Plaintiff brings claims, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter  “FRCP”) Rule 23, individually and on behalf of the following New York consumer class  (the “Class”):   All New York consumers who were sent collection letters and/or notice from  3  Defendant attempting to collect an obligation owed to or allegedly owed to  Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., that contain at least one of the alleged  violations arising from Defendant's violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq..    The Class period begins one year to the filing of this Action.   Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and incorporates the allegations contained in paragraphs  numbered “1” through “12” herein with the same force and effect as if the same were set  forth at length herein.   The Class satisfies all the requirements of Rule 23 of the FRCP for maintaining a class  action:   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  Defendant 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 (See Exhibit A, except that the undersigned attorney has, in  accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2 partially redacted the financial account  numbers in an effort to protect Plaintiff’s privacy);   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 Defendant violated various provisions of the FDCPA;  b.  Whether Plaintiff and the Class have been injured by Defendant’s  conduct;  c.  Whether Plaintiff and the Class have sustained damages and are  entitled to restitution as a result of Defendant’s wrongdoing and if  so, what is the proper measure and appropriate statutory formula to  4  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.   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.   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 Defendant’s conduct is allowed proceed to without  remedy they will continue to reap and retain the proceeds of their ill-gotten  gains.  5   Defendant has 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.  Some time prior to June 24, 2014, an obligation was allegedly incurred to Capital One  Bank (USA), N.A. (“Capital”)   The Capital obligation arose out of a transaction in which money, property, insurance or  services, which are the subject of the transaction, are primarily for personal, family or  household purposes.   The alleged Capital obligation is a "debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C.§ 1692a(5).   Capital is a "creditor" as defined by 15 U.S.C.§ 1692a(4).   Defendant contends that the Capital debt is past due.   Defendant collects and attempts to collect debts incurred or alleged to have been incurred  for personal, family or household purposes on behalf of creditors using the United States  Postal Services, telephone and internet.   Capital directly or through an intermediary contracted Defendant to collect the Capital  debt.   On or about June 24, 2014, the Defendant caused to be delivered to the Plaintiff a  collection letter in an attempt to collect the alleged Capital debt. See Exhibit A.   The June 24, 2014 letter was sent or caused to be sent by persons employed by Defendant  6  as a “debt collector” as defined by 15 U.S.C. §1692a(6).   The June 24, 2014 letter is a “communication” as defined by 15 U.S.C. §1692a(2).   The June 24, 2014 letter was sent in an envelope that contained a glassine window.   Visible through the glassine window in the return address the Plaintiff’s account number  was shown.    The account number constitutes personal identifying information.   The account number is not meaningless – it is a piece of information capable of  identifying [the consumer] as a debtor, and its disclosure has the potential to cause harm  to a consumer that the FDCPA was enacted to address. Douglass v. Convergent  Outsourcing, 765 F. 3d 299 (Third Cir. 2014).   Defendant’s actions as described herein are part of a pattern and practice used to collect  consumer debts.   Defendant could have taken the steps necessary to bring its actions within compliance  with the FDCPA, but neglected to do so and failed to adequately review its actions to  ensure compliance with the law.   On information and belief, Defendant sent a written communication, in the form annexed  hereto as Exhibit A to at least 50 natural persons in the State of New York within one  year of the date of this Complaint.  Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and incorporates the allegations contained in paragraphs  numbered “1” through “30” herein with the same force and effect as if the same were set  forth at length herein.  7   Defendant’s debt collection efforts attempted and/or directed towards the Plaintiff  violated various provisions of the FDCPA, including but not limited to 15 U.S.C. §  1692f.   Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692f(8), a debt collector is prohibited from using any language  or symbol, other than the debt collector’s address, on any envelope when communicating  with the consumer by use of mails.   The Defendant violated said section by putting the Plaintiff’s account number visible on  the June 24, 2014 letter.   By reason thereof, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for judgment that Defendant's conduct  violated Section 1692f et seq. of the FDCPA, actual damages, statutory damages, costs  and attorneys’ fees.  VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT  15 U.S.C. §1692f et seq.  