IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

DOROTHY MAE ROSS

 Plaintiff,

v.

EQUIFAX INFORMATION 

SERVICES LLC and CAPITAL 

ACCOUNTS, LLC

 Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT

UPRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. This is an action for damages brought by an individual consumer, Dorothy Mae 

Ross, against Equifax Information Services LLC and Capital Accounts, LLC, for violations of the 

Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681, et seq., as amended, the Fair Debt 

Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (hereafter the “FDCPA”) and the Telephone 

Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. §§ 227, et seq. (hereafter the “TCPA”). 

UTHE PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Dorothy Mae Ross is an adult individual residing in Pontiac, Michigan.

3. Defendant, Equifax Information Services LLC (“Equifax”) is a business entity that 

regularly conducts business in the Eastern District of Michigan and which has a principle place of 

business at 1550 Peachtree Street, Mail Drop 65, Atlanta, GA 30309.

4. Defendant Capital Accounts, LLC (“Capital Accounts”) is a business entity that 

regularly conducts business in Eastern District of Michigan and which has a principal place of 

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 1 of 10 Pg ID 1
2

business located at 1642 Westgate Circle, Ste. 204, Brentwood, TN 37027. The principal purpose 

of Defendant is the collection of debts already in default using the mails and telephone, and 

Defendant regularly attempts to collect said debts.

UJURISDICTION & VENUE

5. Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1681p and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

6. Venue lies properly in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

UFACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. Defendants have been reporting derogatory and inaccurate statements and 

information relating to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s credit history to third parties (the “inaccurate 

information”).

8. The inaccurate information includes, but is not limited to, a collection account with 

Capital Accounts.

9. The inaccurate information negatively reflects upon Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s credit 

repayment history, Plaintiff’s financial responsibility as a debtor and Plaintiff’s credit worthiness.

10. Defendants have been reporting the inaccurate information through the issuance of 

false and inaccurate credit information and consumer credit reports that they have disseminated to 

various persons and credit grantors, both known and unknown.

11. Plaintiff has disputed the inaccurate information with Defendants at least two times 

by following Equifax’s established procedures for disputing consumer credit information. 

12. Plaintiff has disputed the inaccurate information with Equifax from October 2014

through the present.

13. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s efforts, Equifax has sent Plaintiff correspondence 

indicating its intent to continue publishing the inaccurate information and Equifax continues to 

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 2 of 10 Pg ID 2
3

publish and disseminate such inaccurate information to other third parties, persons, entities and 

credit grantors. Equifax has published and disseminated consumer reports to such third parties 

from at least October 2014 through the present.

14. Despite Plaintiff’s efforts, Equifax has never: (1) contacted Plaintiff to follow up 

on, verify and/or elicit more specific information about Plaintiff’s disputes; (2) contacted any third 

parties that would have relevant information concerning Plaintiff’s disputes; (3) forwarded any 

relevant information concerning Plaintiff’s disputes to the entities originally furnishing the 

inaccurate information; (4) requested or obtained any credit applications, or other relevant 

documents from the entities furnishing the inaccurate information; and (5) performed any 

handwriting analysis.

15. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s disputes, Capital Accounts has also failed to conduct 

timely and reasonable investigations of Plaintiff’s disputes after being contacted by the relevant 

credit reporting agencies concerning Plaintiff’s disputes, has willfully continued to report such 

inaccurate information to various credit reporting agencies, and has failed to mark the above 

accounts as disputed. 

16. At all pertinent times hereto, Defendant Capital Accounts was hired to collect a 

debt relating to an account that does not belongs to Plaintiff (hereafter the “debt”).

17. The alleged debt at issue arose out of a transaction which was primarily for 

personal, family or household purposes.

18. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff does not and has never owed a debt to 

Defendant. 

19. Defendant Capital Accounts began contacting Plaintiff on Plaintiff’s cellular 

telephone in an attempt to collect the debt. 

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 3 of 10 Pg ID 3
4

20. Defendant Capital Accounts has been calling Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number 

using an automated telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) including but not limited to predicative 

dialers and/or artificial and prerecorded voice technology to coerce payment of the debt, with the 

intent to annoy, abuse, or harass Plaintiff. 

21. Plaintiff informed Defendant Capital Accounts that she was not responsible for the 

debt and advised Defendant to stop contacting her. 

22. Notwithstanding the above, Defendant Capital Accounts continued contacting 

Plaintiff with the intent to annoy, abuse, or harass Plaintiff. 

23. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by communicating with any person other than the consumer on more than one occasion. 

24. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by communicating with any person other than the consumer in connection with the 

collection of a debt. 

25. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by 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.

26. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly 

or continuously with the intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

27. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by falsely representing the amount, character or legal status of the debt.

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 4 of 10 Pg ID 4
5

28. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by using any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any 

debt or to obtain any information concerning a consumer.

29. Defendant Capital Accounts acted in a false, deceptive, misleading and unfair 

manner by using unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.

30. Defendant Capital Accounts knew or should have known that its actions violated 

the FCRA, FDCPA and TCPA. Additionally, Defendant Capital Accounts could have taken the 

steps necessary to bring its agent’s actions within compliance of these statutes, but neglected to do 

so and failed to adequately review those actions to insure compliance with said laws.

31. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the 

form of credit denial or loss of credit opportunity, credit defamation and emotional distress, 

including anxiety, frustration, embarrassment and humiliation.

32. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendants were acting by and through their agents, 

servants and/or employees who were acting within the course and scope of their agency or 

employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the Defendants herein.

33. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of the Defendants, as well as that of their 

agents, servants and/or employees was intentional, willful, reckless, and in grossly negligent 

disregard for the rights of the Plaintiff herein.

CLAIMS

COUNT I – EQUIFAX

VIOLATIONS OF THE FCRA

34. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at 

length herein.

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 5 of 10 Pg ID 5
6

35. At all times pertinent hereto, Equifax was a “person” and “consumer reporting 

agency” as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b) and (f).

36. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff was a “consumer” as that term is defined by 

15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).

37. At all times pertinent hereto, the above-mentioned credit reports were “consumer 

reports” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d).

38. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n and 15 U.S.C. § 1681o, Equifax is liable to the 

Plaintiff for willfully and negligently failing to comply with the requirements imposed on a 

consumer reporting agency of information pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e and 1681i.

39. The conduct of Equifax was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a substantial 

factor, in bringing about the serious injuries, actual damages and harm to Plaintiff that are outlined 

more fully above and, as a result, Equifax is liable to Plaintiff for the full amount of statutory, 

actual and punitive damages, along with the attorneys’ fees and the costs of litigation, as well as 

such further relief, as may be permitted by law.

COUNT II – CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

VIOLATIONS OF THE FCRA

40. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at 

length herein.

41. At all times pertinent hereto Capital Accounts was a “person” as that term defined 

by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b).

42. Capital Accounts violated sections 1681n and 1681o of the FCRA by willfully and 

negligently failing to comply with the requirements imposed on furnishers of information pursuant 

to 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b).

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 6 of 10 Pg ID 6
7

43. Capital Accounts’ conduct was a direct and proximate cause, as well as a substantial 

factor, in causing the serious injuries, damages and harm to the Plaintiff that are outlined more 

fully above, and as a result Capital Accounts is liable to compensate Plaintiff for the full amount 

of statutory, actual and punitive damages, along with attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as such

other relief, permitted by law.

COUNT III – CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

VIOLATONS OF THE FDCPA

44. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at 

length herein.

45. Capital Accounts is a “debt collector” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6) of the 

FDCPA.

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

47. The above contacts between Capital Accounts and Plaintiff were 

“communications” relating to a “debt” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2) and 1692a(5) of the 

FDCPA.

48. Capital Accounts violated the FDCPA. Capital Accounts’ violations include, but 

are not limited to, violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692b(3), 1692c(b), 1692d, 1692d(5), 1692e(2)(A), 

1692e(8), 1692e(10), and 1692f, as evidenced by the following conduct: 

(a) Communicating with persons other than the debtor on more than one occasion;

(b) Engaging in conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress or 

abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt;

(c) Communicating with any person other than the consumer in connection with 

collection of a debt;

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 7 of 10 Pg ID 7
8

(d) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation

repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at 

the called number;

(e) Falsely representing the amount, character or legal status of the debt;

(f) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit 

information which is known or which should be known to be false, including 

the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed;

(g) Using any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to 

collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer; and

(h) Otherwise using false, deceptive, misleading and unfair or unconscionable 

means to collect or attempt to collect the alleged debt from Plaintiff.

49. Capital Accounts’ acts as described above were done with intentional, willful, 

reckless, wanton and negligent disregard for Plaintiff’s rights under the law and with the purpose 

of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt.

50. As a result of the above violations of the FDCPA, Capital Accounts is liable to 

Plaintiff in the sum of Plaintiff’s statutory damages, actual damages and attorney’s fees and costs.

COUNT IV – CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

VIOLATIONS OF THE TCPA

51. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at 

length herein. 

52. At all times relevant hereto, Capital Accounts used, controlled and/or operated 

“automatic telephone dialing systems” as defined by § 227(a)(1) of the TCPA.

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 8 of 10 Pg ID 8
9

53. Capital Accounts initiated multiple calls to Plaintiff’s telephone line using artificial 

and or prerecorded voices to deliver messages without express consent of Plaintiff in violation of 

47 U.S.C. §§ 227(b)(1)(A)(3) of the TCPA. 

54. The acts and/or omissions of Capital Accounts was done unfairly, unlawfully, 

intentionally, deceptively and fraudulently and absent from bona fide error, lawful right, legal 

defense, legal justification, or legal excuse. 

55. As a result of the above violation of the TCPA, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff in 

the sum of Plaintiff’s statutory damages, actual damages, and treble damages.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

56. Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues so triable.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and damages against the 

Defendants, based on the following requested relief:

(a) Actual damages;

(b) Statutory damages

(c) Treble damages;

(d) Punitive damages;

(e) Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees; and

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 9 of 10 Pg ID 9
10

(f) Such other and further relief as may be necessary, just and proper.

Respectfully Submitted,

FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.

BY: /s/ John Soumilas_

JOHN SOUMILAS, ESQUIRE

GREGORY J. GORSKI, ESQUIRE

(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)

Land Title Building, 19th Floor

100 South Broad Street

Philadelphia, PA 19110

(215) 735-8600

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: May 11, 2015

2:15-cv-11674-MOB-MJH Doc # 1 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 10 of 10 Pg ID 10