1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MARILYN STARKS, )

on behalf of plaintiff and the )

class members described below, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

ALLSTATE CHECK SERVICES, LLC , )

d/b/a ALLSTATE CHECK RECOVERY, )

)

Defendant. )

COMPLAINT – CLASS ACTION

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff Marilyn Starks brings this action to secure redress from unlawful

credit and collection practices engaged in by defendant Allstate Check Services, LLC.

2. Plaintiff alleges violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15

U.S.C. §1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”), the Illinois Collection Agency Act, 225 ILCS 425/1 et seq.

(“ICAA”), and the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, 815 ILCS 505/2 (“ICFA”).

3. The FDCPA broadly prohibits unfair or unconscionable collection

methods; conduct which harasses, oppresses or abuses any debtor; and any false, deceptive or

misleading statements, in connection with the collection of a debt; it also requires debt collectors

to give debtors certain information. 15 U.S.C. §§1692d, 1692e, 1692f and 1692g. 

4. The ICAA reflects a determination that “The practice as a collection

agency by any entity in the State of Illinois is hereby declared to affect the public health, safety

and welfare and to be subject to regulation and control in the public interest. It is further declared

to be a matter of public interest and concern that the collection agency profession merit and

receive the confidence of the public and that only qualified entities be permitted to practice as a

collection agency in the State of Illinois. This Act shall be liberally construed to carry out these

objects and purposes. . . . It is further declared to be the public policy of this State to protect

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1
2

consumers against debt collection abuse.” 225 ILCS 425/1a.

5. The ICFA prohibits unfair and deceptive practices in connection with the

conduct of trade and commerce with Illinois residents.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. This Court has jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. §1692k (FDCPA), 28 U.S.C.

§1331, 28 U.S.C. §1337 and 28 U.S.C. §1367.

7. Venue and personal jurisdiction in this District are proper because:

a. Defendant’s collection communications were received by plaintiff

within this District;

b. Defendant does or transacts business within this District.

PARTIES

8. Plaintiff is a resident of the Northern District of Illinois. 

9. Defendant Allstate Check Services, LLC is a limited liability company 

chartered under the law of South Carolina. Its registered agent and office is Angel Lopez, 1750

Highway 160 West, #320, Fort Mill, SC 29708. It does business as Allstate Check Recovery.

10. Defendant operates a collection agency, using the mails and interstate wire

communications to collect consumer debts allegedly owed to others.

11. Defendant is a debt collector as defined by the FDCPA.

FACTS

12. Defendant has been attempting to collect from plaintiff an alleged payday

loan debt incurred for personal, family or household purposes.

13. In order to collect such debts, defendant has sent to plaintiff during 2011

the e-mail correspondence attached as Exhibits A and B.

14. On information and belief, defendant is attempting to collect a highinterest loan allegedly obtained by plaintiff over the Internet for personal, family or household

purposes.

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:2
3

15. On information and belief, defendant obtained one or more portfolios of

payday or high-interest loans to collect.

16. On information and belief, Cash Advance Network made highinterest loans over the Internet to Illinois residents.

17. On information and belief, Cash Advance Network sought out 

Illinois residents for such loans.

18. On information and belief, Cash Advance Network was never 

licensed to make loans by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

19. All loans made by the lender were made at an annual percentage rate

exceeding the 9% that a non-bank lender that does not have a license from the Illinois

Department of Financial and Professional Regulation may charge for a loan made to an Illinois

resident.

20. All such loans were unlawful and unenforceable.

21. Defendant knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that the loans it was

attempting to collect were unenforceable.

22. The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation has

posted notices on its Web site concerning the making of payday and high-interest loans to

Illinois residents by unlicensed lenders located in other states and foreign countries, along with

at least one order finding that such unlicensed loans were unlawful (See Exhibits C-F).

COUNT I – FDCPA – CLASS CLAIM

23. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-22.

24. Allstate Check Services, LLC violated 15 U.S.C. §§1692e, 1692e(2), 

1692e(5), 1692e(10), 1692f and 1692f(1) by:

a. Attempting to collect illegal payday loans; 

b. Falsely representing such loans to be legally enforceable debts. 

25. Section 1692e provides:

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:3
4

§ 1692e. False or misleading representations [Section 807 of

P.L.] 

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading

representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 

Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following

conduct is a violation of this section: . . .

(2) The false representation of-- (A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; . . . 

(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or

that is not intended to be taken. . . .

(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to

collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information

concerning a consumer. . . .

 26. Section 1692f provides:

§ 1692f. Unfair practices [Section 808 of P.L.] 

A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to

collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general

application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this

section:

(1) The collection of any amount (including any interest, fee,

charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation) unless such

amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or

permitted by law. . . .

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

27. Plaintiff brings this claim on behalf of a class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.

23(a) and 23(b)(3). 

28. The class consists of (a) all individuals with Illinois addresses (b) from

whom defendant sought to collect a loan made at more than 9% interest (c) made by an entity

which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by the Illinois Department of

Financial and Professional Regulation (d) where any communication occurred on or after a date

one year prior to the filing of this action.

29. The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is not practicable.

30. On information and belief, there are at least 40 individuals with Illinois

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:4
5

addresses from whom defendant sought to collect a loan made at more than 9% interest by an

entity which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by the Illinois Department of

Financial and Professional Regulation, where any communication occurred on or after a date one

year prior to the filing of this action.

31. There are questions of law and fact common to the class members, which

common questions predominate over any questions relating to individual class members. The

predominant common questions are whether defendant engages in a practice of attempting to

collect illegal debts.

32. Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class members. All are

based on the same factual and legal theories.

33. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the class members. Plaintiff

has retained counsel experienced in class actions and FDCPA litigation.

34. A class action is superior for the fair and efficient adjudication of this

matter, in that:

a. Individual actions are not economically feasible;

b. Members of the class are likely to be unaware of their rights;

c. Congress intended class actions to be the principal enforcement

mechanism under the FDCPA.

WHEREFORE, the Court should enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and the class

and against defendant for:

(1) Statutory damages;

(2) Actual damages including all amounts collected by

defendant from members of the class;

(3) Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit;

(4) Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.

(5)

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:5
6

COUNT II – ILLINOIS COLLECTION AGENCY ACT – CLASS CLAIM

35. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-22.

36. Defendant is a “collection agency” as defined in the ICAA, 225 ILCS

425/1 et seq. 

37. Defendant violated the following provisions of 225 ILCS 425/9:

. . . (20) Attempting or threatening to enforce a right or remedy with

knowledge or reason to know that the right or remedy does not exist. . . . 

(26) Misrepresenting the amount of the claim or debt alleged to be owed. . . . 

38. A private right of action exists for violation of the ICAA. Sherman v.

Field Clinic, 74 Ill. App. 3d 21, 392 N.E.2d 154 (1st Dist. 1979).

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

39. Plaintiff brings this claim on behalf of a class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.

23(a) and 23(b)(3). 

40. The class consists of (a) all individuals with Illinois addresses (b) from

whom defendant sought to collect a loan made at more than 9% interest (c) made by an entity

which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by the Illinois Department of

Financial and Professional Regulation (d) where any communication occurred on or after a date

5 years prior to the filing of this action.

41. The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is not practicable.

42. On information and belief, there are at least 40 individuals with Illinois

addresses from whom defendant sought to collect a loan made at more than 9% interest by an

entity which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by the Illinois Department of

Financial and Professional Regulation, where any communication occurred on or after a date 5 

years prior to the filing of this action.

43. There are questions of law and fact common to the class members, which

common questions predominate over any questions relating to individual class members. The

predominant common question is whether defendant engages in a practice of attempting to

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:6
7

collect illegal debts.

44. Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class members. All are

based on the same factual and legal theories.

45. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the class members. Plaintiff

has retained counsel experienced in class actions and consumer credit litigation.

46. A class action is superior for the fair and efficient adjudication of this

matter, in that:

a. Individual actions are not economically feasible;

b. Members of the class are likely to be unaware of their rights.

WHEREFORE, the Court should enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and the class

and against defendant for:

(1) Actual damages including all amounts collected by

defendant from members of the class;

(2) Nominal damages;

(3) Punitive damages;

(4) Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit;

(5) Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.

COUNT III – CONSUMER FRAUD ACT – CLASS CLAIM

47. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-22.

48. Defendant engaged in both unfair and deceptive acts and practices, in

violation of §2 of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, 815 ILCS 505/2, by:

a. Attempting to collect illegal payday loans;

b. Falsely representing such loans to be legally enforceable debts. 

49. Defendant engaged in such conduct in the course of trade and commerce.

50. Defendant knowingly or recklessly disregarded the unlawful nature of the

debts it sought to collect.

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:7
8

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

51. Plaintiff brings this claim on behalf of a class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.

23(a) and 23(b)(2). 

52. The class consists of (a) all individuals with Illinois addresses (b) from

whom defendant has sought or will in the future seek to collect a loan made at more than 9%

interest (c) made by an entity which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by the

Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

53. The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is not practicable.

54. On information and belief, there are at least 40 individuals with Illinois

addresses from whom defendant has sought or will in the future seek to collect a loan made at

more than 9% interest by an entity which did not possess a bank charter and was not licensed by

the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

55. Defendant has acted on a uniform basis with respect to plaintiff and the

entire class, by attempting to collect loans which plaintiff and the class contend are unlawful.

56. Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class members. All are

based on the same factual and legal theories.

57. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the class members. Plaintiff

has retained counsel experienced in class actions and consumer credit litigation.

WHEREFORE, the Court should enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and the class

and against defendant for:

(1) An injunction restraining defendant from receiving or

attempting to collect money on account of loans made by

unlicensed lenders to Illinois residents;

(2) Disgorgement of all amounts collected by defendant from

members of the class;

(3) Nominal and punitive damages;

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:8
9

(4) Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit;

(5) Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.

s/Daniel A. Edelman

Daniel A. Edelman

Daniel A. Edelman

Cathleen M. Combs

James O. Latturner

Zachary A. Jacobs

EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER

& GOODWIN, L.L.C.

120 S. LaSalle Street, 18th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 739-4200

(312) 419-0379 (FAX)

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:9
10

NOTICE OF LIEN AND ASSIGNMENT

Please be advised that we claim a lien upon any recovery herein for 1/3 or such

amount as a court awards. All rights relating to attorney’s fees have been assigned to counsel.

s/Daniel A. Edelman

Daniel A. Edelman

Daniel A. Edelman

Cathleen M. Combs

James O. Latturner

Zachary A. Jacobs

EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER

& GOODWIN, LLC

120 S. LaSalle Street, 18th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 739-4200

(312) 419-0379 (FAX)

Case: 1:11-cv-07971 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/09/11 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:10