 60. This action is brought as a class action. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself  and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal  Rules of Civil Procedure.    61. The identities of all class members are readily ascertainable from the records F.H. Cann  & Associates, Inc. and those business and governmental entities on whose behalf it  attempts to collect debts.    62. Excluded from the Plaintiff’s class is the Defendant and all officers, members, partners,  managers, directors, and employees of F.H. Cann & Associates, Inc. and all of their  respective immediate families, and legal counsel for all parties to this action and all  members of their immediate families.    63. There are questions of law and fact common to the Plaintiff’s Class, which common  issues predominate over any issues involving only individual class members. The  principal issues are whether the Defendant's communications with the Plaintiff, such as  the above stated claims, violate provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.    64. The Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the class members, as all are based upon the same  facts and legal theories.      65. The Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Plaintiff’s Class  defined in this complaint. The Plaintiff has retained counsel with experience in handling  consumer lawsuits, complex legal issues, and class actions, and neither the Plaintiff nor  their attorneys have any interests, which might cause them not to vigorously pursue this  action.    66. This action has been brought, and may properly be maintained, as a class action pursuant  to the provisions of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because there is a  well-defined community interest in the litigation:   .  (a)  Numerosity: The Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis allege,  that the Plaintiff’s Class defined above is so numerous that joinder of all members  would be impractical.   .  (b)  Common Questions Predominate: Common questions of law and fact exist  as to all members of the Plaintiff’s Class and those questions predominate over  any questions or issues involving only individual class members. The principal  issues are whether the Defendant's communications with the Plaintiff, such as the  above stated claims, violate provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.   .  (c)  Typicality: The Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the class  members. Plaintiff and all members of the Plaintiff’s Class defined in this  complaint have claims arising out of the Defendant's common uniform course of  conduct complained of herein.   .  (d)  Adequacy: The Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the  class members insofar as Plaintiff has no interests that are adverse to the absent  class members. The Plaintiff is committed to vigorously litigating this matter.  Plaintiff has also retained counsel experienced in handling consumer lawsuits,  complex legal issues, and class actions. Neither the Plaintiff nor their counsel  have any interests, which might cause them not to vigorously pursue the instant  class action lawsuit.                           (e) Superiority: A class action is superior to the other available means for the fair  and efficient adjudication of this controversy because individual joinder of all  members would be impracticable. Class action treatment will permit a large  number of similarly situated persons to prosecute their common claims in a single  forum efficiently and without unnecessary duplication of effort and expense that  individual actions would engender. Certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(l)(A)  of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is appropriate because adjudications with  respect to individual members create a risk of inconsistent or varying  adjudications which could establish incompatible standards of conduct for  Defendant who, on information and belief, collects debts throughout the United  States of America.    67. Certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is  also appropriate in that a determination that the above stated claims, violate provisions of  the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and is tantamount to declaratory relief and any  monetary relief under the FDCPA would be merely incidental to that determination.    68. Certification of a class under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is  also appropriate in that the questions of law and fact common to members of the  Plaintiff’s Class predominate over any questions affecting an individual member, and a  class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of  the controversy.    69. Further, Defendant has acted, or failed to act, on grounds generally applicable to the Rule   (b)(l)(A) and (b)(2) Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with respect   to the Class as a whole.    70. Depending on the outcome of further investigation and discovery, Plaintiff may, at the   time of class certification motion, seek to certify one or more classes only as to particular  issues pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(4).   Violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act brought by Plaintiff on  behalf of herself and the members of a class, as against the Defendant.    71. Plaintiff Bautista repeats, reiterates, and incorporates the allegations contained in  paragraphs numbered one (1) through seventy (70) herein with the same force and effect  is if the same were set forth at length herein.    72. This cause of action is brought on behalf of Plaintiff Bautista and the members of a class.    73. The class involves all individuals whom Defendant's records reflect resided in the State  of New York and who were sent a collection letter in substantially the same form letter as  the letter sent to the Plaintiff Bautista on or about March 23rd, 2017; and (a) the  collection letter was sent to a consumer seeking payment of a personal debt; and (b) the  collection letter was not returned by the postal service as undelivered; and (c) the Plaintiff  Bautista asserts that the letter contained violations of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A)  and 1692e(10) of the FDCPA for the use of any false representation or deceptive means to  collect or attempt to collect any debt and for misrepresenting the amount of the debt  owed by the Plaintiff.   Violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act    74. The Defendant's actions as set forth above in the within complaint violates the Fair Debt  Collection Practices Act.    75. Because the Defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Plaintiff and  the members of the class are entitled to damages in accordance with the Fair Debt  Collection Practices Act.   WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully requests preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, and  that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against the Defendant and award damages  as follows:    .  (a)  Statutory damages provided under the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692(k);    .  (b)  Attorney fees, litigation expenses and costs incurred in bringing this action; and    .  (c)  Any other relief that this Court deems appropriate and just under the circumstances.   Date: Brooklyn, New York  April 21, 2017  /s/ Daniel Cohen          Daniel Cohen, Esq. (DC7967)  Attorney for the Plaintiff  Daniel Cohen, PLLC  300 Cadman Plaza W, 12th floor  Brooklyn, New York 11201  E-mail: dan@dccohen.com  Office: (646) 645-8482  Fax: (347) 665-1545  Plaintiff requests trial by jury on all issues so triable.   /s/ Daniel Cohen  Daniel Cohen, Esq 