1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MOHAMED ALI ZAHEDI,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

PLUNKETT COONEY, P.C., 

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:20-cv-02712

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Mohamed Ali Zahedi, through counsel, for his complaint against Defendant, 

Plunkett Cooney, P.C., states:

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. In connection with the collection of a consumer debt, Defendant communicated 

with Plaintiff and thereafter failed to provide Plaintiff with statutorily mandated disclosures in 

violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). 

Subsequently, Defendant communicated with Plaintiff and falsely represented the amount of the 

debt Plaintiff allegedly owed. Plaintiff brings this action to seek redress in this Court for 

Defendants’ conduct and to recover actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney’s fees and 

costs.

BACKGROUND FACTS

2. Plaintiff, Mohamed Ali Zahedi (“Plaintiff” ), is a natural person who resides in 

Chicago, Illinois and within the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States District Court for 

the Northern District of Illinois.

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1
2

3. On December 17, 2003, Plaintiff borrowed money and executed a note in the 

amount of $87,000.00 payable to Oak Bank (the “Note”). To secure payment of that Note, Plaintiff 

granted a contemporaneous mortgage lien (the “Mortgage”) on his personal residence located at 

6007 N. Sheridan Road, Unit 24B, Chicago, Illinois (the “Home”). The Note and Mortgage are 

collectively referred to herein as the “Loan.”

4. Plaintiff incurred the Loan for his own personal, family or household purposes.

5. The Loan is secured by a Mortgage upon his primary and principal residence. 

6. Wintrust Bank, N.A. (“Wintrust”) is a national banking association organized and 

existing under the National Banking Act which does business in this District.

7. Wintrust is the successor by merger to Oak Bank and is the present owner of the 

Loan.

8. Plunkett Cooney, P.C. (“PC”) is a Michigan professional corporation engaged in 

the practice of law in Illinois and in this District.

9. PC regularly collects consumer debts alleged to be owed to others. 

10. PC uses the mail in its collection business.

11. At all times relevant here, PC acted as the agent and attorney for Wintrust.

12. Plaintiff is a “consumer” as that term is defined by applicable federal and state 

statutes. Plaintiff is a natural person from whom PC sought to collect a debt incurred for personal, 

family, or household purposes. Here the debt was alleged to have been a residential loan secured 

by the Plaintiff’s primary and principal residence which was incurred by Plaintiff for personal, 

family, or household purposes.

13. PC is a “debt collector” as defined by the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692(a)(6), because, 

as set forth herein, it attempted to collect from Plaintiff the Loan on behalf of Wintrust.

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2
3

14. PC a “debt collector” as defined by the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692(a)(6), because it 

uses the mails to regularly collect debts owed to others.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

15. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 as this 

action arises the FDCPA.

16. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) as a substantial part of 

the events or omissions giving rise to the claims asserted herein occurred in this District. 

SUMMARY OF CLAIMS

17. The FDCPA broadly prohibits unfair or unconscionable collection methods, 

conduct which harasses or abuses any debtor, and the use of any false or deceptive statements in 

connection with attempts to collect a debt.

18. Plaintiff asserts claims against PC for multiple violations of the FDCPA.

ADDITIONAL FACTS

19. On March 19, 2020, attorney James Crowley, an attorney with PC, sent an email to 

Plaintiff in connection with the Loan and in an attempt to collect that debt. A true and correct 

copy of this email is attached as Exhibit 1.

20. Exhibit 1 is an “initial communication” with a consumer, Plaintiff, in connection 

with the collection of a debt, the Loan, as defined by §1692(a) of the FDCPA.

21. Section 1692g of the FDCPA requires a debt collector to send the debtor a 

“validation of debt” notice within five days after the initial communication with the consumer. 15 

U.S.C. § 1692g(a).

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3
4

22. PC failed to comply with the legal requirement imposed on it by the FDCPA by 

sending the required validation letter within five (5) days of its initial communication with 

Plaintiff.

23. On April 21,2020, over a month after its email to Plaintiff, and well beyond the 

mandated five (5) days, PC sent a letter to Plaintiff captioned “Notice of Default and Demand for 

Payment,” in connection with the Loan. A copy of the April 21, 2020 letter is attached at Exhibit 

2.

24. 15 U.S.C. 1692e provides in relevant part:

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; . . .

25. The April 21, 2020 letter, Exhibit 2, falsely represents to Plaintiff that the original 

principal amount of the Loan is $83,000.00 when, in fact, the correct amount was $87,000.00. This 

false statement lead Plaintiff to be confused and to question the accuracy of the amounts PC 

claimed to be due.

26. Plaintiff retained counsel to represent him with respect to the attempt by PC to 

collect the Loan and to help him seek redress by filing the instant action. Counsel reviewed the 

initial communication and the April 21, 2020 letter and consulted with Plaintiff regarding the same. 

Plaintiff incurred attorney fees to his counsel for this work.

27. Additionally, Plaintiff has incurred filing fees and attorney fees and costs to consult 

with attorneys and to have those attorneys bring the instant action.

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4
5

COUNT ONE

 [VIOLATION OF THE FDCPA]

28. Plaintiff restates and incorporates all of his statements and allegations contained in 

paragraphs 1 through 27.

29. PC violated §1692g(a) of the FDCPA by failing to provide to Plaintiff a validation 

notice within five (5) days of its initial communication with Plaintiff on March 19, 2020.

30. PC violated §1692e by misrepresenting to Plaintiff the amount of the Loan in the 

April 21, 2020 letter, Exhibit 2.

31. Plaintiff suffered actual damages as set forth infra. 

32. Plaintiff suffered informational damage because he was deprived of the required 

notice.

33. Pursuant to §1692k of the FDCPA, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from PC actual 

damages, statutory damages up to $1,000, the costs of this action, together with reasonable 

attorney’s fees as determined by the Court.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays for the entry of judgment in his favor and against PC, 

as follows:

1. For Statutory damages of up to $1,000.00 for violation of the FDCPA; 

2. For actual damages, all costs and reasonable attorney’s fees; and

3. For all other relief this Court may deem just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff, Mohamed Ali Zahedi, hereby respectfully demands a trial by jury on all claims.

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5
6

Respectfully submitted,

MOHAMED ALI ZAHEDI

/s/ Rusty A. Payton

Rusty A. Payton

PAYTON LEGAL GROUP

20 North Clark Street

Suite 3300

Chicago, Illinois 60602

(773) 682-5210

info@payton.legal

Arthur C. Czaja

LAW OFFICE OF ARTHUR CZAJA

7521 N. Milwaukee Ave.

Niles, Illinois 60714

(847) 647-2106

arthur@czajalawoffices.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case: 1:20-cv-02712 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/05/20 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6