FDCPA Violation Complaint (Federal FDCPA + Missouri MMPA)

COMPLAINT — FDCPA + MISSOURI MERCHANDISING PRACTICES ACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Introduction
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Parties
5. Factual Allegations
6. Reasonable-Consumer / Causation Allegations (SB 591)
7. Count I — Violations of the FDCPA
8. Count II — Violations of the Missouri MMPA
9. Damages
10. Prayer for Relief
11. Demand for Trial by Jury
12. Signature and Service Blocks
13. Missouri Practice Notes
14. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

[EASTERN / WESTERN] DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

[__________________] DIVISION

CASE NO. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (FDCPA + MISSOURI MMPA) — JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1. This is a consumer protection action arising under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., and the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act ("MMPA"), RSMo § 407.010 et seq.

2.2. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant(s), in connection with the collection of an alleged consumer debt, engaged in false, deceptive, harassing, and unfair conduct in violation of federal and Missouri law.

2.3. Plaintiff seeks actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, equitable relief, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3.1. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the FDCPA claims pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

3.2. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the Missouri MMPA claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because the state-law claims arise from the same case or controversy as the federal claims.

3.3. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in this District and/or because Defendant(s) reside or transact business here.

4. PARTIES

4.1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] is a natural person and a "consumer" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3), residing in [COUNTY] County, Missouri. Plaintiff is also a "person" within the meaning of RSMo § 407.010(5) who purchased or leased merchandise primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

4.2. Defendant [DEBT COLLECTOR ENTITY] is a [corporation/LLC] organized under the laws of [STATE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS], and is a "debt collector" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6) because it regularly collects debts owed or due another and/or its principal purpose is the collection of debts. Defendant transacts business in Missouri and engaged in "trade or commerce" within the meaning of RSMo § 407.010(7).

4.3. Defendant [INDIVIDUAL COLLECTOR] is, on information and belief, a natural person employed by or acting on behalf of [DEBT COLLECTOR ENTITY] and is personally liable as a "debt collector" under the FDCPA for the conduct alleged herein.

5. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

5.1. The alleged debt at issue (the "Debt") is a consumer debt incurred by Plaintiff primarily for personal, family, or household purposes within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5), and is connected with merchandise purchased or leased by Plaintiff for personal, family, or household use within the meaning of RSMo § 407.010 and § 407.025.

5.2. The original creditor of the Debt was [ORIGINAL CREDITOR], account number [ACCOUNT — last four digits].

5.3. On or about [DATE], Defendant(s) initiated communications with Plaintiff in connection with the collection of the Debt.

5.4. Specifically, Defendant(s) engaged in the following conduct (the "Collection Conduct"):

• [DESCRIBE — e.g., placed [number] telephone calls to Plaintiff's cell phone within [time period], including [number] calls after Plaintiff orally requested that Defendant cease calling];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., contacted Plaintiff at her place of employment after being told that her employer prohibits such calls];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., misrepresented the amount, character, or legal status of the Debt by stating [specific misrepresentation]];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., threatened legal action that Defendant did not intend to take and could not lawfully take, including threats of arrest, wage garnishment without judgment, or criminal prosecution];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., communicated with third parties (employer, family members, neighbors) regarding the Debt without Plaintiff's prior consent];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., failed to send the written validation notice required by 15 U.S.C. § 1692g within five days of the initial communication];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., continued collection activity after Plaintiff disputed the Debt in writing within the 30-day validation period and before Defendant obtained verification];
• [DESCRIBE — e.g., reported the Debt to one or more consumer reporting agencies without indicating that the Debt was disputed].

5.5. As a direct and proximate result of the Collection Conduct, Plaintiff suffered actual damages including, but not limited to: emotional distress, anxiety, embarrassment, sleep disturbance, lost time and wages, out-of-pocket costs (postage, telephone, copying), and harm to credit reputation.

5.6. Defendant(s) acted intentionally, willfully, or with reckless disregard for Plaintiff's rights under federal and Missouri law.

6. REASONABLE-CONSUMER / CAUSATION ALLEGATIONS (SB 591)

6.1. At all times relevant, Plaintiff acted as a reasonable consumer would act in light of all of the circumstances, within the meaning of RSMo § 407.025.1(2)(a).

6.2. The unlawful methods, acts, and practices in which Defendant(s) engaged, as described in Section 5, would cause a reasonable person to enter into the underlying credit or payment transaction that resulted in damages, within the meaning of RSMo § 407.025.1(2)(b).

6.3. Plaintiff's alleged damages can be calculated with a reasonable degree of certainty based on definitive and objective evidence, including (without limitation) telephone records, billing statements, credit reports, medical or counseling records evidencing emotional distress, and out-of-pocket cost receipts, within the meaning of RSMo § 407.025.1(2)(c).

6.4. Plaintiff has suffered an ascertainable loss of money or property — real or personal — as a direct result of Defendant(s)' violations of RSMo § 407.020.

7. COUNT I — VIOLATIONS OF THE FDCPA (15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.)

7.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 5.6.

7.2. Defendant(s)' Collection Conduct violated, inter alia, the following provisions of the FDCPA:

• 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)–(c) — Communications at unusual times or places, after refusal to pay, or with represented consumer;
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) — Communications with third parties without consent;
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692d — Harassing, oppressive, or abusive conduct, including repeated or continuous telephone calls;
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692e — False, deceptive, or misleading representations, including false representation of the character, amount, or legal status of the debt and threats of action that cannot legally be taken;
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692f — Unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect;
• 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a)–(b) — Failure to provide validation notice and continued collection during the dispute period.

7.3. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k, Plaintiff is entitled to actual damages, statutory damages of up to $1,000 per Plaintiff in this individual action, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

8. COUNT II — VIOLATIONS OF THE MISSOURI MERCHANDISING PRACTICES ACT (RSMo § 407.010 et seq.)

8.1. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 2.1 through 6.4.

8.2. The Collection Conduct constitutes "deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, unfair practice or the concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise in trade or commerce" prohibited by RSMo § 407.020.1.

8.3. The Collection Conduct includes, without limitation, conduct enumerated by the Missouri Attorney General's regulations as "unfair practices," including 15 CSR 60-8.020 (false representation), 15 CSR 60-8.030 (misrepresentations), 15 CSR 60-8.060 (concealment), and 15 CSR 60-8.090 (unfair practice — debt-collection abuses).

8.4. Plaintiff has satisfied the post-SB 591 elements set forth in Section 6 above.

8.5. The Collection Conduct was outrageous because of Defendant(s)' evil motive or reckless indifference to Plaintiff's rights, as required by RSMo § 510.261, satisfying the standard for an award of punitive damages by clear and convincing evidence.

8.6. Pursuant to RSMo § 407.025.1, Plaintiff is entitled to actual damages, punitive damages (subject to the cap in RSMo § 510.265), equitable injunctive relief, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

9. DAMAGES

9.1. Actual damages including emotional distress, anxiety, lost time and wages, out-of-pocket expenses, and harm to credit reputation, in an amount to be proven at trial.

9.2. Statutory damages of up to $1,000.00 under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A).

9.3. Punitive damages under RSMo § 407.025.1 and RSMo § 510.261, subject to the cap in RSMo § 510.265 (greater of $500,000 or five times the net judgment).

9.4. Equitable relief under RSMo § 407.025.1 enjoining Defendant(s) from further violations.

9.5. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3) and RSMo § 407.025.1.

10. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands:

• A. Judgment against Defendant(s), jointly and severally, for actual damages in an amount to be determined by a jury;
• B. Statutory damages of $1,000.00 per Plaintiff under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A);
• C. Punitive damages under RSMo § 407.025.1, subject to the cap in RSMo § 510.265;
• D. Equitable and injunctive relief, including an order enjoining Defendant(s) from further violations;
• E. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3) and RSMo § 407.025.1;
• F. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• G. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

11. 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(b) (or, if filed in state court, Mo. R. Civ. P. 69.01).

12. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [DATE]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Missouri Bar No. [______]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

13. MISSOURI PRACTICE NOTES

• SB 591 (2020) is the most consequential change in MMPA practice in a generation. Effective August 28, 2020, RSMo § 407.025.1(2) requires every MMPA plaintiff to plead and prove that (a) the plaintiff acted as a reasonable consumer in light of all circumstances; (b) the challenged practice would cause a reasonable person to enter into the transaction; and (c) damages are calculable with a reasonable degree of certainty based on definitive and objective evidence. The pre-2020 "unsophisticated consumer" or "ascertainable loss without reliance" theories have been substantially curtailed. Always plead Section 6 elements expressly.
• Punitive damages standard. RSMo § 510.261 requires clear and convincing evidence that the defendant intentionally harmed the plaintiff without just cause or acted with deliberate and flagrant disregard for the safety of others. Conclusory pleading is insufficient — develop and plead specific facts.
• Punitive damages cap. RSMo § 510.265 caps punitive damages at the greater of $500,000 or five times the net amount of the judgment, with narrow statutory exceptions.
• Attorney-fee limit in class actions. RSMo § 407.025.5 (post-SB 591) requires attorney-fee awards in MMPA class actions to bear a "reasonable relationship" to the amount of any monetary judgment, or, if the judgment provides equitable relief, to be based on the time reasonably expended (lodestar). The traditional "common fund / percentage" approach is constrained.
• MMPA limitations period. Five years under RSMo § 516.120(2). The FDCPA's one-year period is much shorter — calendar both deadlines independently.
• No separate state debt-collection statute. Missouri does not have a stand-alone debt-collection statute analogous to California's Rosenthal Act or New York's General Business Law § 600. Debt collectors operating in Missouri are governed principally by the FDCPA, the MMPA, and (for in-state banks and lenders) the Missouri Division of Finance regulations.
• Concurrent jurisdiction. FDCPA claims may proceed in federal or state court. Filing in U.S. District Court for the Eastern or Western District of Missouri is typical, given federal-question jurisdiction and the supplemental MMPA count. State Circuit Court is also available, though defendants may remove under 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
• Pleading specificity for fraud-based MMPA claims. Federal courts in Missouri apply Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) to MMPA fraud-style claims. Plead the who-what-when-where-how with specificity, particularly for misrepresentation theories under § 407.020.
• Class action removal. CAFA (28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)) makes class-action MMPA cases highly removable when class damages exceed $5 million. Plan accordingly when contemplating a putative class.
• MMPA class certification "reasonable consumer" element. Under post-SB 591 RSMo § 407.025.5(1), the class representative must have acted as a reasonable consumer would act in light of all of the circumstances. Plead and prove this element class-wide; defendants will use it to defeat predominance under Rule 23(b)(3).

14. 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
• RSMo § 407.010 (Definitions) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.010
• RSMo § 407.020 (Unlawful practices) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.020
• RSMo § 407.025 (Civil action — SB 591 reasonable-consumer / causation) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=407.025
• RSMo § 510.261 (Punitive damages — clear and convincing evidence) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=510.261
• RSMo § 510.265 (Punitive damages cap) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=510.265
• RSMo § 516.120 (Five-year limitations) — https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=516.120
• 15 CSR 60-8 (MO AG MMPA Unfair Practices regulations) — https://www.sos.mo.gov/cmsimages/adrules/csr/current/15csr/15c60-8.pdf
• Missouri AG Consumer Protection Division — https://ago.mo.gov/divisions/consumer/
• CFPB (debt-collection complaints) — https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/
• Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8, 10, 38 — https://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies
• Missouri Rules of Civil Procedure — https://www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=720

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Missouri must review and customize this document before filing. The 2020 SB 591 amendments to the MMPA materially changed pleading and proof requirements for any case filed on or after August 28, 2020 — verify current statutory text and case law before filing.