UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JOSEPH ARDINO, on behalf of himself and all 

others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiff(s), 

-againstCivil Case Number: _____________ 

CIVIL ACTION

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

AND 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 

SRA ASSOCIATES, INC., and JOHN DOES 1-

25, 

 Defendant(s). 

Plaintiff, JOSEPH ARDINO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated

(hereinafter “Plaintiff”) by and through her undersigned attorney, alleges against the abovenamed Defendants, SRA ASSOCIATES, INC., (hereinafter “SRA”) and JOHN DOES 1-25,

collectively (hereinafter “Defendants”) their employees, agents, and successors the following: 

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. Plaintiff brings this action for damages and declaratory and injunctive relief

arising from the Defendants’ violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., the Fair Debt Collection

Practices Act (hereinafter “FDCPA”), which prohibits debt collectors from engaging in abusive, 

deceptive and unfair practices. More specifically, SRA in its regular course of business mails to 

New Jersey Consumers collection notices attempting to collect debts allegedly due to others, 

which contains language that is confusing and overshadows the required validation notice as set 

forth in 15 U.S.C. §1692g et seq. In addition SRA has voice messages threatening to action 

which it is not legally allowed to take. 

- 1 - 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 1 of 18 PageID: 1
JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331. This is

an action for violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. 

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

transactions that give rise to this action occurred, in substantial part, in this district. 

DEFINITIONS

4. As used in reference to the FDCPA, the terms “creditor,” “consumer,” “debt,” and 

“debt collector” are defined in § 803 of the FDCPA and 15 U.S.C. § 1692a. 

PARTIES

5. The FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., which prohibits certain debt collection 

practices provides for the initiation of court proceedings to enjoin violations of the FDCPA and 

to secure such equitable relief as may be appropriate in each case. 

6. Plaintiff is a natural person and a resident of the State of New Jersey, and is a 

“Consumer” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3). 

7. SRA is a domestic law firm with its office located at 401 Minnetonka Road, Hi 

Nella, New Jersey 08083. 

8. Upon information and belief, SRA is primarily in the business of acquiring and/or 

collecting debts that are allegedly due to another. 

9. More specifically, SRA has attempted to collect a debt allegedly owed by Plaintiff 

to Dell Financial Services. 

- 2 - 

10. SRA regularly uses the United States Postage Service when attempting to collect 

past due debts and is therefore a “Debt Collector” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 

§1692a(6). 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 2 of 18 PageID: 2
11. John Does 1-25, are fictitious names of individuals and businesses alleged for the 

purpose of substituting names of defendants whose identities will be disclosed in discovery and

should be made parties to this action. 

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

12. Plaintiff brings this action as a state wide class action, pursuant to Rule 23 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “FRCP”), on behalf of herself and all New Jersey 

consumers and their successors in interest (the “Class”), who have received debt collection

letters and/or notices from the Defendants which are in violation of the FDCPA, as described in 

this Complaint. 

13. This Action is properly maintained as a class action. The Class consists of: 

• All New Jersey consumers who received collection letters and/or notices from

the Defendants that contained at least one of the alleged violations arising 

from the Defendants’ violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. 

• The Class period begins one year to the filing of this Action.

14. The Class satisfies all the requirements of Rule 23 of the FRCP for maintaining a

class action: 

- 3 - 

• Upon information and belief, the Class is so numerous that joinder of all

members is impracticable because there are hundreds and/or thousands of 

persons who have received debt collection letters and/or notices from the 

Defendants that violate specific provisions of the FDCPA. Plaintiff is 

complaining of a standard form letter and/or notice that is sent to hundreds of 

persons; 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 3 of 18 PageID: 3
• There are questions of law and fact which are common to the Class and which 

predominate over questions affecting any individual Class member. These 

common questions of law and fact include, without limitation: 

a. Whether the defendants violated various provisions of the FDCPA 

including but not limited to: Section §§ 1692g et seq,; 1692e(5); 

and 1692e(10); 

b. Whether Plaintiff and the Class have been injured by the 

Defendants’ conduct; 

c. Whether Plaintiff and the Class have sustained damages and are 

entitled to restitution as a result of Defendants’ wrongdoing and if 

so, what is the proper measure and appropriate statutory formula to 

be applied in determining such damages and restitution; and 

d. Whether Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to declaratory and/or 

injunctive relief.

• Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the Class, which all arise from the same 

operative facts and are based on the same legal theories. 

• Plaintiff has no interest adverse or antagonistic to the interest of the other 

members of the Class. 

• Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interest of the Class and has

retained experienced and competent attorneys to represent the Class. 

- 4 - 

• A Class Action is superior to other methods for the fair and efficient 

adjudication of the claims herein asserted. Plaintiff anticipates that no unusual 

difficulties are likely to be encountered in the management of this class action. 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 4 of 18 PageID: 4
• A Class Action will permit large numbers of similarly situated persons to 

prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously and without 

the duplication of effort and expense that numerous individual actions would 

engender. Class treatment will also permit the adjudication of relatively small 

claims by many Class members who could not otherwise afford to seek legal 

redress for the wrongs complained of herein. Absent a Class Action, class 

members will continue to suffer losses of statutory protected rights as well as 

monetary damages. If Defendants’ conduct is allowed to proceed without 

remedy they will continue to reap and retain the proceeds of their ill-gotten

gains. 

• Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the entire Class,

thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding 

declaratory relief with respect to the Class as a whole. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS

15. On or about December 13, 2010, SRA mailed a letter to Plaintiff attempting to 

collect a consumer debt allegedly owed by Plaintiff to Dell Financial Services. A copy of said 

letter is annexed hereto as Exhibit A.

16. Said letter requested payment in the amount $2,854.04. 

17. Said letter stated in part, “However, as a courtesy to you, we will withhold 

collection procedures to allow you ample time to resolve this matter.” 

18. Upon receipt Plaintiff read said letter. 

- 5 - 

19. On February 17, 2011, Plaintiff through his attorneys sent a letter to SRA, (via

facsimile, certified mail, and first class mail) disputing the alleged debt, demanding verification 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 5 of 18 PageID: 5
of the alleged debt, and instructing SRA to immediately Cease and Desist all collection efforts

and communications with Plaintiff. A copy of said letter is annexed hereto as Exhibit B.

20. On or about March 2, 2011, SRA mailed to Plaintiff’s attorneys documents it 

alleges supports it claim of the alleged debt. A copy of the cover letter is annexed hereto as 

Exhibit C. 

21. On March 15, 2011, SRA, through its employee Veronica Fulton, called 

Plaintiff’s attorneys and left a voice message threatening to contact Plaintiff directly if she did 

not receive an immediate return telephone call.

COUNT I

FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 15 U.S.C. § 1692

VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. § 1692g et seq.

22. Plaintiff repeats the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 21 as if the

same were here set forth at length. 

23. Collection letters and/or notices such as those sent by SRA are to be evaluated by 

the objective standard of the hypothetical “least sophisticated consumer.” 

24. Section 1692g of the FDCPA requires the debt collector to give what is 

commonly referred to as a thirty-day (30) notice within five (5) days of its communication with 

the consumer. 

25. Section 1692g(a)(3),(4),(5) of the FDCPA requires the debt collector: 

- 6 - 

Within five days after the initial communication with a

consumer in connection with the collection of any debt... 

send the consumer a written notice containing --- 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 --- a statement that if the 

consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 6 of 18 PageID: 6
thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is 

disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the 

debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a 

copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to 

the consumer by the debt collector; and --- a statement 

that, upon the consumer's written request within the 

thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the

consumer with the name and address of the original 

creditor, if different from the current creditor. 

26. SRA violated Section 1692g et seq., of the FDCPA by sending a notice to 

Plaintiff on or about December 13, 2010, attempting to collect an alleged debt, which stated in 

part, “However, as a courtesy to you, we will withhold collection procedures to allow you ample 

time to resolve this matter.” 

27. The least sophisticated consumer upon reading the notice will be confused as to

when the time the “amply time to resolve this matter” would end. 

28. The least sophisticated consumer upon reading the notice will be confused as to

when the collection procedures would in fact begin. 

29. The least sophisticated consumer upon reading the notice will be confused as to

what “resolve this matter” means. 

30. The least sophisticated consumer upon reading the notice will be confused as to

whether he had “amply time” to disputed the alleged and resolve the matter or whether he had 

only thirty days from receiving the collection notice to dispute the debt. 

31. By reason thereof, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for declaratory judgment that

Defendants’ conduct violated Section 1692g et seq., of the FDCPA, statutory damages, costs and 

attorneys’ fees. 

COUNT II

FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 15 U.S.C. § 1692

- 7 - 

VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10)

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 7 of 18 PageID: 7
32. Plaintiff repeats the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31 as if the

same were here set forth at length. 

33. Section 1692e(10) of the FDCPA prohibits the use of any false representation or 

deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 

34. SRA violated Section 1692e(10) of the FDCPA by to mailing a letter to Plaintiff 

in an attempt to collect the alleged debt which was confusing and falsely represented Plaintiff’s 

rights to disputed the alleged debt. 

35. By reason thereof, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for declaratory judgment that

Defendants’ conduct violated Section 1692e(10) of the FDCPA, actual damages, statutory 

damages, costs and attorneys’ fees. 

COUNT II

FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 15 U.S.C. § 1692

VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5)

36. Plaintiff repeats the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 35 as if the

same were here set forth at length. 

37. Section 1692e(5) of the FDCPA prohibits a debt collector from threatening to take 

any action that cannot legally be taken. 

38. SRA violated Section 1692e(5) of the FDCPA, when its employee, Veronica 

Fulton placed a voice mail on the undersigned attorney’s direct line, threatening to contact 

Plaintiff directly if the undersigned attorney did not immediately return her telephone call. 

- 8 - 

39. By reason thereof, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for declaratory judgment that

Defendants’ conduct violated Section 1692e(5) of the FDCPA, actual damages, statutory 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 8 of 18 PageID: 8
damages, costs and attorneys’ fees. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants as follows: 

(a) Declaring that this action is properly maintainable as a Class Action and 

certifying Plaintiff as Class representative and, Joseph K. Jones, Esq., as Class Counsel; 

(b) Issuing a preliminary and/or permanent injunction restraining Defendants,

their employees, agents and successors from, inter alia, engaging in conduct and practices that

are in violation of the FDCPA; 

(c) Issuing a declaratory Order requiring Defendants to make corrective

disclosures; 

(d) Awarding Plaintiff and the Class statutory damages; 

(e) Awarding Plaintiff costs of this Action, including reasonable attorneys’

fees and expenses; and 

(f) Awarding Plaintiff and the Class such other and further relief as this Court 

may deem just and proper. 

Dated: Fairfield, New Jersey 

 March 15, 2011 

 s/ Joseph K. Jones_______________ 

 Joseph K. Jones, Esq. (JJ5509) 

 Law Offices of Joseph K. Jones, LLC 

 375 Passaic Avenue, Suite 100 

 Fairfield, New Jersey 07004 

 (973) 227-5900 telephone 

 (973) 244-0019 facsimile 

 jkj@legaljones.com

 

- 9 - 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 9 of 18 PageID: 9
DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff hereby requests a 

trial by jury on all issues so triable. 

 

s/ Joseph K. Jones_______________ 

 Joseph K. Jones, Esq. 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 11.2

I, Joseph K. Jones, the undersigned attorney of record for Plaintiff, do hereby certify to 

my own knowledge and based upon information available to me at my office, the matter in 

controversy is not the subject of any other action now pending in any court or in any arbitration

or administrative proceeding. 

 

Dated: March 15, 2011 

 s/ Joseph K. Jones_______________ 

 Joseph K. Jones, Esq. 

- 10 - 

Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 10 of 18 PageID: 10
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 11 of 18 PageID: 11
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 12 of 18 PageID: 12
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 13 of 18 PageID: 13
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 14 of 18 PageID: 14
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 15 of 18 PageID: 15
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 16 of 18 PageID: 16
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 17 of 18 PageID: 17
Case 1:11-cv-01456-RBK -JS Document 1 Filed 03/15/11 Page 18 of 18 PageID: 18