Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-0784 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Matthew R. Saracco Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No.: p9 - 7g4 &' (I Term Jury Trial Demanded Legal Tax Service, Inc. 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 TARE 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 al partir de la fecha de -a excrita o en persona o per 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 order contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y por cualquier queja o ali.vic que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes Para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIEDiE ABOGADOO SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE 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 Matthew R. Saracco Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 05. 7H &;P.4 7-70- V. Jury Trial Demanded Legal Tax Service, Inc. COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff is an individual, residing in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and consumer pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692a(3). 2. Defendant is a debt collector engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts in this Commonwealth with its principal place of business located at 714 Lebanon Road, West Mifflin, PA 15122. 3. On or about January 20, 2009, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by letter in an attempt to collect an alleged debt that was purportedly past due. 4. The letter, attached, stated that the alleged debt had been turned over to the legal department for collection and legal action. 5. The letter further stated that the alleged debt must be paid in full to avoid legal action which would result in a lien against properly. 6. Plaintiff paid the alleged debt and as such, contacted the Defendant. 7. The agent indicated that it was not the Defendant's responsibility to verify if a payment had been made, but that, is was Plaintiff's responsibility to prove that he did not owe the alleged debt. 8. Further, during the call, the agent of Defendant advised Plaintiff that he had an outstanding balance from 2005. 9. Plaintiff advised the Defendant that he did not owe anything for 2005, and the agent once again said, you have to prove you do not owe the debt. 10. Plaintiff asked why if he owed money from 2005, he never received a letter or notice. 11. Defendant's agent said that the postal service loses 10% of the mail and that he would send a notice. 12. The notices sent by the Defendant to collect a past due debt did not contain any of the notices as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. II The agents of Defendants advised Plaintiff that legal action could be taken against him and that the debt could legally be on Plaintiffs credit report. 14. At all times pertinent hereto, the Plaintiff disputed the alleged debt and requested that the defendants provide information. 15. At no time did the agents inform Plaintiff as to how to dispute the alleged debt in writing. 16. Plaintiff believe and therefore avers that defendants' communications contain false, misleading and deceptive language. 17. Consumers are hurt by these tactics. COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 18. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully stated herein. 19. Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. §2270 et seq. 20. Violating provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also violate the Pennsylvania FCEU, 73 P.S. §2270.4(a). 21. That Defendants 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). 22. Defendants' acts as described herein were done with malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and wanton disregard for Plaintiff's rights with the purpose of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt. 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 defendants for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. 2207.5. COUNT II - PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 24. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the forgoing as if fully set forth herein. 25. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P. S. §201-1 et seq. 26. That Defendants failed to have proper assignment of the alleged debt, in violation of 18 Pa.C.S. §7311a (1) through (3), as such, violated this Act and the FDCPA. 27. That Defendants engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by UTPCI'L. 28. 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 defendants for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §201-902. COUNT III - FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 29. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 30. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. ("FD('PA"), particularly 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. §1337. 31. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). 32. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that defendants threatened legal action, in violation of the FDCPA. 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. § 1692e(2)(A), (5) and (10) by misrepresenting the imminence of legal action by Defendants. 35. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. §1692f, by threatening and/or filing suit without proper legal authority in Pennsylvania. 36. 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. 37. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) and (10) by threatening action that they never intended to take or that could not be taken. 38. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g, by failing to provide the Plaintiff with all the notices required by the FDCPA. 39. At all time pertinent hereto, the defendant was acting by and through its agents, servants P and/or employees, who were acting within the scope and course of their employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the defendants herein. 40. 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. 41. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of defendants rises to the level needed for punitive damages. 42. Defendant, in its collection efforts, violated the FDCPA, inter alia, Sections 1692, b, c d e, f, g, h, and/or n. ' 43. Defendant, in its collection efforts, used false or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 44. That, as a result of the wrongful tactics of defendants 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 for Plaintiff 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 defendants 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 defendants form letters. C) Award Plaintiff costs of this litigation, including a reasonable attorney's fee at a rate of $450.00/hour for hours reasonably expended Plaintiff's attorney in vindicating his 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 w or equity may provide. Dated: 2/9/09 BY: a L nn Saracco Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 1 101 N. Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Telephone 717-732-3750 Email: SaraccoLaw(a?aol.com LEGAL TAX SERVICE, INC. 714 Lebanon Road West Mifflin, PA 15122 tel (412) 464-9997 fax (412) 464-9970 SARACCO MATTHEW R January 20, 2009 76 GREENMONT DR ENOLA PA 17025 RE: Delinquent 2008 Garbage Fees, Borough of Munhall ACCOUNT NUMBER: MDG141 G2096 Service Address: 1392 RAVINE ST Total Due for year 2008 only: $43.00 NOTICE _ UNPAID 2008 GARBAGE COLLECTION FEES To Whom it May Concern: Please be advised that your 2008 Borough of Munhall Garbage Collection Fees have been turned over to our legal department for collection and/or legal action. Be aware that a service charge in the amount of $10.00 has accrued for each quarter not paid for year 2008. Although you may have made a final payment, that payment was not received by December 31, 2008 and has incurred the service charge. Be advised that the account accrues interest on the first day of each month commencing February 1, 2009 at a rate of 10% per annum. In other words, the total stated above will change on that date. We are giving you this opportunity to pay said fees, in full, and to avoid any legal action which may result in a lien against your property. Please note that the above amount must be paid in full to avoid any action. THIS WILL BE YOUR. ONLY NOTICE. You may have prior delinquencies and/or liens due on this realty that have not been paid and continue to accrue interest. Any prior amount is not included in the total amount due stated above; however, it will be included in any lien filed. Please include your account number and 2008 on check or money order and send to: Legal Tax Service, Inc. 714 Lebanon Road West Mifflin, PA 15122 Attn: MDG 08 Please note that all checks returned will be charged a $29.00 handling fee. Should you have any questions, please call: (412) 464-9997. Sincerely, LEGAL TAX SERVICE, INC. C> o c?" ? t ? l 7 r -- y f rI C),- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Matthew R. Saracco Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 09-784 V. Jury Trial Demanded Legal Tax Service, Inc. VERIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, information given to me by the Plaintiff, under penalty of perjury, I hereby make this statement. Dated: 3 13 /0 q By: 4 . )d- . ? d ..m ?' ?F: ?? ? a s??r.:: +"? ? JG ? -rC IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MATTHEW R. SARACCO Plaintiff, vs. LEGAL TAX SERVICE, INC. CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-784 Civil Term Defendant. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, NEW MATTER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Filed on Behalf of Defendant: Legal Tax Service, Inc. Counsel for this Paxty: Donald C. Fetzko, Esquire PA ID 10001 714 Lebanon Road West Mifflin PA 15122 (412) 464-9997 email: dfetzko@ltsagency.com IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MATTHEW R. SARACCO CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, vs. NO. 09-784 Civil Term LEGAL TAX SERVICE, INC. Defendant. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT NEW MATTER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Legal Tax Service, Inc., by and through its attorney, Donald C. Fetzko, Esquire, and files the within Answer to Complaint. Admitted. 2. The averments of Paragraph 2 are Denied in part, Defendant is engaged in a business of collecting municipal claims and taxes. Defendant does not collect any consumer debt as that term is commonly used. 3. That the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 are based on a letter which is attached to the complaint, and speaks for itself, and requires no answer by this Defendant. 4. That the averments of Paragraph 6 are denied as stated, Plaintiff paid the $43.00 debt on February 3, 2009 after the posted date of the letter of January 20, 2009. 5. That after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the averments of Paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 and the same is deemed denied. 6. That the averments of Paragraph 12 are based on a written correspondence attached to the complaint that speaks for itself, and requires no answer from this Defendant. 7. That the averments of Paragraph 13 are specifically denied, Defendant has never referred in any collection matter that a debt can be legally on a Plaintiff's credit report. Defendant has never ever made reference to anyone's credit report for any reason. As to the other allegation of legal action, after reasonable investigation, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the allegations of Paragraph 13 in regards to legal action. However, if the contrary result occurs, the same is denied since the agents who answer the phone inquiries are not part of Defendant's legal department and would never refer to legal action or Plaintiff's credit reports, but would only give the accounts status to the inquiry. 8. After reasonable investigation, Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the allegations of Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's complaint. 9. The averments of Paragraph 16 are denied. On the contrary, there is nothing false, misleading or deceptive about Defendant's communications. 10. The averments of Paragraph 17 are denied. Defendant does not use any tactics that harm consumers. To the extent of the contrary result, Defendant denies that its tactics hurt consumers, since Defendant only collects municipal or political subdivision taxes or user fees, and never makes a report to any credit agency. ANSWER TO COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 11. In response to paragraph 18, Defendant incorporates as an answer Paragraphs 1 through 10 as if fully set forth herein. 12. That the averments of Paragraphs 19 and 20 are an opinion of law and require no answer. 13. The averments of Paragraph 21 are denied. On the contrary, Defendants information is accurate and true, and Defendant is the appointed collector for the Borough of Munhall, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and as such is not defined as a debt collector within the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act pursuant to and 73 P.S. §2370.3(2)(v) and 73 P.S. §2370.3(3)(iv). 14. That Defendants deny the averments of Paragraph 22. On the contrary, other than the letter attached to the complaint, Defendant has never initiated any other call or contact to Plaintiff. 15. That the averments of Paragraph 23 are an opinion and require no answer. To the extent that the contrary occurs, Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Plaintiffs complaint and award costs to Defendant. ANSWER TO COUNT Il - PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 16. In answer to Paragraph 24, Defendant incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth herein. 17. That the averments of Paragraph 25 are an opinion of law and requires no answer. 18. That the averments of Paragraph 26 are denied, in so far that the Borough of Munhall, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania has properly designated Legal Tax Service, Inc., the Defendant, as its collector of earned income taxes, delinquent tax collector, and collector of its garbage and sanitary user fees, both current and delinquent. 19. That the averments of Paragraph 27 are denied, on the contrary, Defendant does not engage in unfair methods of competition or deceptive acts, and Defendant does not engage in any commerce and does not sell any product to the public, but solely collect municipal claims and taxes for various political subdivisions and municipal authorities of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 20. That the averments of Paragraph 28 are an opinion and require no answer from this Defendant. To the extent that the contrary occurs, Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests this Honorable Court to dismiss Plaintiff s Count II of the complaint, and award cost to the Defendant. ANSWER TO COUNT III - FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 21. In answer to Paragraph 29, Defendant hereby incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 20 as if fully set forth herein 22. That the averments of Paragraphs 30 and 31 are an opinion of law and require no answer. 23. The averments of Paragraph 32 are denied. On the contrary, Defendant did not threaten legal action in violation of the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act. Defendant can file a lien against the property, can bring an assumpsit's action against the Defendant, and under Act 20 of 2003 recover all legal costs including reasonable attorney's fees for pursuing said legal action in the name of the Borough of Munhall. 24. That the averments of Paragraph 33 are denied. On the contrary, the Defendant did not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect a debt. Defendants sent one notice and never initiated any other contact with the Plaintiff. 25. That the allegations of Paragraph 34 are denied. On the contrary, if the debt was not paid, the property would have been liened, and/or other legal actions would have been taken at a far greater cost to Plaintiff then payment of the valid municipal claim that was owed. 26. That the averments of Paragraph 36 are denied. Defendant never engaged in the conduct set forth in Paragraph 36. On the contrary, Plaintiff received only one written notice, and no other contact was initiated by Defendant. 27. That the averments of Paragraph 37 are denied. On the contrary, that by failing to pay your taxes and/or municipal user fees, a lien or other action can and is often filed. 28. That the averments of Paragraph 38 are denied. On the contrary, all of the information required by the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act is supplied in the initial notification, and that Plaintiff reacted quickly by paying the delinquent garbage fee to defendant on behalf to the Borough of Munhall which payment was entered on February 3, 2009, and no further communication was warranted, otherwise plaintiff may have received the required notice within five days of the initial contact. 29. That the averments of Paragraph 39 are an opinion and require no answer. To the extent of a contrary result, the averments of Paragraph 39 are denied and strict proof is required thereof. 30. That the averments of Paragraph 40 are denied. At all times, the conduct of the Defendant were within the scope of its authority of its municipal collection duties, and defendant was never malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent or in wanton disregard for the federal and state law and rights of the Plaintiff. 31. The averments of Paragraph 41 are denied. The only communication to Plaintiff was one letter dated January 20, 2009 and no further attempt of communication to Plaintiff was ever initiated by Defendant. 32. Paragraph 42 is a conclusion of law and requires no answer from the Defendant. If a contrary result occurs, Paragraph 42 is denied. 33. Paragraph 43 is denied. Defendant never used false or deceptive acts; the data recited in the correspondence is the true and correct data as stated in the accounts. 34. The averments of Paragraph 44 are denied. On the contrary, Defendant has never initiated a contacted to Plaintiff by telephone or any other method other than one correspondence, so the averment that Plaintiff has been subject to anxiety, harassment, intimidation and annoyance is strictly denied and Plaintiff is not entitled to any compensation as alleged. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiff's complaint to Count III and award cost to Defendant. NEW MATTER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 35. That Defendant collection consists of nothing but the collection taxes and municipal claims together with ancillary legal services for said collections, of the taxes and municipal fees levied or adopted by political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 36. That Defendant is the appointed official of the Borough of Munhall, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, who collects or attempts to collect the tax or municipal fees and assessments owed to the Borough of Munhall, and that Legal Tax Service, Inc. was acting within the scope of its appointed position of employment to collect delinquent municipal claims and as such is not subject to the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act. 37. That Defendant does not offer goods or services for sale and commerce, but solely collects taxes or municipal fees adopted by a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and as such is not subject to the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act. 38. That Defendant has never initiated a contact by telephone with Plaintiff, or sent any collector to his doorstep and could not have possibly harassed, or caused any mental anguish to Plaintiff by one single correspondence. 39. That as of the date of January 20, 2009, Plaintiff did owe the Borough of Munhall a quarterly late garbage collection fee. 40. That on February 3, 2009, Defendant made payment of the late delinquent garbage collection fee to Legal Tax Service, Inc. that was the subject matter of January 20, 2009. 41. That a notices forwarded by Legal Tax Service, Inc. to Plaintiff and others do include the notices required by 15 U.S.C. § 1692(g). 42. That if the language was not contained in the January 20, 2009, then its omission was inadvertent and unintentional resulting from a bona fide error not withstanding an in place procedure and policy by Legal Tax Service, Inc. to avoid such error. 43. That Plaintiff's Count I does not state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted because Legal Tax Service, Inc. as the appointed official of the Borough of Munhall, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is not included in the definition of Debt Collector under the aforesaid Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act. 44. That Plaintiff's Count II does not state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act for the following reasons: (a) Defendant does not engage in any trade or commerce as that term is defined in said Act. (b) Defendant does not engage in any fraudulent conduct under said Act. (c) Defendant does not solicit any sales of goods or services to the public and specifically Plaintiff. 45. That Count III does not state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted since absence of the required language of 15 U.S.C. §1692 is not a per se violation of said Act, and the complaint is not specific as to the omission of the required language within the time period allowed. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully prays that Plaintiff's complaint be denied. Respectfully submitted, F Donald C. Fetzko, Esquire PA ID 10001 714 Lebanon Road West Mifflin, PA 15122 (412) 464-9997 Email: ffetzko@ltsagency.com VERIFICATION I, MATTHEW C. FETZKO, verify that the averments contained in the foregoing Answer to Complaint, New Matter and Affirmative Defenses are true and correct based upon my personal knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 03/27/09 ^ttl-? Matthew C. Fetzko, President Legal Tax Service, Inc. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that he did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer to Complaint, New Matter and Affirmative Defenses by First Class Mail, postage pre-paid on the 27th day of March 2009 to the following: Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 1101 North Front Street Harrisburg PA 17102 Donald C. Fetzko, Esquir Attorney for Defendant, Legal Tax Service, Inc. ^a C- r f? CD Asa. cD t `._ :17 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Matthew R. Saracco Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No.: 09-784 Jury Trial Demanded Legal Tax Service, Inc. IMPORTANT NOTICE TO: Mr. Matthew Fetzko Legal Tax Service Inc. 3714 Hom-Duq Rd. West Mifflin, PA 15122 DATE OF NOTICE: MARCH 30, 2009 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 StA-?? Deanna Lynn Saracco 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 (717) 732-3750 Attorney for Plaintiff FILED-uF'i ICE OF THE PSG` INInNOTARY 2099 MAR 31 AM 11: 4. CU'l IvgT :.4 1 hry '?1 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Matthew R. Saracco Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 09-784 V. Jury Trial Demanded Legal Tax Service, Inc. PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229 WITHOUT PREJUDICE And now comes Plaintiff, by and through his counsel, Deanna Lynn Saracco, and files this Praecipe to Discontinue, Without Prejudice, the above captioned matter. After further investigation, as well as the Defendant's affirmative defenses, the Plaintiff believes that the issues in this case will be better served as both an individual and class action, pursuant to federal law, specifically, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., known as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. This case should be discontinued and you may mark this case CLOSED. Respectfully submitted, Lik? Dated: 4/7/09 Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 717-732-3750 Certificate of Service: I hereby certify that I served, via hand delivery, a copy of the forgoing. on the defendant as follows: Mr. Matthew Fetzko Legal Tax Service Inc. 714 Lebanon Road West Mifflin, PA 15122 Dated: 4/7/09 ku?-" Deanna Lynn Saracco RLED-CC I" OF THE is T H+ ° + TIi 2009 APR -8 Aft It: S f GuMb J a, ,