UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

CARL LOWE, and JACOB DUFFEE, on

behalf of themselves and others similarly

situated, Civil Action No. : l:12-cv-2009

AMENDED AIISWER TO AMENDED

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff,

-agalnstDIVERSIFIED CONSULTANTS, INC., A

Florida Corporation,

Defendant.

Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc. ("Defendant"), by and through its

attorneys, as and for its Answer to the Complaint of Plaintiffs Carl Lowe and Jarlob

Duffee (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), hereby states as follows:

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1. Defendant admits that Plaintiffs purport to bring a Complaint for violations of the

Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") and the Fair Debt Collection Practices

Act ("FDCPA"), but denies that they have a valid basis for doing so, and denies all

allegations set forth in paragraph I of the Complaint. Defendant further states tlhat

PlaintiffDufee's claims are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

2. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph2 of the Complaint.

X

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:197
3' The ategations in pangraph3 shte a legar conclusion to which no response from the Defendant is required. To the extent that aresponse is required,

Defendant denies the ategations set forth in paragraph 3 of the complaint.

4' The allegations in paragraph 4 state a regar conclusion to which no

response from the Defendant is required. To the extent that aresponse is required,

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 4 of the complaint.

PARTIES

5' Defendant is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the trurh

of the allegations set forth in paragraph 5 of the complaint. To the extent that a responsre

is required' Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 5 of the complaint.

6' Defendant is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of thre

allegations set forth in paragraph 6 of the complaint. To the extent that aresponse is

required' Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 6 of the complaint,

Defendant further states that Plaintifi Dufee's claims are preempted by the Federal

Arbihation A4 g U.S.c. g1-16.

7' Defendant admits that it is a company located at 10550 Deerwood park

Boulevard, suite 309, Jacksonville, Florida, engaged in the business of collecting debts.

Defendant further admits it is licensed with the Illinois Deparhnent of Financial and

Professional Re gulation.

F'ACTS

8' Defendant admits that it is a company engaged in the business of

collecting debts

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:198
9. Defendant admits that it is a company engaged in the business of

collecting debts, and in doing so, uses the telephone to collect some of those debts.

Defendant denies all remaining allegations set forth in paragraph 9 of the Complaint.

10. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 10 of tlhe

Complaint.

1 l. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph I I of the

Complaint.

12. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 12 of the

Complaint.

13. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 13 of rhe

Complaint.

FACTS RELATING TO PLAINTIFF'LOWE

14. Defendant is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the trr.rth

of the allegations set forth in paragraph 14 of the Complaint. To the extent that a

response is required, Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 14 of the

Complaint.

15. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 15 of the

Complaint.

16. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 16 of the

Complaint.

17. Defendant is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations set forth in paragraph 17 of the Complaint. To the extent that a respo.nse

is required, Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 17 of the Complaintt.

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:199
18.

Complaint.

19.

Complaint.

20.

Complaint.

21.

Complaint.

22.

Complaint.

23.

Complaint.

24.

Complaint.

25.

Complaint.

26.

Complaint.

27.

Complaint.

28.

Complaint.

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 18 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 19 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 20 of tlhe

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 2l of rthe

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 22 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragtaph 23 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 24 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 25 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 26 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth n paragraph 27 of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 28 of the

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:200
Defendant denies the ategations set forth in paragraph 2g o1' the

Defendant admits the or^^-.. ro the allegations selI forfh in pangraph 

'fendant firrfho. -n^.- 30 of the

Federal Arbitation Act, 9 U.S.C. {l_16.

complaint. Defendant further shtes ,0, 

o*""'rs s€t forfh in pangraph 30 of ;fht

lederar Arbitation AcL 9 rr c n or . _ 

tt Plaindf{ Dufee's claims are preempted by the

29.

Complaint.

30.

31. Defendant denies

Defendant further shtes

allegations set forth in paragraph 3l of the

Plainfifi, Dufee,s claims are preempted bv

the

that

Complaint.

the Federal

32.

Complaint

Defendant denies the allegations

Defendant further $ates that ptaintiff

set forth in paragraph 32 of the

Dufee's claims are preempted by the Federal Arbirarion Ac! 9 U.S.C. gl-16.

33' Defendant denies the alregations set forth in paragraph 33 0f the complaint Defendant fi'ther states that praintifi Dufee,s craims are preempted by the

Fedfial Arbiharion Act, 9 U.S.C. {l_16.

34- Defendant denies the ailegations set forth in paragrap h 34 of the

complaint' Defendant further states that Plaintifi Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbiuation Act, 9 U.S.C. gl-16.

35' Defendant admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 35 of the

Complaint' Defendant further states that Plaintiff Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal fubitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $l-16.

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:201
36. The allegations set forth in paragraph 36 state a legal conclusion to which

no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a response is required,

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 36 of the Complaint.

37. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 37 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

38. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 38 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $l-16.

COT]NT I

VIOLATIONS OF TIIE TCPA.47 U.S.C. 8227

On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class

39. Defendant repeats and realleges its responses to the preceding paragraphs

as if set forth at length herein.

40. The allegations set forth in paragraph 40 of the Complaint state a legal

conclusion to which no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a

response is required, Defendant responds by stating the TCPA speaks for itself.

41. The allegations set forth in paragraph 4l of the Complaint state a legal

conclusion to which no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a

response is required, Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 41 of the

Complaint.

6

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:202
42. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 42 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbihation Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

43. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 43 of the

Complaint.

44. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 44 of the

Complaint.

45. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 45 of the

Complaint.

46. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 46 of the Complaint.

Defendant frrther states that Plaintifl Dufee's claims are preempted by the Federal

Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $l-16.

47. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 47 of the

Complaint.

48. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 48 of the

Complaint.

49. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 49 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $l-16.

50. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 50 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:203
51. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 51 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintifl Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

52. Defendant admits that Plaintiffs purport to bring a Complaint on behalf of

a class but denies that they have a valid basis for doing so or that the class described

therein can be properly certified, and further denies all allegations set forth in paragraph

52 of the Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are

preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $l-16.

53. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 53 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbihation Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

54. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 54 of the

Complaint.

55. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 55 of the

Complaint, and all of its subparts. Defendant flrther states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims

are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. S1-16.

56. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 56 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

57. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 57 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbihation Act, 9 U.S.C. $1-16.

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:204
58. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 58 of the

Complaint.

59. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 59 of the

Complaint.

60. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 60 of the

Complaint. Defendant further states that Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the

Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. g1-16.

61. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 6I of the

Complaint.

COT]NT II

YIOLATIONS OF THE FDCPA.15 U.S.C. QQ1692 et seq.

On Behalf of Plaintiff. Individuallv

62. Defendant repeats and realleges its responses to the preceding paragraphs

as if set forth at length herein.

63. The allegations set forth in paragraph 63 state a legal conclusion to which

no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a response is required,

Defendant responds by stating the FDCPA speaks for itself.

64. The allegations set forth in paragraph 64 state a legal conclusion to which

no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a response is required,

Defendant responds by stating the FDCPA speaks for itself.

65. The allegations set forth in paragraph 65 state a legal conclusion to which

no response from Defendant is required. To the extent that a response is required,

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 65 except admits that is a

9

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:205
company engaged in the business of collecting debt and is licensed with the Illinois

Deparhnent of Financial and Professional Regulation.

66. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 66 of the

Complaint.

67. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 67 of the

Complaint.

68. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 68 of the

Complaint.

69. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 69 of the

Complaint.

70. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 70 of the

Complaint.

7t.

Complaint.

72.

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 7l of the

Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 72 of the

Complaint.

73. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 73 of the

Complaint.

74. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 74 of the

Complaint.

75. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 75 of the

Complaint.

10

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:206
76. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 76 of the

Complaint.

77. Defendant denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 77 of the

Complaint.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

F'IRST AF'FIRMATIVE DEF'ENSE

Plaintiffs fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

SECOND AFF'IRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendant has no civil liability under the FDCPA, as any violation vras

unintentional and resulted from a bona fide error despite the maintenance of procedures

reasonably adopted to avoid the alleged FDCPA violation(s) at issue here. l'he

procedures maintained by DCI include, but are not limited to, training of all new DICI

employees on FDCPA provisions, testing of all new DCI employees on FDCPA

provisions and routinely monitoring all DCI employees on FDCPA compliance.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiffs' claims are or may be barred by applicable Statutes of Limitations.

FOURTH AF'F'IRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiffs' claims are, or may be, barred or diminished by Defendant's right to

setoffand/or recoupment arising from defaults, deficiencies or otherwise.

F'IFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendant is not liable for any actions of its agents or employees committed

outside of the line and scope of their employment.

ll

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:207
SIXTH AF'FIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendant did not breach any legal duty to Plaintiff.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Class certification is inappropriate because individual questions of law

predominant over any issues common to the putative class members.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Class certification is inappropriate because this case involves disparate issues that

would not be manageable in a class action.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEF'ENSE

Plaintiff, Dufee's claims are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C.

81-16.

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendant reserves the right to allege and assert any additional and/or further

affrmative defenses as become apparent to Defendant during the course of this litigation.

WHEREF'ORE, Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc. demands judgment in

its favor and against Plaintiffs, dismissing the Complaint with prejudice and awarding

Defendant costs, attomeys' fees, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just

and proper.

Dated: September 7,2012

THE SALVO LAW FIRM, P.C.

By:/s/ Cindv D. Salvo

CINDY D. SALVO

12

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:208
165 Passaic Avenue, Suite 310

Fairfield, New Jersey 07004

(e73)233-4080

(973) 900-8800 (fax)

Pro hac vice Attorneys for Defendant,

Diversified Consultants, Inc.

r3

Case: 1:12-cv-02009 Document #: 39 Filed: 09/08/12 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:209