1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION 

ROSALBA SERRANO, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

USI SOLUTIONS, INC., 

 Defendant. 

CIVIL COMPLAINT 

CASE NO. 1:20-cv-00061 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

COMPLAINT 

 NOW comes ROSALBA SERRANO (“Plaintiff”), by and through her 

attorneys, Sulaiman Law Group, Ltd. (“Sulaiman”), complaining as to the conduct 

of USI SOLUTIONS, INC. (“Defendant”), as follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. Plaintiff brings this action for damages pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act (“FDCPA”) under 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq., and the Florida Consumer 

Collection Practices Act (“FCCPA”) pursuant to Florida Statutes §559.55, for 

Defendant’s unlawful conduct. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This action arises under and is brought pursuant to the FDCPA. Subject 

matter jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court by 15 U.S.C §1692, 28 U.S.C. 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 1 of 10
2 

§§1331 and 1337, as the action arises under the laws of the United States. 

Supplemental jurisdiction exists for the state law claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367. 

3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391 as Defendant 

conducts business in the Northern District of Florida a subtotal portion of the event 

that gave rise to this action occurred within the Northern District of Florida. 

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff is a consumer over 18 years-of-age and a “person,” as defined by 47 

U.S.C. §153(39). 

5. Defendant promotes itself as “a creditor’s rights firm that specializes in debt 

collection.”1 Defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of 

Delaware with its principal place of business located at 408 Mill St., Bristol, 

Pennsylvania 19007. Defendant regularly collects from consumers in the State of 

Florida. 

6. Defendant is a “person” as defined by 47 U.S.C. §153(39). 

7. Defendant acted through its agents, employees, officers, members, directors, 

heirs, successors, assigns, principals, trustees, sureties, subrogees, representatives 

and insurers at all times relevant to the instant action. 

FACTS SUPPORTING CAUSES OF ACTION

 

1 http://unitrustsolutionsinc.com/

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 2 of 10
3 

8. The instant action stems from Defendant’s attempts to collect upon a 

defaulted personal loan (“subject debt”) that Plaintiff purportedly owed to Mark One 

Financial (“Mark One”). 

9. The subject debt was incurred in order to finance the purchase of Plaintiff’s 

personal automobile. 

10. Around December 2019, Defendant began its collection campaign by 

telephonically contacting Plaintiff. 

11. Upon speaking with Plaintiff, Defendant employed harassing collection 

tactics to forcefully extract payment from Plaintiff. 

12. Plaintiff hesitated to speak with Defendant, and in response, Defendant read 

to Plaintiff her entire Social Security number and date of birth during a recorded 

telephone conversation as an intimidation tactic. 

13. Defendant also alluded that it would pursue a collection lawsuit as it referred 

to its collection efforts as a “claim” it had against Plaintiff. 

14. Moreover, Defendant stated that Plaintiff incurred the subject debt on 

November 25, 2019 and that the debt was reported on Plaintiff’s credit reports on 

July 24, 2013. 

15. Defendant’s inconsistent statements referenced in paragraph 14 are 

individually false. 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 3 of 10
4 

16. Plaintiff informed Defendant of her advanced age and of the negative effects 

its oppressive collection attempts had on Plaintiff. 

17. In response, Defendant berated and mocked Plaintiff for not making a 

payment towards the subject debt. 

18. On at least one occasion, Defendant failed to disclose itself as a debt collector 

upon contacting Plaintiff. 

19. Frustrated over Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiff spoke with Sulaiman 

regarding her rights, resulting in expenses. 

20. Plaintiff has been unfairly and unnecessarily harassed by Defendant's actions. 

21. Plaintiff has suffered concrete harm as a result of Defendant’s actions, 

including but not limited to, invasion of privacy, and aggravation. 

COUNT I – VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT

22.Plaintiff repeats and realleges paragraphs 1 through 21 as though full set forth 

herein. 

23.Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by 15 U.S.C. §1692a(3) of the FDCPA. 

24.Defendant is a “debt collector” as defined by §1692a(6) of the FDCPA, 

because it regularly use the mail and/or the telephone to collect, or attempt to collect, 

delinquent consumer accounts. 

25.Defendant identifies itself as a debt collector, and is engaged in the business 

of collecting or attempting to collect, directly or indirectly, defaulted debts owed or 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 4 of 10
5 

due or asserted to be owed or due to others. Defendant has been a member of the 

Association of Credit and Collection Professionals, and association of debt 

collectors, since 2014.2

 

26.The subject consumer debt is a “debt” as defined by FDCPA §1692a(5) as it 

arises out of a transaction due or asserted to be owed or due to another for personal, 

family, or household purposes. 

a. Violations of FDCPA §1692d 

27.The FDCPA, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692d, prohibits a debt collector from 

engaging “in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or 

abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt.” §1692d(2) forbids 

“[t]the use of obscene language or language the natural consequence of which is to 

abuse the hearer or reader.” 

28.Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §1692d and d(2) when it used harassing debt 

collection methods to collect upon the subject debt. The harassing nature of 

Defendant’s collection campaign is highlighted by its unprofessional conduct after 

Plaintiff communicated to Defendant of the negative effects its harassing collection 

campaign was having on an elderly person such as Plaintiff. Moreover, Defendant 

harassed and abused Plaintiff by mocking her for failing to make a payment towards 

the subject debt. Defendant also harassed Plaintiff when it attempted to intimidate 

 

2

 https://www.acainternational.org/search#memberdirectory 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 5 of 10
6 

her by reading to Plaintiff her entire Social Security number and date of birth during 

a recorded conversation. 

a. Violations of FDCPA § 1692e 

29.The FDCPA, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692e, prohibits a debt collector from 

using “any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection 

with the collection of any debt.” 

30.In addition, this section enumerates specific violations, such as: 

“The false representation of – the character, amount, or legal 

status of any debt . . . .” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2); 

“The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that 

is not intended to be taken.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5); 

“The use of any false representation or deceptive means to 

collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information 

concerning a consumer.” 15 U.S.C. §1692e(10); and 

“The failure to disclose in the initial written communication 

with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication 

with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that 

the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any 

information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the 

failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the 

communication is from a debt collector, except that this 

paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in 

connection with a legal action.” 15 U.S.C. §1692e(11). 

31.Defendant violated §1692e, e(2), and e(10) when it used deceptive means to 

collect and/or attempt to collect the subject debt. Specifically, it was deceptive for 

Defendant to misrepresent the date the subject debt was incurred and the date when 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 6 of 10
7 

the subject debt was allegedly reported on Plaintiff’s credit reports. Defendant’s 

actions only served to worry and confuse Plaintiff. 

32.Defendant also violated §1692e, e(2), e(5), and e(10) when it issued deceptive 

threats to collect and/or attempt to collect the subject debt. It was deceptive for 

Defendant to threaten to pursue a lawsuit against Plaintiff without the intent to 

follow through. Defendant’s lack of intent to pursue a lawsuit against Plaintiff is 

highlighted by the fact that it referred to its collection attempts as a “claim” against 

Plaintiff. From its actions, it was Defendant’s goal to collect upon the subject debt 

outside of the judicial process. 

33.Defendant further violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, e(10), and e(11) through its 

failure to disclose itself as a debt collector. By failing to disclose itself as a debt 

collector, Defendant deceptively and misleadingly attempted to obscure Plaintiff’s 

rights under the FDCPA. Consequently, Defendant’s objective was to obfuscate its 

status as a debt collector in order to prevent Plaintiff from enforcing her rights. 

b. Violations of FDCPA § 1692f 

34.The FDCPA, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692f, prohibits a debt collector from 

using “unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.” 

35.Defendant violated §1692f when it unfairly and unconscionably attempted to 

collect on a debt by threatening to sue Plaintiff to collect upon the subject debt 

without the intent to follow through. Any reasonable fact finder will conclude that 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 7 of 10
8 

Defendant’s threats are unfair and unconscionable as they are designed to instill and 

under sense of urgency within consumers to make a payment. 

36.Defendant further violated §1692f when it unfairly and unconscionably 

attempted to collect on a debt by concealing its status as a debt collector. Failing to 

disclose itself as a debt collector is an unfair and unconscionable act intended to 

confuse Plaintiff regarding the status and identity of the debt collector and 

unlawfully designed shield itself from any potential retaliation. 

37.As pled in paragraphs 19 through 21, Plaintiff has been harmed and suffered 

damages as a result of Defendant’s illegal actions. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, ROSALBA SERRANO, respectfully requests that this 

Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor as follows: 

a. Declaring that the practices complained of herein are unlawful and violate 

the aforementioned bodies of law; 

b. Awarding Plaintiff statutory damages of $1,000.00 as provided under 15 

U.S.C. §1692k(a)(2)(A); 

c. Awarding Plaintiff actual damages, in an amount to be determined at trial, as 

provided under 15 U.S.C. §1692k(a)(1); 

d. Awarding Plaintiff costs and reasonable attorney fees as provided under 15 

U.S.C. §1692k(a)(3); 

e. Enjoining Defendant from further contacting Plaintiff seeking payment of 

the subject debt; and 

f. Awarding any other relief as this Honorable Court deems just and 

appropriate. 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 8 of 10
9 

COUNT II – VIOLATIONS OF THE FLORIDA CONSUMER COLLECTION 

PRACTICES ACT

38.Plaintiff restates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 21 as though fully set 

forth herein. 

39.Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by Florida Statutes §559.55(8). 

40.Defendant is a “debt collector” as defined by Florida Statutes §559.55(7). 

41.The subject debt is a “consumer debt” as defined under Florida Statute § 

559.55(6). 

a. Violations of FCCPA § 559.72(8) 

42.A person violates section 559.72(8) of the FCCPA when it uses profane, 

obscene, vulgar, or willfully abusive language in communicating with the debtor or 

any member of her or his family. 

43.Defendant violated section 559.72(8) of the FCCPA when it willfully used 

abusive language as it attempted to collect from Plaintiff. Defendant’s mockery and 

ridicule of Plaintiff was specifically designed to oppress her into immediately 

making a payment. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, ROSALBA SERRANO, respectfully requests that this 

Honorable Court enter judgment in her favor as follows: 

a. Enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant; 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 9 of 10
10 

b. Award Plaintiff her actual damages in an amount to be determined at trial 

pursuant to the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. 

§559.77; 

c. Award Plaintiff statutory damages of $1,000.00 pursuant to the Florida 

Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §559.77; 

d. Award Plaintiff and equitable relief, including enjoining Defendant from 

further violations, pursuant to Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, 

Fla. Stat. §559.77(2); 

e. Award Plaintiff costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Florida 

Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §559.77; 

f. Enjoining Defendant from further contacting Plaintiff seeking payment of 

the subject debt; and 

g. Award any other relief this Honorable Court deems equitable and just. 

Dated: March 12, 2020 Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ Alejandro E. Figueroa 

 Alejandro E. Figueroa, Esq. 

 Counsel for Plaintiff 

 Sulaiman Law Group, Ltd 

 2500 S Highland Ave, Ste. 200 

 Lombard, IL 60148 

 Telephone: (630) 575-8181 

 alejandrof@sulaimanlaw.com 

Case 1:20-cv-00061-MW-GRJ Document 1 Filed 03/12/20 Page 10 of 10