24. This action concerns attempts by defendants to collect from plaintiff a consumer debt, consisting of an allegedly defaulted mortgage loan.  The note and mortgage were obtained for consumer purposes (housing).  25. Plaintiff encountered financial distress and was unable to pay the loan.  26. Partners for Payment Relief DE II, LLC claims to have acquired the loan in  2014.  Plaintiff does not know if it in fact has good title to the loan. 3  27. On January 12, 2016, Partners for Payment Relief DE II, LLC, represented by Barham and Barham Legal, filed suit against plaintiff to foreclose the mortgage loan in Cook County Circuit Court, alleging that the loan has been in default since 2009.  (Appendix I)  28. The complaint was served in February 2016.   29. Thereafter, plaintiff received telephone calls from or on behalf of defendants seeking payment.  30. Because Partners for Payment Relief DE II, LLC was not licensed as a collection agency in Illinois, and is not within any exemption, it had no right to take any legal or collection action against plaintiff.  31. Defendants failed to disclose the material fact that their collection activities were unauthorized and contrary to law.  32. The conduct of Daniel  O. Barham, Barham Legal,  and PPR, in attempting foreclosure on plaintiff’s home and otherwise attempting to collect from plaintiff is deceptive and unlawful.   33. Plaintiff has been injured by defendants’ improper conduct, in that: a. His credit has been injured; b. He has suffered  aggravation and distress; c. He has been forced to spend time and money dealing with defendants’ wrongful conduct, including filing an appearance in the foreclosure and paying a fee. 34. Plaintiff People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Kirby Ashley incorporates paragraphs 1-33.  35. This claim is against PPR.  36. The ICAA creates a licensing regime.  Section 4 of the ICAA, 225 ILCS 425/4, provides: 4 Sec. 4. No collection agency shall operate in this State, directly or indirectly engage in the business of collecting, solicit claims for others, have a sales office, a client, or solicit a client in this State, exercise the right to collect, or receive payment for another of any account, bill or other indebtedness, without registering under this Act except that no collection agency shall be required to be licensed or maintain an established business address in this State if the agency's activities in this State are limited to collecting debts from debtors located in this State by means of interstate communication, including telephone, mail, or facsimile transmission from the agency's location in another state provided they are licensed in that state and these same privileges are permitted in that licensed state to agencies licensed in Illinois.  37. The licensing requirements of the ICAA were imposed to protect the public.  The  public policy represented by the ICAA is stated in §1a, 225 ILCS 425/1a: Declaration of public policy Sec. 1a. The practice as a collection agency by any entity in the State of Illinois is hereby declared to affect the public health, safety and welfare and to be subject to regulation and control in the public interest. It is further declared to be a matter of public interest and concern that the collection agency profession merit and receive the confidence of the public and that only qualified entities be permitted to practice as a collection agency in the State of Illinois. This Act shall be liberally construed to carry out these objects and purposes. It is further declared to be the public policy of this State to protect consumers against debt collection abuse.  38. Sections 14 and 14b of the ICAA, 225 ILCS 425/14 and 14b, make it unlawful to  engage in the business of a collection agency without a license.    39. Section 14a, 225 ILCS 425/14a, provides: Sec. 14a. The practice as a collection agency by any entity not holding a valid and current license under this Act is declared to be inimical to the public welfare, to constitute a public nuisance, and to cause irreparable harm to the public welfare. The Director, the Attorney General, the State's Attorney of any county in the State, or any person may maintain an action in the name of the People of the State of Illinois, and may apply for injunctive relief in any circuit court to enjoin such entity from engaging in such practice. Upon the filing of a verified petition in such court, the court, if satisfied by affidavit or otherwise that such entity has been engaged in such practice without a valid and current license, may enter a temporary restraining order without notice or bond, enjoining the defendant from such further practice. Only the showing of nonlicensure, by affidavit or otherwise, is necessary in order for a temporary injunction to issue. A copy of the verified complaint shall be served upon the defendant and the proceedings shall thereafter be conducted as in other civil cases except as modified by this Section. If it is established 5 that the defendant has been or is engaged in such unlawful practice, the court may enter an order or judgment perpetually enjoining the defendant from further practice. In all proceedings hereunder, the court, in its discretion, may apportion the costs among the parties interested in the action, including cost of filing the complaint, service of process, witness fees and expenses, court reporter charges and reasonable attorneys' fees. In case of violation of any injunctive order entered under the provisions of this Section, the court may summarily try and punish the offender for contempt of court. Such injunction proceedings shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all penalties and other remedies provided in this Act.  40. The activities of  PPR amount to an “exercise [of] the right to collect . . . .”     41. PPR is engaged “in the business of collecting.”    42. Plaintiff is entitled to relief against PPR under 225 ILCS 425/14a. WHEREFORE, plaintiff  requests that the Court enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant  PPR for: a. Injunctive relief; b. Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit; c. Such other or further relief as the Court deems proper. 43. Plaintiff Kirby Ashley incorporates paragraphs 1-33.  44. This claim is against all defendants.  45. 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 debt collection attempts. It also requires debt collectors to give debtors certain information. 15 U.S.C. §§1692d, 1692e, 1692f and 1692g.  46. In enacting the FDCPA, Congress found that: “[t]here is abundant evidence of the use of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by many debt collectors. Abusive debt collection practices contribute to the number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of individual privacy.”  15 U.S.C. §1692(a).  47. Because of this, courts have held that “the FDCPA's legislative intent emphasizes the need to construe the statute broadly, so that we may protect consumers against debt 6 collectors' harassing conduct.” and that “[t]his intent cannot be underestimated.”  Ramirez v. Apex Financial Management LLC, 567 F.Supp.2d 1035, 1042 (N.D.Ill. 2008).  48. The FDCPA encourages consumers to act as "private attorneys general" to enforce the public policies and protect the civil rights expressed therein.  Crabill v. Trans Union, LLC, 259 F.3d 662, 666 (7th Cir. 2001).  49. Plaintiff seeks to enforce those policies and civil rights which are expressed through the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq.  50. Defendants, by representing that  PPR  was entitled to enforce a note and mortgage against plaintiff, and collect money from plaintiff, when this was not true, violated 15 U.S.C. §§1692e, 1692e(2), 1692e(4), 1692e(5) and 1692e(10).  51. Section 1692e provides: § 1692e. False or misleading representations [Section 807 of P.L.]  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; or    (B) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt. (4) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. (5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. (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. . . . 7 60. Plaintiff Kirby Ashley  incorporates paragraphs 1-33.  61. This claim is against PPR.  62. Defendant, in the course of trade and commerce, engaged in unfair and deceptive acts and practices, in violation of 815 ILCS 505/2, by directly and indirectly demanding and collecting money to which it had no legal right, by means described throughout this complaint.  63. PPR violated the public policy of Illinois, by engaging in the business of an unlicensed collection agency.  64. PPR inflicted substantial injury on consumers, by taking their money and homes, and threatening them with loss of money and homes.  65. The conduct of PPR was unethical and unscrupulous, and indeed criminal. 66. Plaintiff brings this claim on behalf of a class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a) and 23(b)(3).  67. The class consists of (a) all individuals with Illinois addresses (b) from whom PPR sought to collect money, (c) on or after a date 3 years prior to the filing of this action.  68. On information and belief, the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is not practicable.   9  69. There are questions of law and fact common to the class members, which  predominate over any questions relating to individual class members.  The predominant common question is whether PPR, by conducting an unlicensed and illegal collection agency business, violated the ICFA.  70. Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class members.  All are based on the same factual and legal theories.  71. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the class members.  Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in class actions and collection abuse litigation.    72. A class action is superior  for the fair and efficient adjudication of this matter.  Individual actions are not economically feasible.  Members of the class are likely to be unaware of their rights.  There is no reason for numerous individual cases, all identical. WHEREFORE, the Court should enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and the class members and against defendant for: a. Compensatory and punitive damages; b. An injunction against further collection activity; c. Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit; and d. Such other or further relief as the Court deems proper. s/Daniel A. Edelman         Daniel A. Edelman Daniel A. Edelman Cathleen M. Combs James O. Latturner Michelle A. Alyea