Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

DETROIT OFFICE

GREGORY HERMAN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) 

v. )

) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NATIONWIDE CREDIT SERVICES )

D/B/A NCS, )

)

Defendant. )

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES the plaintiff, GREGORY HERMAN, by and through his attorneys, 

SMITHMARCO, P.C., and for his Complaint against the defendant, NATIONWIDE CREDIT 

SERVICES d/b/a NCS, the plaintiff states as follows:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. This is an action for actual and statutory damages for violations of the Fair Debt 

Collection Practices Act (hereinafter “FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §1692, et seq.

II. JURISDICTION & VENUE

2. Jurisdiction arises under the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq., and pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §1331 and 28 U.S.C. §1337.

3. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b).

III. PARTIES

4. GREGORY HERMAN, (hereinafter, “Plaintiff”) is an individual who was at all 

relevant times residing in the City of Canton, County of Wayne, State of Michigan.

5. The debt that Plaintiff was allegedly obligated to pay was a debt allegedly owed 

by Plaintiff to Advance Cash Services (hereinafter, “the Debt”). 

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.1 Page 1 of 6
Page 2 of 6

6. The Debt was from a payday loan, the funds from which were used primarily for 

the personal use of Plaintiff and/or for household expenditure.

7. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was a “consumer” as that term is defined by 15 

U.S.C. §1692a(3).

8. NATIONWIDE CREDIT SERVICES D/B/A NCS, (hereinafter, “Defendant”) is 

a business entity engaged in the collection of debt within the State of Michigan. Defendant’s 

principal place of business is located in the State of South Carolina.

9. The principal purpose of Defendant’s business is the collection of debts allegedly 

owed to third parties.

10. Defendant regularly collects, or attempts to collect, debts allegedly owed to third 

parties.

11. During the course of its efforts to collect debts allegedly owed to third parties, 

Defendant sends to alleged debtors bills, statements, and/or other correspondence via the mail 

and/or electronic mail and initiates contact with alleged debtors via various means of 

telecommunication, such as the telephone and facsimile.

12. At all relevant times, Defendant acted as a debt collector as that term is defined by 

15 U.S.C. §1692a(6).

13. At all relevant times, Defendant acted through its duly authorized agents, 

employees, officers, members, directors, heirs, successors, assigns, principals, trustees, sureties, 

subrogees, representatives, and insurers.

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.2 Page 2 of 6
Page 3 of 6

IV. ALLEGATIONS

14. Starting in or around September 2014, Defendant started placing multiple 

telephone calls to Plaintiff’s parents in an attempt to collect the Debt.

15. During the course of the aforementioned telephone calls placed by Defendant to 

Plaintiff’s parents, Defendant’s representative failed to state that they were calling to confirm or 

correct location information for Plaintiff. 

16. During the course of the aforementioned telephone calls to Plaintiff’s parents, 

Defendant’s representative disclosed the name of Defendant despite not being expressly 

requested to do so.

17. During the course of the aforementioned telephone calls to Plaintiff’s parents, 

Defendant disclosed that it was a debt collector and that Plaintiff owed a debt.

18. Plaintiff’s parents did not request that they be contacted by Defendant and 

requested Defendant to stop calling them. 

19. Despite Plaintiff’s parents multiple requests that Defendant stop calling them, 

Defendant has continued to initiate multiple telephone calls to Plaintiff’s parents in an attempt to 

collect the Debt from Plaintiff.

20. Plaintiff has not authorized Defendant to communicate with third-parties.

21. On or about October 12, 2014, Defendant engaged in a telephone call with 

Plaintiff. Plaintiff spoke with a representative of Defendant who identified herself as Kayla 

Brown. Defendant failed to advise Plaintiff that she was a debt collector, that she was attempting 

to collect a debt and that any information obtained would be used for that purpose. 

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.3 Page 3 of 6
Page 4 of 6

22. On or about October 12, 2014, during the course of the aforementioned telephone 

call between Defendant and Plaintiff, Defendant stated that Defendant was a legal process server 

and that a lawsuit had been filed against Plaintiff in an attempt to collect the Debt.

23. Defendant further stated that it was contacting Plaintiff because it intended to 

have him served with process.

24. Defendant has not filed a lawsuit against Plaintiff for the Debt.

25. No lawsuit has been filed against Plaintiff for the Debt.

26. The aforementioned representation had the effect of conveying to Plaintiff that a 

lawsuit had been filed against him.

27. Defendant’s representations, as delineated above, were false, deceptive and 

misleading given that no lawsuit has been filed against him for the Debt.

28. Defendant’s representations, as delineated above, misrepresented the character, 

amount, and/or legal status of the Debt given that no lawsuit has been filed against Plaintiff for 

the Debt.

29. Defendant has not provided to Plaintiff, within five (5) days of its initial 

communication to collect the Debt, with written confirmation of the amount of the Debt, the 

name of the creditor to whom the Debt is owed or a statement that unless the consumer, within 

thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the Debt, or any portion thereof, the 

Debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector. 

30. In its attempts to collect the debt allegedly owed by Plaintiff Defendant violated 

the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692, in one or more of the following ways:

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.4 Page 4 of 6
Page 5 of 6

a. Communicated with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of 

acquiring location information about the consumer and stating that the 

consumer owes any such debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692b(2);

b. Communicated with any person other than the consumer more than once 

without authorization from the consumer and without a reasonable belief that 

the earlier response from said person as to the consumer’s location was 

erroneous or incomplete in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692b(3);

c. Used false, deceptive, misleading and unfair or unconscionable means to 

collect or attempt to collect an alleged debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e;

d. Falsely represented the character, amount, or legal status of any debt in 

violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(2)(A);

e. Threatened to take action that cannot legally or is not intended to be taken in 

violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5);

f. Failed to disclose in communications that said communication was from a 

debt collector and that any information obtained during the communication 

will be used for the purpose of collecting a debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. 

§1692e(11);

g. Used any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to 

collect any debt or to obtain information concerning the consumer in violation 

of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(10);

h. Was otherwise deceptive and failed to comply with the provisions of the 

FDCPA. 

31. As a result of Defendant’s violations as aforesaid, Plaintiff has suffered, and 

continues to suffer, personal humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish and emotional distress.

V. JURY DEMAND

32. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, GREGORY HERMAN, by and through his attorneys, 

respectfully prays for Judgment to be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant as 

follows:

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.5 Page 5 of 6
Page 6 of 6

a. All actual compensatory damages suffered;

b. Statutory damages of $1,000.00;

c. Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs;

d. Any other relief deemed appropriate by this Honorable Court.

Respectfully submitted,

GREGORY HERMAN

By: s/ David M. Marco

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: February 19, 2015

David M. Marco (Atty. No.: 6273315)

SMITHMARCO, P.C.

205 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 2940

Chicago, IL 60601

Telephone: (312) 546-6539

Facsimile: (888) 418-1277

E-Mail: dmarco@smithmarco.com

Case 5:15-cv-10626-JCO-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 02/19/15 PageID.6 Page 6 of 6