1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

ARTURO CHAVEZ RAMIREZ, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BC SERVICES, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. 1:20-cv-03568 

COMPLAINT 

 NOW COMES, ARTURO CHAVEZ RAMIREZ, through undersigned counsel, 

complaining of BC SERVICES, INC., as follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION 

1. This is an action seeking redress for alleged violation(s) of the Fair Debt Collection 

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

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

3. Venue in this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). 

PARTIES 

4. ARTURO CHAVEZ RAMIREZ (“Plaintiff”) is a natural person, over 18-years-ofage, who at all times relevant resided at 17230 71st Avenue, Apartment 10, Tinley Park, Illinois 

60477. 

5. Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3). 

6. BC SERVICES, INC. ("Defendant”) is a corporation organized and existing under 

the laws of Colorado. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1
2 

7. Defendant has a principal place of business at 550 Disc Drive, Longmont, Colorado 

80503. 

8. Defendant is a “debt collector” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). 

9. Defendant uses instrumentalities of interstate commerce and the mail in its business 

– the principal purpose of which is the collection of debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or 

due another. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

10. Defendant sent eight (8) letters to Plaintiff's long-time address, dated January 31, 

2020, which stated: 

Date: January 31, 2020 L50008-#101 

Creditor: UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO MEDICINE 

Current Amount Due: $ [varies] Account #: [varies] 

Principal: $ [varies] Interest: $0.00 

Your creditor, listed above, has placed your account for collection. 

Unless you notify this office within 30 days after receiving this notice that you dispute the 

validity of this debt or any portion thereof, this office will assume this debt is valid. If you 

notify this office in writing within 30 days from receiving this notice that you dispute the 

validity of this debt or any portion thereof, this office will obtain verification of the debt or 

obtain a copy of a judgment and mail you a copy of such judgment or verification. If you 

request of this office in writing within 30 days after receiving this notice this office will 

provide you with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current 

creditor. 

A consumer has the right to request in writing that a debt collector or collection agency 

cease further communication with the consumer. A written request to cease 

communication will not prohibit the debt collector or collection agency from taking any other 

action authorized by law to collect the debt. 

The current amount due reflected above is the amount due as of the date of this letter. 

Due to the possible accrual of interest on your account(s), the current amount due as 

shown in this letter may change from day to day. 

This communication is an attempt to collect a debt by a debt collector. Any information 

obtained will be used for that purpose. 

11. Each letter sought to collect on different medical accounts. 

****6821 $244.80 

 6822 $22.80 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:2
3 

** **6825 $665.40 

 6826 $589.20 

** **6827 $364.20 

 6828 $22.80 

** **6829 $102.00 

 6830 $28.20 

12. The twist? Plaintiff did not receive medical treatment from University of ColoradoMedicine; therefore, did not owe this debt. 

13. Confused, Plaintiff verbally notified Defendant that they had the wrong individual. 

14. Nevertheless, Defendant sent four (4) identically-worded letters to Plaintiff, dated 

March 27, 2020 – each seeking to collect on four additional University of Colorado-Medicine 

accounts. 

** **4633 $240.60 

 4634 $177.60 

** **4635 $346.80 

****4636 $172.80 

15. Each account is a "debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5). 

16. Each letter is a “communication” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692(a)(2) as each letter 

conveyed information regarding a debt directly or indirectly to Plaintiff. 

17. Defendant's letters caused Plaintiff to fear that Defendant will (1) commence 

wrongful collection proceedings against Plaintiff; and/or (2) report these debts on Plaintiff's credit 

report. 

18. Furthermore, Defendant's letters caused anxiety, confusion, inconvenience and 

mental anguish. 

19. Concerned with having had his rights violated, Plaintiff was forced to retain counsel 

and incur attorney’s fees to vindicate his rights. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:3
4 

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 

COUNT I: 

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.) 

20. Paragraphs 10 through 23 of this Complaint are expressly adopted and incorporated 

herein as though fully set forth herein. 

Violation(s) of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e 

21. Section 1692e provides 

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representations 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. 

 (10) 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(2)(A) and e(10). 

22. Merely dunning a person who is not legally obligated to pay the debt constitutes a 

false, misleading, or deceptive representation about the character and status of the debt. Kayyal v. 

Enhanced Recovery Co., LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161475 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 23, 2019) (citing 

Owens v. Howe, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22728, 2004 WL 6070565, *11 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 8, 2004). 

23. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e(2)(A) and e(10) by sending twelve (12) 

dunning letters to Plaintiff seeking to collect on debt that was not incurred by Plaintiff. 

24. Plaintiff may enforce the provisions of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e(2)(A) and e(10) 

pursuant to section k of the FDCPA (15 U.S.C. § 1692k) which provides "any debt collector who 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:4
5 

fails to comply with any provision of [the FDCPA] with respect to any person is liable to such 

person in an amount equal to the sum of - 

(1) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure; 

(2) 

(A) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages 

as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000.00; or 

(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability, the 

costs of the action, together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined 

by the court. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the following relief: 

A. a finding that Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e(2)(A) and e(10); 

B. an award of any actual damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result of Defendant’ 

violation(s); 

C. an award of such additional damages, as the Court may allow, but not exceeding 

$1,000.00; 

D. an award of costs of this action, together with reasonable attorney’s fees as 

determined by this Court; and 

E. an award of such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:5
6 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of any and all issues in 

this action so triable of right. 

DATED: June 18, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

 

ARTURO CHAVEZ 

By: /s/ Joseph S. Davidson 

 

 Mohammed O. Badwan 

Joseph S. Davidson 

Victor T. Metroff 

 SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD. 

 2500 South Highland Avenue 

Suite 200 

 Lombard, Illinois 60148 

 +1 630-575-8181 

mbadwan@sulaimanlaw.com 

jdavidson@sulaimanlaw.com 

vmetroff@sulaimanlaw.com 

 

Case: 1:20-cv-03568 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/20 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:6