The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-7017 - 00- 70/7 ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Heather Kauffman, Grandview Drive Enola, P A 17025 MRS Associates, Inc. 3 Executive Campus, Suite 400 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 and True Logic Financial Corp. 10000 East Geddes Ave, Suite 1000 Englewood, CO 80112 Plaintiff( s) & Addresses Defendant( s) & Addresses PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue writ of summons in the above-captioned action. Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to (X ) Attorney ( ) Sheriff. Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Phone 717-732-3750 SaraccoLaw@aol.com ~~ S(gnature of Attorney Dated: /;; ~(p - tJ& WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLi):O)JTIFF(S) HAS COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. /1, Dated: f)p~"7. ~t. By: Deputy f'oo.> = = c:::r-. o rr1 ("") I -.J J> :1: o '"Tl ~" ffi- r- um :r:JT C::U -;...: -T", ;'') ::!} ~,2:P ,--,.n '-...) :;;l ::0 -< w l..O IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Heather Kauffman Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 06-7017 True Logic Financial Corp., and M.R.S. Associates, Inc., Defendants. 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, P A 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 la excrita 0 en persona 0 por abogado y archivar en la corte en forma excrita sus defensas 0 sus objectiones alas demande, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso 0 notificacion y por cualquier queja 0 alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero 0 sus propiedades 0 otros derechos importantes para usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO 1MMED1ATAMENTE. S1 NO T1ENE ABOGADOO 31 NO T1ENE EL D1NERO SUF1C1ENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERV1C10N, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OF1C1NA CUYA D1RECC10N SE PUEDECONSEGUIR AS1STENC1A LEGAL. f " IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Heather Kauffman Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 06-7017 True Logic Financial Corp., and M.R.S. Associates, Inc., Defendants. COMPLAINT I. Plaintiff is an individual, residing in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and consumer pursuant to 15 U.S.C. sI692a(3). 2. Defendant True Logic Financial Corp., (hereinafter True Logic), is a business entity(ies) engaged in the business of collecting debts in this Commonwealth with and address of, 10000 East Geddes Ave, Suite 1000, Englewood, CO, 80112. 3. Defendant, M.R.S. Associates, Inc., (hereinafter MRS), is a business entity engaged in the business of collecting debts in this Commonwealth, with an address of, 3 Executive Campus, Suite 400, Cherry Hill, New Jersey, 08022. 4. On or about June, July and August, 2006, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by US. Mail and/or telephone calls in an attempt to collect an alleged consumer debt. 5. Defendants are debt collectors as defined by the state law and the FDCP A. 15 US.C. 11692a(6). 6. Defendants sent letters and/or made telephone calls to Plaintiff in June, July and August, 2006, which are "communications" relating to a "debt" as defined by the FDCP A. 7. At all pertinent times hereto, the defendants were collecting an alleged debt relating to a consumer transaction, pursuant to 15 US.C. S 1692a(5). (Hereinafter the "alleged debt.") 8. Defendants communicated with plaintiff on or after one year before the date of this -r action, in connection with collection efforts, by letters, telephone contact or other documents, with regard to plaintiffs alleged debt. 9. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that Defendants' letters contained false, misleading, deceptive and/or confusing statements. 10. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that agents of the respective Defendants, in their telephone communications made false, misleading, deceptive and/or confusing statements. I I. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that agents of the respective Defendants, in their telephone communications, were rude, beligerent, insulting and harassing to the Plaintiff. 12. Plaintiff disputes the alleged debt and hereby requests proof of the manner in which the alleged debt was calculated, as is required by state and federal law. 13. Defendant failed to make clear to the Plaintiff that it has no authority to take legal action in Pennsylvania. 14. Consumers are hurt by these tactics. COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 15. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully stated herein. 16. Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. 92270 et seq. 17. Violating provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also violate the Pennsylvania FCEU, 73 P.S. 92270.4(a). 18. 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 of37 Pa.Code 99303.3(3), 303.3(14), 303.3(18), 303.6 and 73 P.S. 9201-2(4). r- 19. Defendants' 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. 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. 2207.5. COUNT 11- FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 21. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 22. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 91692, et seq. ("FDCPA"), particularly 15 U.S.C. SI692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. S1337. 23. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.c. 1391(b). 24. The FDCP A states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCP A. 15 U .S.c. 91692n. 25. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that defendant True Logic does not have proper assignment of the claim, and is therefore, unable to collect the alleged debt pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. 9731 l(a)(l) and (2). 26. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that defendant MRS does not have proper assignment of the claim, and is therefore, unable to collect the alleged debt pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. 97311(a)(I) and (2). 27. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that neither defendant has proper assignments and/or 0" documentation permitting said defendants to charge interest, fees and/or costs. 18 Pa.C.S. ~73 I 12(b)(I). 28. The FDCPA states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCPA. 15 U.S.C. 91692n. Defendants violated this section of the FDCP A. 29. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that each defendant added interest, fees and costs in violation of state and federal law 30. Defendant True Logic, in its collection efforts, demanded interest, fees and/or costs in violation of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.c. SI692f(l) and 1692e(2)A and B. 31. Defendant MRS, in its collection efforts, demanded interest, fees and/or costs in violation of the FDCPA, 15 US.c. *1692f(l) and 1692e(2)A and B. 32. Defendant True Logic, letter stated in part, Balance Due; $7, 144.24. 33. Defendant, MRS, letter stated in part, Acct. Balance: $7,221.49. 34. There was never an exprcss agreement by Plaintiff to pay any additional fees, cost or interest to any Defendant or any of its agents. 35. TheFDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. S 1692f. Defendants violated this section of the FDCP A. 36. The FDCP A 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. sI692e(5) and (10), gI692f(8) and S1692j. Defendants violated these sections of the FDCP A. 37. To date, no debt collector has been able to validate the alleged debt. 38. The FDCP A states, a debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural r .' consequence of which is to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. 15 U.S.c. S 1692d. Defendants violated this section of the FDCP A. 39. The FDCP A provides certain rights to the consumer regarding her right to dispute the alleged debt, 15 U.S.c. 9 1692g. Defendants violated this section of the FDCP A. 40. Any threat oflitigation is false if the defendant rarely, sues consumer debtors or if the defendant did not intend to sue the Plaintiff. Bently v. Great Lakes Collection Bureau, 6 F.3d 62 (2d Cir. 1998). See also, 15 U.S.c. sI692e(5), 15 U.S.c. sI692e(l0). 4 I. At all time pertinent hereto, the defendants were 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 defendants herein. 42. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of defendants 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. 43. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of defendants rises to the level needed for punitive damages. 44. Defendants, in its collection efforts, violated the FDCP A, inter alia, Sections 1692, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and/or n. 45. Defendants, in its collection efforts, used false or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 46. 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 defendants 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 FDCP A. (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 Plaintiffs attorney in vindicating his rights under the FDCP A, permitted by 15 U.S.C. S 1 692k(a)(3). (D) A ward declaratory and injunctive relief, and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper or law or equity may provide. COUNT III - FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 47. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 48. The Fair Credit Reporting at, 15 U.S.c. S 1681 b prohibits the improper use of a consumer's credit information. 49. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the defendant reported false, misleading and/or inaccurate information on Plaintiff s credit report, without first validating the alleged debt. 50. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the defendant reviewed Plaintiffs credit report without proper authority or assignment of the alleged debt. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his Honorable Court enter judgment for Plaintiff and against defendants and issue an Order: I' (A) Award Plaintiff statutory damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each violation of the FCRA or each separate and discrete incident in which defendants have violated the FCRA. 15 U.S.C. ~1681n(a)(I)(A). (B) Award Plaintiff general damages and punitive damages for anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at Plaintiff in an amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($ I 0,000.00), as well as the repetitive nature of defendants form letters. C) A ward Plaintiff costs of this litigation, including a reasonable attorney's fee at a rate of $450.00/hour for hours reasonably expended Plaintiffs attorney in Dated: 1/3/06 vindicating his rights under the FOCP ~ S 1681 n(3)C). By: /s/ e Saracco Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive, Enola, P A 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750 Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw@aol.com (') c- ':!..,.. ~.~~~ ."'"Ou-' 0)\"', ~ <.:3 <- ~ \ cP q. ~~ ..-05 :l"t( (~G, ~"r" ..: -0(2 -5 % :gff' . . "'P" ~ <.J' v:> 2~, q) r:': :~:t~ St IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYL VANIA HEATHER KAUFFMAN, Plaintiff Civil Action No.: 06-7017 VS. TRUE LOGIC FINANCIAL CORP. AND M.R.S. ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendants PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT OF DEFENDANT. TRUE LOGIC FINANCIAL CORP. Defendant, True Logic Financial Corp., preliminarily objects to plaintiffs Complaint and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1028(a)(2) provides that preliminary objections may be filed by any party to any pleading for failure of a pleading to conform to law or rule of Court. 2. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1019(f) requires that averments oftime, place and items of special damage be specifically stated. 3. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1024 requires that plaintiffs complaint be verified by the plaintiff. 4. Pa.R.C.P. Rule 1019(i) requires that when a claim is based upon a writing, the pleader shall attach a copy of the writing to the pleading. 5. Plaintiff's Complaint sets forth general and non-specific allegations against both named defendants simultaneously without specifying the alleged conduct asserted against each defendant. 6. Plaintiff s Complaint fails to state with any specificity as to the dates of the alleged conduct complained of by the plaintiff against the answering defendant. 7. Plaintiff s complaint fails to state the dates the letters complained of were sent, how the letters complained of fail to comply with any statute and fails to attach any letter that is the subject matter of this suit. 8. Plaintiffs complaint fails to state a factual basis for the allegations that answering defendant did not have a proper assignment of plaintiff s account. 9. Plaintiff s complaint fails to state with any specificity how answering defendant demanded interest, fees in costs in violation of state and federal law by failing to state what interest, fees and costs were demanded and what statutes were violated. 10. Plaintiff fails to state that she requested validation of the debt in writing in the first thirty days as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and fails to attach a copy of any such writing. I 1. Plaintiff s complaint fails to state when and how the answering defendant improperly reported plaintiffs debt to the credit bureaus and fails to attach a copy of such credit reporting to her complaint. 12. Answering defendant cannot properly prepare a defense to this action without a more specific pleading as to the conduct alleged and without the documents complained of being attached to the complaint. 13. Plaintiff's complaint must be dismissed as a matter of law for failure to conform to law or rules of Court, for failure to specifically plead to averments of time, place and items of special damage and for failure to attach a proper verification. WHEREFORE, defendant, True Logic Financial Corp., respectfully requests that its preliminary objections to Plaintiff s Complaint be sustained. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. BY: VERIFICATION FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, ESQUIRE, hereby states that he is the attorney for the defendant in this action and verifies that the statements made in the foregoing pleadings are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. J-~ FREDERIC 1. W BE , ESQUIRE .. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I, FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, ESQUIRE, hereby certify that I, on the date below, served a copy of Defendant, True Logic Financial Corp.'s, Preliminary Objections to Plaintiffs Complaint, via First Class Mail, postage pre-paid, to all other parties or their counsel of record. '?- FREDERIC I. wO, ESQUIRE Dated: / ( 30 (CJ ~ (") "-'> 0 t',:":') I"~""" ~:"::::J. 11 -...J ''''-:'' <....... :T! ""'r.~ , n1 11 :d: r- iT! W C' : 1 ,'" ~;) \J -ri ~j?~ ~:- --t C) ~~5 CO -< IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Heather Kauffman Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 06-7017 True Logic Financial Corp., and M.R.S. Associates, Inc., Defendants. PRAECIPE TO DISCONTINUE Pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 229 WITHOUT PREJUDICE And now comes Plaintiff, by and through her counsel, Deanna Lynn Saracco, and files this Praecipe to Discontinue, without Prejudice, the above captioned matter. After further investigation, 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. S 1692 et seq., known as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff intends to drop all state actions and raise only the federal causes of action. The Defendant will not be prejudiced since the complaint will remain virtually the same and FDCP A actions are routinely pursued in federal court. This case should be discontinued and you may mark this case CLOSED. Dated: 1/12/07 Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive, Enola, P A 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: Frederic 1. Weinberg, Esquire Gordon & Weinberg 21 South 21 st Street Philadelphia, P A 19103 Dated: 1/12/07 10M- . Deanna Lynn Saracco Sii~" ~~; :,il !~ ..;;;: :18'~ ~ i: