IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DFV^ISION

BRUCE O. SCARBROUGH,

Hon.

Plaintiff, Case No.

V.

MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC.

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC.

Defendant.

LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN P. PARKER, PC

Brian P. Parker (P48617)

Attorney for Plaintiff

2000 Town Center, #1900

Southfield MI 48075

Tel: (248) 642-6268

Fax: (248) 659-1733

brianparker@collectionstopper.com

www.collectionstopper.coni

/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY

NOW COMES Plaintiff, BRUCE O. SCARBROUGH, by and through counsel, The

Law Offices ofBrian Parker, PC, brings this action against the above listed Defendant,

MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, and MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT on the grounds set

forth herein:

L PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Plaintiffbrings this action for damages based upon the Defendant's violations of the Fair

Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. 1692 etseq. and Regulation of Collection

Practices Act ("RCPA"), M.C.L. § 445.251 etseq.

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.1 Page 1 of 9
IL PARTIES

1.

The Plaintiff, BRUCE SCARBROUGH is a natural person and consumer and a resident

ofClare County, State ofMichigan as defined by 15 U.S.C. 1692a, and a "consumer" as defined

by the FDCPA.

2.

The Defendant, MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, is a debt collector and servicer of

consumer debts, and a California corporation with its resident agent location in East Lansing,

Ingham County, State of Michigan.

3.

The Defendant, MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, is a debt collector and servicer

of consumer debts, and a California corporation with its resident agent location in East Lansing,

Ingham County, and State of Michigan.

m. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4.

This court hasjurisdiction over this Complaint pursuant to the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. Sec.

1692k(d), 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1331 and 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1367. Venue in this judicial district is proper

because the pertinent events took place here at Plaintiffs home through letters, phone calls and

lawsuit.

IV. STATUTORY STRUCTURE

FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT (FDCPA)

5.

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.2 Page 2 of 9
The FDCPA is a strict hability statute, which provides for actual or statutory damages

upon the showing ofone violation. Whether a debt collector's actions are false, deceptive, or

misleading under § 1692(a)-g is based on whether the "least sophisticated consumer" would be

misled by a defendant's actions. Harvey v. Great Seneca Fin. Corp., 453 F.3d 324, 329 (6th Cir.

2006).). This standard ensures "that the FDCPA protects all consumers, the gullible as well as

the shrewd." Kistner v. Law Offices ofMichael P. Margelefshy, LLC., 518 F.3d 433,438 (6th

Cir).

6.

Under the FDCPA, a consumer is any natural person obHgated or allegedly obligated to

pay any debt. 15U.S.C. 1692a(3).

7.

Under the FDCPA, debt means any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to pay

money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are

the subject ofthe transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. 15

U.S.C. 1692a(5).

8.

Under the FDCPA, "debt collector" is any person who uses any instrumentality of

interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose for which is the collection

of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or

due or asserted to be owed or due to another. 15 U.S.C. 1692a(6).

9.

Defendants are debt collectors because at the time they received the debt and servicing

rights ofthe debt, it was in default. 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1692a(6)(F)(iii).

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.3 Page 3 of 9
10.

A debt collector may not violate the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692f by using unfair or

unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.

11.

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

in connection with the collection of any debt 15 U.S.C. 1692e.

12.

Any debt collector who fails to comply with the provisions ofthe FDCPA is liable for

any actual damages sustained, statutory damages up to $1,000.00, attorney's fees as determined

by the Court and costs ofthis action. 15 U.S.C. 1692k.

MICHIGAN COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT (RCPA)

13.

The Michigan Collection Practices Act (RCPA), MCL 445.251 et seq. is an act to regulate

the collection practices of certain persons; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state

agencies; and to provide penalties and civil fines.

14.

"Claim" or "debt" means an obligation or alleged obligation for the payment ofmoney or

thing ofvalue arising out of an expressed or implied agreement or contract for a purchase made

primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

15.

"Collection agency" means a person directly or indirectly engaged in soliciting a claim for

collection or collecting or attempting to collect a claim owed or due or asserted to be owed or due

another, or repossessing or attempting to repossess a thing of value owed or due or asserted to be

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.4 Page 4 of 9
owed or due another person, arising out of an expressedor imphed agreement. Collectionagency

includes a person representing himselfor herselfas a collection or repossession agency or a person

performing the activities ofa collection agency, on behalfofanother, which activities areregulated

by Act No. 299 ofthe Public Acts of 1980, as amended, being sections 339.101 to 339.2601 ofthe

Michigan Compiled Laws. Collection agency includes a person who furnishes or attempts to

furnish a form or a written demand service represented to be a collection or repossessiontechnique,

device, or system to be used to collect or repossess claims, if the form contains the name of a

person other than the creditor in a manner indicating that a request or demand for payment is being

made by a person other than the creditor even though the form directs the debtor to make payment

directly to the creditor rather than to the other person whose name appears on the form. Collection

agency includes a person who uses a fictitious name or the name of another in the collection or

repossession of claims to convey to the debtor that a third person is collecting or repossessing or

has been employed to collect or repossess the claim.

16.

"Communicate" means the conveying ofinformation regarding a debt directly or

indirectly to a person through any medium.

17.

"Consumer" or "debtor" means a natural person obligated or allegedly obligated to pay a

debt.

18,

"Person" means an individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, or

corporation.

19.

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.5 Page 5 of 9
"The RCPA mirrors the requirements and remedies ofthe FDCPA with the same 6*^*

Circuit use ofthe "least sophisticated consumer" standard oiKistner v The Law Offices of

Michael P. Margelefsky, 518 F.3d at 441. McKeown v. Mary Jane M. Elliott P. C., No. 07-

12016-BC, 2007 WL4326825, at *5 (E.D.Mich. Dec. 10, 2007) {cWmg Hubbard v. Nat'l Bond

and Collection Assocs., Inc., 126 B.R. 422, 426 (D.Del. 1991)).

V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

20.

As a result ofIdentity Theft, Plaintiffwas sued by an attorney collection firm on behalf

ofMidland Funding, LLC which owned a Bank ofAmerica debt for approximately $5900 that

Plaintiffnever signed for or owed to Bank ofAmerica.

21.

Plaintifflitigated the case with the law firm and Defendant Midland Funding and the

court in the case dismissed the case against Plaintiffwithout prejudice. Please See Exhibit 1.

22.

Prior to the litigation and after the case was dismissed, Defendant Midland kept putting

the debt on Plaintiffs credit reports even though Midland Funding was aware Plaintiffhad

infomed them that "This is not my account, the OC account was made by an ID Thief, Please

validate this account." Please see Exiiibit 2. Neither Defendant has validated the debt showing

Mr. Scarbrough owed on the debt to Defendants or Bank ofAmerica.

23.

Defendant Midland Credit Management was also pulling Mr. Scarbrough's credit reports

even though Plaintiff does not owe the debt. Please see Exhibit 3.

24.

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.6 Page 6 of 9
Plaintiff eventually got the negative credit trade lines removed from his credit reports.

However, now Mr. Scarbrough is receiving debt collection attempts from Defendant Midland

Credit Management, Inc. for $10,276.50 masked as Defendant's attempt to fix the identity theft

even though the debts have been removed from Plaintiffs credit reports again. Please see

Exhibit 4

25.

Defendants are contacting Plaintiff again and because the first lawsuit against him was

dismissed without prejudice, this new round of collection attempts has Plaintifffearful that he

will be sued again and his credit report will be negatively impacted all over again.

26.

As a result ofDefendants' wrongfril conduct. Plaintiff has suffered statutory, actual,

emotional and financial damages and also seeks his attorney fees and costs under the FDCPA

andMCPA.

VI. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

Count 1-Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

27.

Defendant violated the FDCPA. Defendant's violations ofthe FDCPA include, but are not

necessarily limited to, the following:

a. Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. (10) with the use of any false representation or deceptive

means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a

consumer without following the FDCPA (Paragraph 20-25); and

b. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. 1692d by engaging in conduct the natural consequence of

which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.7 Page 7 of 9
as statedabovewith the lawsuitand subsequentcollectionattempts (Paragraph 20-25); and

c. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. 1692e(5) for suing Mr. Scarbrough on a debt he does not

owe to Defendants or Bank ofAmerica (Paragraph 20-21); and

d. Defendant violated 15U.S.C. 1692e(8)by communicating to any person credit information

which is known or which should be known to be false regarding the amount owed and that

Mr. Scarbrough owes the debt ((Paragraph 22-24); and

e. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. 1692f(l) seeking to collect interest and charges on the

subject debt not expressly authorized by the original credit card agreement (Paragraph 20

and Paragraph 24).

WHEREFORE, plaintiffseeks judgment against Defendants for:

a. Statutory damages for Plaintiff in the amount of $1,000.00 pursuant to 15 U.S.C.

1692k(a)(2)(A) and (B);

b. Actual damages;

c. Costs and reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692k(a)(3); and;

d. Such further relief as the court deems just and proper.

Count 2- Michigan Collection Practices Act

28.

Plaintiffincorporates the foregoing paragraphs by reference.

29.

Defendants have violated the MCPA. Specifically:

a. Defendants violated M.C.L. § 445.252(e) by making an inaccurate, misleading, untrue, or

deceptive statement or claim in a communication to collect a debt;

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.8 Page 8 of 9
b. Defendants violated M.C.L. § 445.252(f) by misrepresenting in a communication with a

debtor the following: (i) the legal status of a legal action being taken or threatened, and (ii) the

legal rights of a creditor or debtor; and

c. Defendants violated M.C.L. § 445.252(q) by failing to implement a procedure designed to

prevent a violation by an employee.

Wherefore, plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, requests

that the Plaintiffis entitled to:

a. Statutory damages, Actual Damages, trebled, for plaintiffpursuant to M.C.L. § 445.257;

and

b. Reasonable attorney's fees and court costs pursuant to M.C.L. § 445.257.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffprays that the Court grants the following relief against the

Defendants:

1. For compensatory damages;

2. For statutory damages under the FDCPA and RCPA;

3. For attorney's fees and costs incurred in this action under the FDCPA and RCPA;

4. For Actual Damages under the FDCPA and RCPA, and

5. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a Trial by Jury on all issues.

Dated: February 18, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Brian P. Parker

BRL^.NP. PARKER (P48617)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 1:15-cv-10624-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.9 Page 9 of 9