12.  Plaintiff also brings this action on behalf of a class, pursuant to Federal Rules of  Civil Procedure Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(3).   13.  The class consists of all natural persons with addresses in the State of New York  who were the subject of a communication from Defendant, made within the time frame relevant  to this action, which both sought to collect a personal or household debt less than $50.00 and  contained the statement, “Subscriber to Experian, Transunion and Experian.”    14.  For purposes of the class definition, the “time frame relevant to this action” is that  period of time beginning one year prior to the filing of the original complaint in this action,  through and including the date of class certification.   15.  The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is not practicable. On  information and belief, there are at least 40 members of the class, including the Plaintiff.   16.  There are questions of law and fact common to the class, which common  questions predominate over any questions relating to individual class members. The predominant  1 Source: http://www.pmacollections.com/services.html (Last accessed: April 9, 2016).  4  common question is whether the Defendant threatened to take any action (i.e., report debts less  than $50.00 to the credit bureaus) that was not intended to be taken.   17.  Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the class members. All are based on the  same factual and legal theories.   18.  Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the class members. Plaintiff has  retained counsel experienced in class actions and FDCPA litigation.   19.  A class action is superior for the fair and efficient adjudication of this matter, in  that:  a. Individual actions are not economically feasible;  b. Members of the class are likely to be unaware of their rights;  c. Congress intended class actions to be a principal enforcement mechanism under  the FDCPA.  20.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint  as though fully stated herein.   21.  A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or  means in connection with the collection of any debt including but not limited to the threat to take  any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5).  Likewise, a debt collector may not use any false representation or deceptive means to collect or  attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10).   22.  Defendant, through Exhibit A, sought to collect a debt from Plaintiff in the  amount of $32.35 in part by impliedly threatening to report Plaintiff’s debt to the credit bureaus  5  despite its advertised policy and practice not to report balances of less than $50.00 to the credit  bureaus. In so doing, Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) and § 1692e(10). The implied  threat to report Plaintiff’s debt to the credit bureaus constitutes both a threatened act that was  never intended to be taken and a false or deceptive means of collecting debt.   23.  Because Defendant’s unlawful collection communication employs one or more of  the acts proscribed by 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for statutory  damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692k.  WHEREFORE, the Court should enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against  Defendants for:  (1) Statutory damages;  (2) Attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit;  (3) Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.  Dated: Atlanta, Georgia              April 11, 2016  The Law Offices of Shimshon Wexler, PC  By: /s Shimshon Wexler  Shimshon Wexler  Attorney for Plaintiff  216 W 104th St., #129  New York, NY 10025  Tel: (212)760-2400  Fax: (917)512-6132  swexleresq@gmail.com  licensed in New York and Georgia  Plaintiff requests a trial by jury on all issues so triable.  By: /s Shimshon Wexler  6  8.  On or about March 9, 2016, Defendant sent, and Plaintiff received a reasonable  time thereafter, a form debt collection letter alleging therein that Plaintiff owed a debt to Sheil  Medical Labs in the amount of $32.35. A true and correct copy of the letter Plaintiff received is  attached hereto as Exhibit A.   9.  In addition to informing Plaintiff that the “amount is outstanding and past due,”  Exhibit A unmistakably warns, in bold, capital letters, that Defendant is a “SUBSCRIBER TO  DEFENDANT’S VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. 1692e  