16.  Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. regularly collects or attempts to  collect debts asserted to be owed to others.     17.  Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. is regularly engaged, for profit, in the  collection of debts allegedly owed by consumers.    18.  The principal purpose of Defendant's business is the collection of such debts.   19.  Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. uses the mails in its debt collection  business.   20.  Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. is a “debt collector” as defined by 15  U.S.C. § 1692a(6).    21.  Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. alleges Plaintiff owes a debt (“the  alleged Debt”).     22.  The alleged Debt is an alleged obligation of Plaintiff to pay money arising out of a  transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the subject of the  transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.   23.  The alleged Debt does not arise from any business enterprise of Plaintiff.   25.  At an exact time known only to Defendant, the alleged Debt was assigned or  otherwise transferred to Defendant for collection.    26.  At the time the alleged Debt was assigned or otherwise transferred to Defendant for  collection, the alleged Debt was in default.   27.  Defendant has sent multiple Letters in its effort to collect the alleged debt.   28.  Defendant sent Plaintiff a Letter to Plaintiff dated December 26, 2019, (the  “December Letter”).   29.  The Decemeber Letter threatened Legal action if Plaintiff did not send payment by  January 25, 2020.   30.  In its efforts to collect the alleged Debt, Defendant again contacted Plaintiff by  letters including the letter dated January 28, 2020. (the “January Letter”) (A true and accurate copy  of the January Letter is annexed hereto as Exhibit 1).   31.  The January Letter conveyed information regarding the alleged Debt.   32.  The January Letter is a “communication” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2).    33.  The January Letter was received and read by Plaintiff.   34.  15 U.S.C. § 1692e protects Plaintiff's concrete interests. Plaintiff has the interest  and right to be free from deceptive and/or misleading communications from Defendant. As set  forth herein, Defendant deprived Plaintiff of this right.   35.  Plaintiff's injury is “particularized” and “actual” in that the letter that caused the  injury was addressed and sent to Plaintiff specifically.    36.  Plaintiff's injury is directly traceable to Defendant's conduct, because Defendant  sent the Letter.    37.  A favorable judicial resolution of Plaintiff's case would redress Plaintiff's injury  with damages.    38.  The deprivation of Plaintiff's rights will be redressed by a favorable decision herein.     39.  Plaintiff has been misled by Defendant's actions.    40.  Plaintiff justifiably fears that, absent this Court's intervention, Defendant will  continue to use abusive, deceptive, unfair and unlawful means in its attempts to collect the alleged  Debt.   42.  As a result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff was forced to hire counsel and  therefore has incurred damages including reasonable attorneys' fees in reviewing Plaintiff's rights  under the law and prosecuting this claim.   43.  As a result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff's counsel was forced to expend time  and money to investigate the enforceability of the Debt.   44.  Upon information and belief, Plaintiff can prove that all actions taken by Defendant  as described in this Complaint were taken willfully, with either the desire to harm Plaintiff with  knowledge that its actions would very likely harm Plaintiff, and/or with knowledge that its actions  were taken in violation of the law.   45.  The December Letter is labelled as a “PRE-LEGAL NOTIFICATION.”    46.  The label is in a stylized and emphasized font, placed in the upper right corner of  the December Letter.    47.  Additionally, the Decemeber Letter states: “Midland Credit Management, Inc. has  made several attempts to contact you regarding this account. MCM is now considering forwarding  your account to an attorney in your state for possible litigation. Upon receipt of this notice, please  pay at MidlandCredit.com or call 877-798-6947 to discuss your options. If we don’t hear from  your or receive payment by 1/25/2020 we may proceed with forwarding this account to an  attorney.”    48.  The January Letter contains a partially shaded box in the center of the Letter which  states in bolded and enlarged font, “PRE-LEGAL NOTIFICATION”, followed by “SECOND  NOTICE. Pay at MidlandCredit.com or Call 877-211-9872.”   49.  The January Letter states, “We are proceeding with an evaluation of your account  and are considering forwarding this account to an attorney in your state for possible litigation.  Contact us by 2/27/2020 to resolve this account.   50.  Moreover, in its efforts to collect the alleged debt, the Letter states, “STOP THE  PRE-LEGAL PROCESS” which is adjacent to “Pay your full balance of $3,316.27”, which  suggests that the consumer can pay the full balance of the alleged debt or face possible legal action  as indicated throughout the Letter.   52.  Defendant did not forward Plaintiff’s account to an attorney, as was threatened in  the December Letter.   53.  On information and belief, Defendant never intended to forward Plaintiff’s account  to an attorney, as was threatened in the December Letter.   54.  On information and belief, Defendant did not forward Plaintiff’s account to an  attorney, as was threatened in the January Letter.   55.  On information and belief, Defendant never intended to forward Plaintiff’s account  to an attorney as was threatened in the January Letter.     56.  Defendant’s conduct in threatening legal action that it did not intend to take is a  false, deceptive, and/or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of a  debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e.    57.  Defendant’s conduct is a threat to take any action that is not intended to be taken,  in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5).    58.  Defendant’s conduct in threatening legal action that it did not take is a false,  deceptive, and/or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of a debt  in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e   59.  Defendant’s conduct is the “use of any false representation or deceptive means to  collect or attempt to collect any debt” in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).    60.  For the foregoing reasons, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e 1692e(5),  1692e(10) and is liable to Plaintiff therefor.  61.  Plaintiff brings this action individually and as a class action on behalf of all persons  similarly situated in the State of New York.   62.  Plaintiff seeks to certify the following class:   63.  All consumers to whom Defendant sent a collection letter substantially and  materially similar to the Letter sent to Plaintiff, which Letter was sent on or after a date one year  prior to the filing of this action to the present.   64.  This action seeks a finding that Defendant's conduct violates the FDCPA, and asks  that the Court award damages as authorized by 15 U.S.C. § 1692k.   66.  Plaintiff's claims are typical of the claims of the Class.  Common questions of law  or fact raised by this action affect all members of the Class and predominate over any individual  issues.  Common relief is therefore sought on behalf of all members of the Class.  A class action  is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy.   67.  The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would  create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to the individual members of the  Class, and a risk that any adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class would, as  a practical matter, either be dispositive of the interests of other members of the Class not party to  the adjudication, or substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.  Defendant  has acted in a manner applicable to the Class as a whole such that declaratory relief is warranted.   68.  Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect and represent the interests of the Class.  The management of the class is not extraordinarily difficult, and the factual and legal issues raised  by this action will not require extended contact with the members of the Class, because Defendant's  conduct was perpetrated on all members of the Class and will be established by common proof.   Moreover, Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in actions brought under consumer protection  laws. 