IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

Charlotte Aguilar, )

)

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) No. 12 C 1655

)

Capital Management Services, LP, a )

Delaware limited partnership, )

)

Defendant. ) Jury Demanded

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Charlotte Aguilar, brings this action under the Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. ("FDCPA"), for a finding that Defendant’s debt 

collection actions violated the FDCPA, and to recover damages for Defendant’s 

violations of the FDCPA, and alleges:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to § 1692k(d) of the FDCPA, and 28 

U.S.C. § 1331.

2. Venue is proper in this District because: a) part of the acts and 

transactions occurred here; and, b) Defendant resides and transacts business here.

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff, Charlotte Aguilar (“Aguilar"), is a citizen of the State of Texas,

from whom Defendant attempted to collect a delinquent consumer debt owed for a 

Discover credit card, despite the fact that she was represented by the legal aid 

attorneys at the Chicago Legal Clinic's Legal Advocates for Seniors and People with 

Disabilities program ("LASPD"), located in Chicago, Illinois.

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1
2

4. Defendant, Capital Management Services, LP (“CMS”), is a Delaware

limited partnership that acts as a debt collector, as defined by § 1692a of the FDCPA, 

because it regularly uses the mails and/or the telephone to collect, or attempt to collect, 

delinquent consumer debts. Defendant CMS operates a nationwide debt collection 

business and attempts to collect debts from consumers in virtually every state, including 

consumers in the State of Illinois. In fact, Defendant CMS was acting as a debt 

collector, as that term is defined in the FDCPA, as to the delinquent consumer debts it 

attempted to collect from Plaintiffs.

5. Defendant CMS is authorized to conduct business in the State of Illinois, 

and maintains a registered agent within the State of Illinois. See, record from the Illinois 

Secretary of State, attached as Exhibit A. In fact, Defendant CMS conducts extensive 

business in Illinois.

6. Moreover, Defendant CMS is licensed as a debt collection agency in the 

State of Illinois, see, record from the Illinois Division of Professional Regulation, 

attached as Exhibit B. In fact, Defendant CMS acts as a collection agency in Illinois.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Ms. Aguilar is the care giver to her disabled husband, and because of her 

family’s limited assets and income she fell behind on paying her bills, including her 

Discover credit card. When CMS began trying to collect the Discover debt from Ms. 

Aguilar, by sending her collection letters dated November 6, 2011 and November 26, 

2011, she sought the assistance of the legal aid attorneys at the Chicago Legal Clinic’s 

LASPD program, regarding her financial difficulties and Defendant CMS’s collection 

actions. Copies of Defendant CMS’s collection letters are attached as Group Exhibit C.

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2
3

8. Accordingly, on February 8, 2012, one of Ms. Aguilar's attorneys at 

LASPD informed CMS, in writing, that Ms. Aguilar was represented by counsel, and 

directed CMS to cease contacting her, and to cease all further collection activities 

because Ms. Aguilar was forced, by her financial circumstances, to refuse to pay her

unsecured debts. Copies of this letter and fax confirmation are attached as Exhibit D. 

9. Nonetheless, Defendant CMS continued to contact Ms. Aguilar directly in 

an attempt to collect the Discover credit debt from her, including, but not limited to, 

telephone calls on February 10, 2012 and February 13, 2012 from telephone number 

800-297-9940.

10. Accordingly, on February 13, 2012, one of Ms. Aguilar’s LASPD attorneys 

had to write to Defendant CMS again to demand that it cease communications and 

cease collection of the Discover debt. Copies of this letter and fax confirmation are

attached as Exhibit E.

11. Undeterred, Defendant CMS kept calling Ms. Aguilar, including, but not 

limited to, telephone calls on February 16, 25 and 28, 2012, from telephone number 

800-297-9940.

12. Defendant CMS’s collection actions complained of herein occurred within 

one year of the date of this Complaint. 

13. Defendant CMS’s collection communications are to be interpreted under 

the “unsophisticated consumer” standard. See, Gammon v. GC Services, Ltd. 

Partnership, 27 F.3d 1254, 1257 (7th Cir. 1994).

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3
4

COUNT I

Violation Of § 1692c(c) Of The FDCPA --

Failure To Cease Communications And Cease Collections

14. Plaintiff adopts and realleges ¶¶ 1-13.

15. Section 1692c(c) of the FDCPA prohibits a debt collector from 

communicating with a consumer after a direction to cease communications, and from 

continuing to demand payment of a debt that the consumer has indicated that they 

refuse to pay. See, 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c).

16. Here, the letters (Exhibit D and E) from Ms. Aguilar's, agent/attorney, 

LASPD, told Defendant CMS to cease communications and cease collections. By 

continuing to communicate regarding this debt and demanding payment, Defendant

CMS violated § 1692c(c) of the FDCPA.

17. Defendant CMS’s violations of § 1692c(c) of the FDCPA render it liable for 

actual and statutory damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees. See, 15 U.S.C. § 

1692k.

COUNT II

Violation Of § 1692c(a)(2) Of The FDCPA --

Communicating With A Consumer Represented By Counsel

18. Plaintiff adopts and realleges ¶¶ 1-13.

19. Section 1692c(a)(2) of the FDCPA prohibits a debt collector from 

communicating with a consumer if the debt collector knows the consumer is 

represented by an attorney with respect to such debts and has knowledge of, or can 

readily ascertain, such attorney’s name and address. See, 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2). 

20. Defendant CMS knew that Ms. Aguilar was represented by counsel in 

connection with her debts because her attorneys at LASPD had informed Defendant, in 

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4
5

writing (Exhibits D and E), that she was represented by counsel, and had directed 

Defendant CMS to cease directly communicating with her. By directly calling Ms. 

Aguilar, despite being advised that she was represented by counsel, Defendant CMS

violated § 1692c (a)(2) of the FDCPA.

21. Defendant CMS’s violations of § 1692c(a)(2) of the FDCPA render it liable 

for actual and statutory damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees. See, 15 

U.S.C. § 1692k.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff, Charlotte Aguilar, prays that this Court:

1. Find that Defendant CMS’s debt collection actions violated the FDCPA;

2. Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Aguilar, and against Defendant CMS, 

for actual and statutory damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees as provided by

§ 1692k(a) of the FDCPA; and,

3. Grant such further relief as deemed just.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff, Charlotte Aguilar, demands trial by jury.

Charlotte Aguilar,

By: /s/ David J. Philipps________

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Dated: March 7, 2012

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5
6

David J. Philipps (Ill. Bar No. 06196285)

Mary E. Philipps (Ill. Bar No. 06197113)

Philipps & Philipps, Ltd.

9760 S. Roberts Road

Suite One

Palos Hills, Illinois 60465

(708) 974-2900

(708) 974-2907 (FAX)

davephilipps@aol.com

mephilipps@aol.com

Case: 1:12-cv-01655 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/07/12 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6