FDCPA Violation Complaint (Hybrid Federal/Arizona Consumer Fraud Act)

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT AND THE ARIZONA CONSUMER FRAUD ACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Introduction
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Parties
5. Factual Allegations
6. Count I — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e (False, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations)
7. Count II — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692f (Unfair or Unconscionable Means)
8. Count III — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692g (Failure to Validate)
9. Count IV — Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, A.R.S. § 44-1522
10. Count V — Arizona Collection Agency Act, A.R.S. § 32-1001 et seq.
11. Damages
12. Prayer for Relief
13. Demand for Trial by Jury
14. Signature and Service Blocks
15. Certificate of Service
16. Arizona Practice Notes
17. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case No. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FDCPA AND THE ARIZONA CONSUMER FRAUD ACT

(JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1. This is an action for damages brought by an individual consumer for Defendants' violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. ("FDCPA"); the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, A.R.S. § 44-1521 et seq. ("ACFA"); and the Arizona Collection Agency Act, A.R.S. § 32-1001 et seq. ("ACAA").

2.2. The FDCPA "eliminate[s] abusive debt collection practices by debt collectors" and protects consumers from harassment, false representations, and unfair collection conduct. 15 U.S.C. § 1692(e).

2.3. Defendants engaged in a pattern of unlawful collection conduct against Plaintiff in connection with an alleged consumer debt, causing actual damages, statutory damages, and emotional distress.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3.1. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the federal claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d), and supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).

3.2. Venue is proper in the District of Arizona under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in [COUNTY] County, Arizona, where Plaintiff resides and received Defendants' communications.

4. PARTIES

4.1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is a natural person residing in [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Arizona, and is a "consumer" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3).

4.2. Defendant [DEBT COLLECTOR / AGENCY NAME] ("Collector") is a [entity type] organized under the laws of [STATE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS]. Collector regularly collects or attempts to collect debts owed to others and is a "debt collector" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6).

4.3. Defendant [INDIVIDUAL COLLECTOR NAME] is a natural person employed by Collector who personally engaged in collection activity directed at Plaintiff and is a "debt collector" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6).

4.4. Upon information and belief, Collector [is / is not] licensed as a collection agency by the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions ("DIFI") under A.R.S. § 32-1001 et seq.

5. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

5.1. The alleged debt at issue (the "Debt") was incurred by Plaintiff primarily for personal, family, or household purposes and is a "debt" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5) and "merchandise" or "services" under A.R.S. § 44-1521.

5.2. On or about [DATE], Defendants began collection activity against Plaintiff by [telephone calls / letters / electronic communications / lawsuit] seeking to collect the Debt in the alleged amount of $[AMOUNT].

5.3. [Describe the initial communication and the violation conduct in chronological detail. Include dates, times, persons, statements made, and the form of communication.]

5.4. [FACTUAL ALLEGATION — false statement of amount, character, or legal status of the Debt; failure to identify itself as a debt collector; communication at unusual or inconvenient times or places; communication with third parties; threats of action that cannot legally be taken or that are not intended to be taken; etc.]

5.5. On or about [DATE], Plaintiff sent Defendants a written dispute and request for validation of the Debt under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b). A copy is attached as Exhibit A.

5.6. Defendants failed to cease collection activity and failed to provide proper validation as required by 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b), instead [describe continued collection conduct].

5.7. Defendants' conduct caused Plaintiff actual damages including [out-of-pocket loss / lost wages / emotional distress / damage to credit / cost of medical care or counseling].

6. COUNT I — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e (False, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations)

6.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 5.7.

6.2. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e by, including but not limited to:

• Falsely representing the character, amount, or legal status of the Debt (§ 1692e(2)(A));
• Threatening action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken (§ 1692e(5));
• Using false representations or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect the Debt (§ 1692e(10));
• Failing to disclose that the communication is from a debt collector (§ 1692e(11)).

6.3. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k for actual damages, statutory damages up to $1,000, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees.

7. COUNT II — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692f (Unfair or Unconscionable Means)

7.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 6.3.

7.2. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692f by, including but not limited to:

• Collecting an amount not authorized by the agreement creating the Debt or permitted by law (§ 1692f(1));
• [Other § 1692f conduct: postdated checks, non-judicial repossession threats, deceptive postcards, etc.].

7.3. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k.

8. COUNT III — FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692g (Failure to Validate)

8.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 7.3.

8.2. Defendants failed to provide a written validation notice within five days of the initial communication and/or failed to cease collection activity after Plaintiff timely disputed the Debt in writing under § 1692g(b).

8.3. Defendants overshadowed and contradicted the validation notice in violation of § 1692g(b).

8.4. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k.

9. COUNT IV — ARIZONA CONSUMER FRAUD ACT, A.R.S. § 44-1522

9.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 8.4.

9.2. Defendants used "deception, deceptive or unfair act or practice, false statement, false pretense, false promise, [or] misrepresentation" in connection with the attempted collection of a consumer transaction in violation of A.R.S. § 44-1522(A).

9.3. Plaintiff relied on Defendants' misrepresentations to his/her detriment, suffering actual injury.

9.4. Defendants' conduct was willful, wanton, or reckless, entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages.

10. COUNT V — ARIZONA COLLECTION AGENCY ACT, A.R.S. § 32-1001 et seq.

10.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 9.4.

10.2. A.R.S. § 32-1001 requires any person who solicits or collects claims owed to a third party to be licensed as a collection agency by the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions.

10.3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Collector engaged in collection activity in Arizona without holding a valid Arizona collection agency license, in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1022.

10.4. Such unlicensed activity constitutes an unlawful practice and supports a finding of unfair conduct under the ACFA.

11. DAMAGES

11.1. Actual damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(1) and A.R.S. § 44-1522, including out-of-pocket expenses, lost wages, emotional distress, anxiety, sleeplessness, humiliation, harm to credit, and reputation damage.

11.2. Statutory damages of up to $1,000 per Defendant under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A).

11.3. Punitive damages under the ACFA for Defendants' willful, wanton, or reckless conduct.

11.4. Costs and reasonable attorney's fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3).

12. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court:

• A. Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants, jointly and severally, on all Counts;
• B. Award actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
• C. Award statutory damages of $1,000 per Defendant under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A);
• D. Award punitive damages under the ACFA in an amount sufficient to deter similar conduct;
• E. Award costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3);
• F. Award pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• G. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

13. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38.

14. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Arizona State Bar No. [######]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [(___) ___-____]

Email: [________________________________]

15. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I electronically filed the foregoing COMPLAINT with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to all counsel of record. A courtesy copy was served upon Defendants by U.S. Mail at the addresses below:

[SERVICE LIST]

[________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME]

16. ARIZONA PRACTICE NOTES

• Statute of limitations. FDCPA actions must be filed within one year of the violation (15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d); Rotkiske v. Klemm, 140 S. Ct. 355 (2019), holding the limitation runs from the date of the violation, not discovery, absent fraudulent concealment). Arizona Consumer Fraud Act actions must be filed within one year of discovery under A.R.S. § 12-541(5) (Alaface v. Nat'l Inv. Co., 181 Ariz. 586 (App. 1994)).
• Private right of action under ACFA. Recognized as an implied right since Sellinger v. Freeway Mobile Home Sales, 110 Ariz. 573 (1974). Elements: (1) false promise or misrepresentation in connection with the sale or advertisement of merchandise, (2) consequent and proximate injury, and (3) reliance (Kuehn v. Stanley, 208 Ariz. 124 (App. 2004)).
• No attorney's fees under ACFA. Unlike many state consumer-protection statutes, the ACFA does not authorize attorney's fees or treble damages. Fee-shifting may be available under A.R.S. § 12-341.01 if the action arises out of contract.
• Forum. FDCPA claims may be filed in any federal district court or state court of competent jurisdiction. Arizona Superior Court has concurrent jurisdiction; Justice Court has limited jurisdiction up to $10,000 (A.R.S. § 22-201).
• Licensing check. Before filing, verify the defendant's license status at https://difi.az.gov/. Unlicensed collection activity is a separate unlawful practice and bolsters ACFA counts.
• Validation notice rule. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1692g and Regulation F (12 C.F.R. § 1006.34), the validation notice must be sent within five days of the initial communication and must contain the itemization, validation period, and FTC/CFPB-style "Mini-Miranda."
• Bona fide error defense. Defendants may assert the bona fide error defense under § 1692k(c) for unintentional, procedural mistakes; legal-interpretation errors do not qualify (Jerman v. Carlisle, 559 U.S. 573 (2010)).

17. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (FDCPA) — https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-41/subchapter-V
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692g (Validation of debts) — https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692g
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692k (Civil liability) — https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1692k
• A.R.S. Title 44, Chapter 10, Article 7 (Consumer Fraud) — https://www.azleg.gov/arsDetail/?title=44
• A.R.S. Title 32, Chapter 9 (Collection Agencies) — https://www.azleg.gov/arsDetail/?title=32
• Arizona DIFI Collection Agencies — https://difi.az.gov/collection-agencies-dfi
• 12 C.F.R. Part 1006 (Regulation F) — https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/1006/
• Sellinger v. Freeway Mobile Home Sales, 110 Ariz. 573 (1974)
• Kuehn v. Stanley, 208 Ariz. 124 (App. 2004)
• Rotkiske v. Klemm, 140 S. Ct. 355 (2019)
• Jerman v. Carlisle, 559 U.S. 573 (2010)

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Arizona must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.