Convergent lawsuit

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Mehef Bey, Plaintiff, v.

Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.,

Civil Action No.: _____________

Defendant.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

For this Complaint, the Plaintiff, Mehef Bey brings this claim against Defendant for its perceived violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq , the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.

JURISDICTION

1. This action arises out of violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (“FDCPA”) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq, by the Defendant and its agents in their illegal efforts to collect an alleged debt.

2. Supplemental jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

3. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), in that the Defendant transacts business in this District and a substantial portion of the acts giving rise to this action occurred in this District.

PARTIES 4. The Plaintiff, Mehef Bey is an adult individual residing in Charlotte, North Carolina, and who is a “consumer” as the term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3).

5. Defendant Convergent Outsourcing, Inc. (“Convergent”), is a Texas business entity with

an address of 800 SW 39th Street, Renton, Washington 98055, operating as a collection agency, and is a “debt collector” as the term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6).

ALLEGATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL COUNTS A. The Alleged Debt 6. Bey incurred a financial obligation to an original “creditor”.

7. The alleged debt arose from services provided by the creditor which were primarily for family, personal or household purposes and which meets the definition of a “debt” under 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5).

8. The alleged debt was appeared to have been purchased, assigned or transferred to Convergent for collection, or Convergent was employed by the creditor to collect an alleged debt.

9. The Defendant attempted to collect an alleged debt and, as such, engaged in “communications” with Bey as defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2).

10. Defendant sent to Bey a letter appearing to be on the creditor’s letterhead with a May 5, 2014 bill date.

11. Bey spoke with the original creditor’s representative on June 30, 2014, Bey was told that no billing statements for payment had been sent to him in 2014.

12. The original creditor’s representative also stated that they were not attempting to collect any payment from Bey after the last billing statement that they sent to him which was in 2009.

13. The representative also stated that she would mail to him the final statements they had on file in which they did.

14. In the billing statements sent to Bey from the creditor, there were no statements for 2014.

15. All billing statements sent from the creditor were from 2008.

16. Therefore, Plaintiff is not aware of how Defendant obtained the billing statement That was sent to him.

17. Plaintiff is also not aware of how Defendant obtained his personal information as he has never signed any contract, agreement or entered into any business arrangement, or had any business dealings with Defendant or any known affiliates of Defendant’s.

18. In an Equifax consumer credit report (‘credit report”) dated March 20, 2014, Bey discovered that Defendant was reporting a false and erroneous account.

19. In May of 2014, Bey was alerted by Equifax of a negative account being reported onto his consumer credit report.

20. It appears that Defendant was assigned the alleged account in June of 2011.

21. On June 9, 2014, Bey immediately filed a dispute of fraudulent activity with Equifax credit reporting agency.

22. Bey received the Equifax consumer report in August of 2014.

23. The false account had been removed from his Equifax report.

24. On or around July 9, 2014, Bey disputed the false account with Transunion credit reporting agency.

25. Bey received his Transunion consumer report in August of 2014.

26. The false account was no longer being reported by Defendant.

27. Within the last year, Convergent contacted Bey in an attempt to collect the alleged debt by sending him a collection letter in the mail on or around April 4, 2014.

28. In April of 2014, Bey requested, in writing, for Defendant to validate the alleged debt.

29. Bey sent a subsequent complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, (hereinafter “CFPB”) who then investigated his claim.

30. The CFPB submitted its response to Bey in May of 2014.

31. In a letter dated May 9, 2014, Convergent attempted to provide verification of the alleged debt by sending to Bey a letter that appears to be from one of Bey’s creditors.

32. The letter from Convergent appeared to be a bill from the original creditor dated May 9, 2014.

33. Bey is not in receipt of a bill from the creditor reflecting a May 5, 2014 date.

34. The credit report shows that Defendant had placed the account onto his consumer credit report in October of 2013.

35. In a June response letter to Bey from the CFPB, Convergent admitted to reporting the negative account by stating that they would remove the false account and that all collection activity would cease.

36. Defendant did cease further collection activity with Bey and apologized for any inconvenience.

37. On or around June 20, 2014, Bey sent to Ms. Anne Carlson, license contact person of Defendant’s, a letter of notice of his intent to mitigate damages with Defendant.

38. Defendant has not responded to date.

B. Plaintiff Suffered Actual Damages 39. The Plaintiff has suffered actual damages as a result of the false and erroneous account being reported by Defendant to his consumer credit report.

40. As a direct consequence of the Defendant’s acts, practices and conduct, Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer from, anger, anxiety, diminished credit worthiness, humiliation, fear of rejection for new credit and embarrassment.

COUNT I VIOLATIONS OF THE FDCPA 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq.

41. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding allegations by reference.

42. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Verified Complaint as though fully stated herein.

43. By sending a letter not from a creditor, Defendant’s conduct violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692j in that Defendant designed, compiled, and furnished a form knowing that such form would be used to create the false belief in Bey that a person other than the creditor of such consumer is participating in the collection of or in an attempt to collect a debt such consumer allegedly owes such creditor, when in fact such person is not so participating.

44. Defendant violated §1692e(2)(A) of the FDCPA by falsely representing the character, amount, and legal status of Plaintiff’s alleged consumer debt because Plaintiff does not owe the debt Defendant is trying to collect.

45. Defendant’s conduct violated §1692f(1) of the FDCPA by attempting to collect a debt that is not authorized by an agreement because Plaintiff does not owe the debt.

46. Defendant’s conduct violated §1692g of the FDCPA by not sending to Plaintiff a written notice within five days after the initial communication by Plaintiff in connection with the collection of an alleged debt.

47. Defendant’s conduct violated §1692e(10) of the FDCPA by using false and deceptive means in an attempt to collect a debt from Plaintiff because Plaintiff does not owe the debt alleged by Defendant.

48. Defendant’s conduct violated §1692f of the FDCPA by using use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect an alleged debt that was outside of the statute of limitations.

49. The foregoing acts and omissions of the Defendant constitute numerous and multiple violations of the FDCPA, including every one of the above-cited provisions.

50. The Plaintiff is entitled to damages as a result of Defendant’s violations.

COUNT II VIOLATIONS OF THE FCRA 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq.

51. Defendant violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C.§1681s-2(b) by publishing the false representation onto Plaintiff's credit file with one or more credit reporting agencies, by failing to fully and properly investigate the Plaintiff's dispute of the false representation; by failing to review all relevant information regarding same; by failing to correctly report results of an accurate investigation to each credit reporting agency; and by failing to permanently and lawfully correct its own internal records to prevent the re-reporting of the false representations to the consumer reporting agencies.

52. As a result of this conduct, action and inaction of Defendants, Plaintiff suffered

damage by loss of credit, loss of the ability to purchase and benefit from credit, anguish, humiliation, fear and embarrassment of credit denials and the loss of creditworthiness.

53. Defendant' s conduct, action and inaction appears to be willful, rendering it liable for actual or statutory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C.§1681n. In the alternative, Defendant appears to be negligent, entitling the Plaintiff to recover actual damages under 15 U.S.C.§1681o.

54. The Plaintiff is entitled to recover costs and attorney fees from Defendant in an amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to 15 U.S.C.§1681n and §1681o.

COUNT III VIOLATIONS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA DEBT COLLECTION ACT, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-70, et seq.

55. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs though fully stated herein.

56. Plaintiff is a “person” as the term is defined by N.C. Gen.Stat. § 58-70-6(4).

57. Defendant is a “collection agency” as the term is defined by N.C. Gen.Stat. § 58-70-15, and is duly licensed collect debt in the state of North Carolina pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 58-70-1.

58. The Defendant falsely represented the creditor's rights or intentions, in violation of N.C. Gen.Stat. § 58-70-110(4).

59. Defendant’s conduct violated N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-70-115 by using means to collect or attempt to collect an alleged debt barred by the statute of limitations.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff pray that judgment be entered against Defendant: 1. Actual damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(1) against Defendant; 2. Statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692k(a)(2)(A) against Defendant; 3. Costs of litigation and reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3) against Defendant;

4. Statutory damages of $4,000.00 per violation pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 58-70130(b); 5. Attorney’s fees pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 75-16.1; 6. Punitive damages; and 7. Such other and further relief as may be just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________ Mehef Bey