and engaging the consumer in repeated conversations. 39. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692b(2) by communicating with third parties regarding the alleged debt, without the consent of the consumer. 40. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692b(3) by communicating with persons other than the Plaintiff more than one time, without consent and without the consent of the Plaintiff. 41. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) and (10). Defendant violated these sections of the FDCPA. 42. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692f. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 43. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 44. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692d. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 45. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b). Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 46. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) by contacting a third party, without the Plaintiffs prior consent. 47. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A), (5) and (10) by misrepresenting the imminence of legal action by Defendant. 48. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c by contacting the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff had requested the Defendant cease communication with the Plaintiff. 49. At all times pertinent hereto, the Plaintiff was unable to dispute the alleged debt. 50. The FDCPA provides certain rights to the consumer regarding his/her right to dispute the alleged debt, 15 U.S.C. §1692g. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 51. The FDCPA states, it is unlawful to misrepresent the legal status of an allege debt, 15 U.S.C. §1692f and § 1692e(2)(A). Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 52. Defendant's collection communications were intentionally confusing, misleading and otherwise deceptive to the Plaintiffs, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) and (10). 53. Defendant's communications created a false sense of urgency on the past of Plaintiff in violation of the FDCPA. 54. At all time pertinent hereto, the Defendant was acting by and through its agents, servants and/or employees, who were acting within the scope and course of their employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the Defendant herein. 55. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of Defendant as well as their agents, servants, and/or employees, was malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and in wanton disregard for federal and state law and the rights of the Plaintiff herein. 56. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendant's agents made false threats of litigation and those threats were false because Defendant does not routinely file suit against consumer debtors, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) and (10). 57. Defendants' communications were intentionally confusing and deceptive, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) and (10). 58. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of Defendant rises to the level needed for punitive damages. 59. Defendant, in its collection efforts, violated the FDCPA, inter alia, Sections 1692, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and/or n. 60. Defendant, in its collection efforts, used false or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 61. That, as a result of the wrongful tactics of Defendant as aforementioned, plaintiff has been subjected to anxiety, harassment, intimidation and annoyance for which compensation is sought. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his Honorable Court enter judgment on Plaintiff's behalf and against Defendant and issue an Order: (A) Award Plaintiff statutory damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each violation of the FDCPA or each separate and discrete incident in which Defendant have violated the FDCPA. (B) Award Plaintiff general damages and punitive damages for anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at Plaintiff in an amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), as well as the repetitive nature of Defendant form letters. C) Award Plaintiff costs of this litigation, including a reasonable attorney's fee at a rate of $450.00 per hour, for hours reasonably expended by Plaintiff's attorney in vindicating Plaintiff's rights under the FDCPA, permitted by 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3). (D) Award declaratory and injunctive relief, and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper or law or equity may p vide. Dated:4/14/08 By: /s/Deanna Lynn AICA,4, Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney or Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive, Enola, PA 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750 Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw@aol.com ?r (!v Vli L fi n ti e s ?r C f; r -?C IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 08-2361 V. Default Notice United Collection Corporation Defendant. . IMPORTANT NOTICE TO: Mr. Otto Zielke United Collection Corporation 1026 C. Street Hayward, CA 94541-5125 DATE OF NOTICE: JUNE 9.2008 YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS N OTICE, A JUDGEMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE TO A LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 717-249-3166 800-990-9108 De a Lynn Saracco 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 (717) 732-3750 Attorney for Plaintiff ? r.a tX .' "?"? r r, ,? `?' ? Z7 ? `' ? ? '"G) ? ?? .,-- Eli Kissinger, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. Civil Action No.: 08-2361 NOTICE TO PLEAD TO THE DEFENDANT NAMED HEREIN: You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint, or for any/ other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street, Carlisle, PA 1-800-990-9108, 717-249-3166 NOTICIA Le han demandado a usted en la torte. Si usted qu_re defenderse de estas demandas expuetas en las paginas siquien-es, usted tiene viente (20) dias de plazo a1 partir de la fecha de la excrita o en persona o por abogado y archivar en la Corte en forma excrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demande, Is. Corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orders contra usted sin previo aviso o notification y por cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la petition de demanda. Usted puede perder diners c sus propiedades e otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE A30GAD00 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICION, 1,7AYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION E PUEDECONSEGC7IR. ASISTENCIA LEGAL. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. Civil Action No.: 08-2361 AMENDED COMPLAINT GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted under the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. §2270 et seq. 2. Plaintiff is a consumer located within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant is a business entity engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts in this Commonwealth with a mailing address of 1026 C Street, Hayward, CA, 94541-5125. 4. Defendant Otto Zielke, is an individual debt collector and an officer, director and/or owner of United Collection Corporation. 5. On or about January 2007 through September 2007, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by telephone and letter. 6. On or about January 2007 through September 2007, Defendant contacted Plaintiff's mother and discussed the alleged debt, in detail. 7. Plaintiff never gave Defendant permission to discuss the alleged debt with his mother. 8. Defendant contacted Plaintiff at his proper telephone number. as such, there was no reason for the Defendant to call Plaintiffs mother. 9. During the course of the conversations between Defendant and the Plaintiff and Plaintiffs mother, the Defendant's agents threatened to sue the Plaintiff. 10. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant does not have a valid assignment and is therefore, unlawfully attempting to collect the alleged debt. It. Plaintiff does not owe the alleged debt and so informed the Defendant. 12. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendants failed to review the contract creating the alleged debt. 13. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant violated federal and state laws. COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 73 P.S. §2270 et seq. 14. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 15. The FDCPA states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCPA. 15 U.S.C. § 1692n. Pennsylvania law applies to this Action. 18 Pa.C.S. §7311 et seq. 16. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendant violated 18 Pa.C.S. §7311(a) and (b), by not having a valid contract and written assignment for the alleged debt. 17. Plaintiff further believes that Defendant violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as alleged in the General Allegations and the other Counts of this Complaint, as such, Defendant violated the Pennsylvania FCEU, 73 P.S. §2270.4(a). 18. That Defendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by FCEU and the regulations, including but not limited to, violations of 37 Pa.Code §§303.3(3), 303.3(14), 303.3(18), 303.6 and 73 P.S. §201-2(4). 19. Defendant's acts as described herein were done with malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and wanton disregard for Plaintiffs rights with the purpose of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt. 20. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs, in an amount of not less that $30,000.00. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on his behalf and against Defendant for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P. S. §2270.5. COUNT II - PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 21. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the forgoing as if fully set forth herein. 22. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P. S. §201-1 et seq. 23. That defendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by UTPCPL. 24. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on Plaintiff's behalf and against defendant for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §201-902. COUNT III - FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICE ACT 15 U.S.C. §1692 ET SEO 25. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. ("FDCPA"), particularly 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. §1337. 26. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). 27. Plaintiff is an individual and consumer pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). 28. Defendant is a debt collector as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(3). 29. Defendants contacts are "communications" relating to a "'debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C. I 1692a(2) and 1692a(5). 30. At all pertinent times hereto, the Defendant was hired to collect a debt relating to a consumer transaction. (Hereinafter the "alleged debt.") 31. Defendant communicated with plaintiff on or after one year before the date of this action, in connection with collection efforts, by letters, telephone contact or other documents, with regard to plaintiff's alleged debt. 32. FDCPA requires debt collectors to comply with all state laws. 15 U.S.C. § 1692n. Defendant violated Pennsylvania law states, 18 Pa.C.S. §7311(a) and (b) for failing to properly review the contract creating the alleged debt and for failure to have a valid assignment of the alleged debt. 33. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692£ Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 34. The Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) by contacting a third party, without the Plaintiffs prior consent. 35. The Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A), (5) and (10) by misrepresenting the imminence of legal action by Defendants. 36. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(7) by implying, during the course of the conversation, that the consumer was "committing fraud." 37. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692f, by threatening and/or filing suit without proper legal authority in Pennsylvania. 38. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(2) by using profane and abusive language towards the Plaintiff and his mother. 39. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5) by causing the phone to ring and engaging the consumer in repeated conversations. 40. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692b(2) by communicating, with third parties regarding the alleged debt, without the consent of the consumer. 41. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692b(3) by communicating with persons other than the Plaintiff more than one time, without consent and without the consent of the Plaintiff. 42. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) and (10). Defendant violated these sections of the FDCPA. 43. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692£ Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 44. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 15 U.S.C. §1692e. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 45. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692d. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 46. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b). Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 47. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) by contacting a third party, without the Plaintiffs prior consent. 48. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A), (5) and (10) by misrepresenting the imminence of legal action by Defendant. 49. The Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c by contacting the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff had requested the Defendant cease communication with the Plaintiff. 50. At all times pertinent hereto, the Plaintiff was unable to dispute the alleged debt. 51. The FDCPA provides certain rights to the consumer regarding his/her right to dispute the alleged debt, 15 U.S.C. § 1692g. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 52. The FDCPA states, it is unlawful to misrepresent the legal status of an allege debt, 15 U.S.C. § 1692f and § 1692e(2)(A). Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 51 Defendant's collection communications were intentionally confusing, misleading and otherwise deceptive to the Plaintiffs, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § I692e(5) and (10). 54. Defendant's communications created a false sense of urgency on the past of Plaintiff in violation of the FDCPA. 55. At all time pertinent hereto, the Defendant was acting by and through its agents, servants and/or employees, who were acting within the scope and course of their employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the Defendant herein. 56. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of Defendant as well as their agents, servants, and/or employees, was malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and in wanton disregard for federal and state law and the rights of the Plaintiff herein. 57. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendant's agents made false threats of litigation and those threats were false because Defendant does not routinely file suit against consumer debtors, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) and (10). 58. Defendants' communications were intentionally confusing and deceptive, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) and (10). 59. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of Defendant rises to the level needed for punitive damages. 60. Defendant, in its collection efforts, violated the FDCPA, inter ilia, Sections 1692, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and/or n. 61. Defendant, in its collection efforts, used false or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 62. That, as a result of the wrongful tactics of Defendant as aforementioned, plaintiff has been subjected to anxiety, harassment, intimidation and annoyance for which compensation is sought. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his Honorable Court enter judgment on Plaintiff's behalf and against Defendant and issue an Order: A) Award Plaintiff statutory damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each violation of the FDCPA or each separate and discrete incident in which Defendant have violated the FDCPA. B) Award Plaintiff general damages and punitive damages for anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at Plaintiff in an amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), as well as the repetitive nature of Defendant form letters. C) Award Plaintiff costs of this litigation, including a reasonable attorneys fee at a rate of $450.00 per hour, for hours reasonably expended by Plaintiff's attorney in vindicating Plaintiff's rights under the FDCPA, permitted by 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3). D) Award declaratory and injunctive relief, and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper or l e uity may provide. Dated:44 By: Saracco Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff i (l 76 Greenmont Drive, Enola, PA 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750 Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw@aol.com -Ti IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 08-2361 V. United Collection Corporation AND Mr. Otto Zielke, Defendants. Default Notice IMPORTANT NOTICE TO: Mr. Otto Zielke United Collection Corporation 1026 C. Street Hayward, CA 94541-5125 DATE OF NOTICE: SEPTEMBER 8,2008\ YOU ARE IN DEFAULT BECAUSE YOU HAVE FAILED TO ENTER A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILE IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. UNLESS YOU ACT WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS N OTICE, A JUDGEMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU WITHOUT A HEARING AND YOU MAY LOSE YOUR PROPERTY OR OTHER IMPORTANT RIGHTS. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS NOTICE TO A LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FOLLOWING OFFICE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 717-249-3166 800-990-9108 r Deanna Lynn aracco 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 (717) 732-3750 Attorney for Plaintiff ? ?_. 'r? . ??? ? ? ? ? :: ?..j --? ?.y "'T7 1 1' 3?' ? 5 . ? ? r ? ? ? ? . y .Rj ??wj ""? it Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No.: 08-2361 United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. RETURN OF SERVICE for AMENDED COMPLAINT Attached is the Return of Service for the Amended Complaint, in the above captioned matter. Please note that the Defendants were served by Certified Mail on July 17, 2007. Dated: 10/27/2008 By: /s/Deanna Lynn Saracco Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 717-732-3750 a ¦ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Rom 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ¦ Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach ttis card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to ,Mkk f r?r??? ?CI-t vin, c?AMW` V C l. c . C:R!?,Ld ? Agent. 0 Addressee C. Date of Oavery A. 0. Is dellmy addram ddkrw t from item-Tr- If YES, enter delivery address glow. O No ? 3.yS?er?ACe Type ?/1?.? ( T 5 (? f /o C lilt d Mee ? Express Mae V' ` O Registered ? RaWm Receipt for Momhandles 0 Insured Map ? C.O.D. 0. Restricted Delivery? 180a Feat O ties 2, Article s 70117 2680 0001 0724 4129 (rransrer P3 For, 3811, February 2004 Domeatic Return Re AA. 1025e5a24e.1840 17- C4cLm Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No.: 08-2361 PRAECIPE TO ENTER JUDGMENT AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, by and through his counsel, and respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter a Default Judgment against the above named Defendants, Otto Zielke, and United Collection Corporation, in the amount of $35,000.09. Dated: 11/3/08 By: /s/Dean a acco Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 717-732-3750 Certificate of Service: I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on defendants, via U.S. First Class Mail, proof of mailing received, addressed as follows: Mr. Otto Zielke United Collection Corporation 1026 C. Street Hayward, CA 94541-5125 Dated: 11/3/08 By: /s/De Nv Saracco fv?C. 00 C3 ?s , ^ Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No.: 08-2361 NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT, ORDER OR DECREE Pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 236, you are notified that there was entered in this office today, in the above captioned case: Judgment of $35,000.00, for the Plaintiff and against the Defendants. Order or Decree for: Dated: 1 t10g/o$ By: rothon o, t Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Civil Action No.: 08-2361 United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. RETURN OF SERVICE for COMPLAINT Attached is the Return of Service for the Amended Complaint, in the above captioned matter. Please note that the Defendants were served by Certified Mail on May 5, 2008, received by Jessica Delacruz. Dated: 11/4/08 By: /s/D anna Xn Saracc Deanna Lynn Saracco, attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 717-732-3750 P,1 717'?2g_g49g nn 34 09 p1:21P M. c cztz? a G'r r y , Y MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION #67896 POB 30477 Philadelphia PA 19103-8477 215/568-5621 ELI KISSINGER, Plaintiff VS. UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE, Defendants. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION NO. 08-2361 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Kindly enter my appearance for United Collection Corporation and Otto Zielke, defendants in the above-captioned matter. ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff y ..r???' - Q ?..v ; i _ y 111 •••? ?-y ? ? v ? ? ? ?V ? -? '"'T 1 ? ?._. ,.... _ k,.? . ? _?,,,, i~? S MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION #67896 POB 30477 Philadelphia PA 19103-8477 215/568-5621 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE ELI KISSINGER, Plaintiff VS. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE, Defendants. NO. 08-2361 PETITION TO OPEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 237.3(B) COME NOW, Defendants United Collection Corporation and Otto Zielke, by and through their counsel, Robert M. Morris, Esq., of Morris & Adelman, P.C., who petition this court to open the default judgment entered on November 5, 2008, pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 237.3. The petition has been filed within 10 days of entry of judgment, and an Answer stating meritorious defenses has been attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. S & ADELMAN, P.C. r- ROBE AT M. MORRIS, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving the foregoing document upon the person and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirement of Pa. R.C.P. 440. SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 ADELMAN,P.C. DATE: Nov. 17, 2008 . MORRIS, ESQUIRE Defendants Cj K' ? ?c3 ;"; ' Gj ?t't -? `? --- ? T? ? c?:??•x ' ? .i: -?y -? 'y?C :"'' c:: ??-? ? -.C ...? Cfy MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION #67896 POB 30477 Philadelphia PA 19103-8477 215/568-5621 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE ELI KISSINGER, Plaintiff VS. UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE, Defendants. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION NO. 08-2361 ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH NEW MATTER COME NOW, Defendants United Collection Corporation ('"UCC") and Otto Zielke ("'Zielke"), by and through their counsel, Robert M. Morris, Esq., of Morris & Adelman, P.C., who answers plaintiff's Amended Complaint as follows: 1. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that this court has jurisdiction to hear cases under the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act. Liability is denied. 2. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that plaintiff is located in the Commonwealth. It is denied that plaintiff is a consumer. 3. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that defendant UCC is a business entity. It is denied that Zielke is a business entity. It is denied that defendants are in the business of collecting consumer debts in the Commonwealth. The mailing address of UCC is correctly stated in the allegation. The mailing address of Zielke is not 1026 C Street, Hayward, CA 914541-5125. I 4. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that Zielke is an officer of UCC. It is denied that Zielke is an individual debt-collector. 5. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that UCC sent letters to plaintiff on March 16, 2007, April 20, 2007, May 25, 2007, June 29, 2007, and August 8, 2007. It is denied that defendants ever initiated any calls to plaintiff. It is admitted that UCC received a call from defendant's representatives on March 23, 2007, and again on April 27, 2007. 6. Denied. It is denied that defendants and plaintiff's mother discussed the alleged debt in detail or at all. 7. Denied. It is denied that plaintiff never gave UCC permission to discuss the alleged debt with his mother. 8. Denied. It is denied that defendants contacted plaintiff at his proper telephone number or at any telephone number or by telephone at all. It is denied that defendants called plaintiff's mother. 9. Denied. To the contrary, at no time during any telephone conversation did defendants' agents threaten to sue plaintiff. 10. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that Avis did not assign the debt in issue to UCC. Avis is the owner of the debt. UCC was hired by Avis to collect the debt. It is denied that it is unlawful for UCC to attempt to collect the debt. 11. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is denied that plaintiff did not owe the debt. It is admitted that plaintiff informed UCC that the debt had been paid directly to Avis by Manugraph DGM, Inc. 12. Denied. To the contrary, UCC's employees gave the claim and related paperwork a meaningful review. 13. Denied as a conclusion of law. 14. No response required. 15. Denied as a conclusion of law. 16. Denied as a conclusion of law. 17. Denied as a conclusion of law. 18. Denied as a conclusion of law. 19. Denied as a conclusion of law. 20. Denied as a conclusion of law. 21. No response required. 22. Denied as a conclusion of law. 23. Denied as a conclusion of law. 24. Denied as a conclusion of law. 25. Denied as a conclusion of law. 26. Denied as a conclusion of law. 27. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that plaintiff is an individual. It is denied that plaintiff is a consumer. 28. Denied as a conclusion of law. 29. Denied as a conclusion of law. 30. Denied. It is denied that defendants were hired to collect a debt relating to a consumer transaction. 31. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is denied that defendant Zielke ever communicated with plaintiff. It is admitted that defendant UCC communicated with plaintiff on or after one year before the date of this action. By way of further answer, most of the communication occurred more than a year before the date of this action. It is admitted that the communication included letters sent to defendant. It is denied that any of the written communications are actionable. It is admitted that UCC received two calls relating to this debt, one on March 23, 2007, and the other on April 27, 2007. It is denied that the telephone conversations are actionable. 32. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, UCC gave the file a meaningful review. 33. Denied as a conclusion of law. 34. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not communicate with a third party without consent. 35. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not misrepresent the imminence of legal action, nor did they discuss legal action at all. 36. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not imply during any communication that plaintiff was committing fraud. 37. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not threaten to file or file a lawsuit in Pennsylvania. 38. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not use profane and abusive language toward plaintiff or his mother. 39. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not cause the phone to ring or engage the debtor in repeated conversations. 40. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not communicate with third parties without the consent of plaintiff. 41. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, defendants did not communicate with persons other than the plaintiff more than one time or without the consent of plaintiff. 42. Denied as a conclusion of law. 43. Denied as a conclusion of law. 44. Denied as a conclusion of law. 45. Denied as a conclusion of law. 46. Denied as a conclusion of law. 47. Denied as a conclusion of law. 48. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, at no time did defendants ever discuss legal action of any kind with defendant or any third party in connection with the debt in issue. 49. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, at no time did plaintiff request that Defendants cease communication with plaintiff. 50. Denied. To the contrary, plaintiff was not prevented from disputing the debt. 51. Denied as a conclusion of law. 52. Denied as a conclusion of law. 53. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, UCC's collection communications were not intentionally confusing, misleading or otherwise deceptive. Zielke did not communicate with plaintiff. 54. Denied. To the contrary, UCC's communications did not "create a false sense of urgency on the past of plaintiff." Zielke did not communicate with plaintiff. 55. Denied as a conclusion of law. 56. Denied as a conclusion of law. 57. Denied as a conclusion of law. To the contrary, at no time did defendants make any threats regarding litigation. 58. Denied as a conclusion of law. At no time were UCC's communications confusing or deceptive. Zielke did not communicate with plaintiff. 59. Denied as a conclusion of law. 60. Denied as a conclusion of law. 61. Denied. To the contrary, defendants did not use false or deceptive acts, nor did they intend to oppress or harass plaintiff. 62. Denied. Defendants lack information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegation and therefore deny the same. NEW MATTER 63. The debt in issue was not a debt incurred for personal, family or household purposes. 64. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. 65. If defendants violated either the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act or the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, such violation was as the result of a bona fide error. 66. Plaintiff is barred from simultaneous recovery under the FCEUA and the FDCPA. 67. The FDCPA does not permit recovery of $1,000 per violation. 68. Plaintiff failed to serve defendant Zielke with original process. 69. The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against either defendant. 70. Plaintiff consented to the communications by third parties with UCC. 71. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of estoppel. WHEREFORE, plaintiff's claim should be dismissed with costs to defendants. P. C. EY FOR DEFENDANTS MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION #67896 POB 30477 Philadelphia PA 19103-8477 215/568-5621 ELI KISSINGER, Plaintiff VS. UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE, Defendants. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION NO. 08-2361 V E R I F I C A T I O N ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE , says I am the attorney-at-law of United Collection Corporation and Otto Zielke, Defendantsf and that: ( ) lacks sufficient knowledge or information to take a verification; M is outside the jurisdiction of the Court and that party's verification cannot be obtained within the time allowed for filing the foregoing; and that I am authorized to take this verification; that the facts contained in the foregoing are true and correct according to my knowledge, information and belief; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities. ESQUIRE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving the foregoing document upon the person and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirement of Pa. R.C.P. 440. SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 ELMAN, P.C. DATE: Nov. 17.2008 ROBERT M. MORRIS, Attorney for Defendants C7 can r ... CD ffi? -r, MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: ROBERT M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE IDENTIFICATION #67896 POB 30477 Philadelphia PA 19103-8477 215/568-5621 ELI KISSINGER, Plaintiff vs. ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL DIVISION UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND : OTTO ZIELKE, Defendants. NO. 08-2361 AMENDMENT TO PETITION TO OPEN DEFAULT JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 237.3(B) COME NOW, Defendants United Collection Corporation and Otto Zielke, by and through their counsel, Robert M. Morris, Esq., of Morris & Adelman, P.C., who amend their petition to open the judgment as follows: 1. The court has not ruled upon any other issue in this or any related matter. 2. The Answer was filed concurrently with the original petition. MORRIS N\VJADELMAN, P.C. HEFT-Y1K. MORRIS, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving the foregoing document upon the person and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirement of Pa. R.C.P. 440. SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 ADELMAN DATE: Nov. 19 2008 By: M. MORRIS, ESQUIRE for Defendants ? 1 (?,^? 1 T *? qw. ?_ ?;,' - ti ?? ?....? -k. ..may MORRIS & ADELMAN, P.C. BY: Morris & Adelman, P.C., ESQUIRE ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF IDENTIFICATION #Philadelphia, PA 19103-8477 P.O. Box 30477 Eli Kissinger Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-8477 (215) 568-5621 Eli Kissinger COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 965 Lenker Dr. CUMBERLAND COUNTY Millersburg, PA 17061 CIVIL DIVISION VS. United Collection Corporation and Otto Zielke 1026 C Street Hayward, CA 94541-5125 NO. 08-2361 PRAECIPE TO SUBSTITUTE VERIFICATION TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please substitute the attached client verification for the attorney verification attached to defendant's Answer to Amended Complaint with New Matter. MORRI$\&WDELMAN, P.C. BY: PROTHONOTARY BY: & Adelman, P.C. v for Plaintiff Deputy Y d TTO-& ECKE. states ?atl?aJsba is7F>fz,j?$r D? Of LC: and that the fad sat forth in dW farWing TD ??YH XA)A1 f are t us and oo vd to tba brit of bid bor personal kmwledge or infDMM&n and belief and that tsais statmncn t is made subjert to ft pe ashes of IS Pa. C.SA. 49D4 relating to unswom. falsification tD ? l ea: //-ll - Z-0 ?' . , c ? ? ..? c= .? ; : ? '-. ? -,?:? n?,a .?_ .,;. ?.? ?.?? NOV 18 Z0086 ELI KISSINGER, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY Plaintiff CIVIL DIVISION vs. UNITED COLLECTION CORPORATION AND OTTO ZIELKE, NO. 08-2361 Defendants. O R D E R AND NOW, this 25` day of t0rw,,,,? , 2008, upon consideration of defendants, petition to open judgment pursuant to Pa R. Civ. P. 237.3(b), and good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that the petition is GRANTED, the default judgment is hereby OPENED, and the Answer filed concurrently herewith shall be accepted for filing. BY THE COURT: ?? .h. F , ,?,?, . r; ? °, . ? . ?. $??. _ . u. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No.: 08-2361 United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants. PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S NEW MATTER 63 - 71. This is a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, it is hereby Denied and strict proof of same is required at time of trial. By way of further response, the Defendants had numerous opportunities to respond and ignored a communications that were filed. Dated: 12/2/08 By: L n Saracco Deanna Lynn Saracco. Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive. Enola, PA 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750 Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw(&aol.COm Certificate of Service: I hereby certify that a true and correct of the foregoing was served on attorney for Defendant, Robert Morris, Esquire, via U.S. First Class Mail as follows: Robert M. Morris 1920 Chestnut Street Suite 300 Philadelphia, PA 19103-4620 Dated: 12/2/08 By: _:'? ?;,? >' ;?. . , ?: i ,...' ,.. _., ?-..' IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Eli Kissinger, Plaintiff, V. United Collection Corporation, Otto Zielke, an individual debt collector, Defendants Civil Action No.: 08-2361 PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229 PREJUDICE And now comes Plaintiff, by and through his counsel, Deanna Lynn Saracco, and files this Praecipe to Discontinue, With Prejudice, the above captioned matter. The parties have amicably resolved their dispute. This case should be discontinued and you may mark this case CLOSED. Respectfully submitted, b-A- Dated: 1/26/09 Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive, Enola, PA 17025 717-732-3750, Fax, 717-728-9498 Certificate of Service: I hereby certify that I served, via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, to the defendant as follows: Robert M. Morris 1920 Chestnut Street Suite 300 Philadelphia, PA 19103-4620 Dated: 1/26/09 Deanna Lynn Saracco "`' :'.? CT ??? r. ?=; -s., .?;°