Lawsuit: FirstStates Financial Services Unlawfully Demanded Payment for Fire Dept. Services
by Erin Shaak
Last Updated on September 13, 2018
Lamonaca v. Firststates Financial Services, Corp.
Filed: July 19, 2018 ◆§ 1:18cv11829
A New Jersey resident claims FirstStates Financial Services, Corp. demanded payment for a fire department's response to the man's car accident when the department allegedly provided no assistance to him or his vehicle.
New Jersey
FirstStates Financial Services, Corp. is facing a proposed class action after allegedly sending to a New Jersey man a deceptive collection letter.
The letter concerned a purported debt referred to the defendant by another debt collector, PA Fire Recovery Service, who the plaintiff previously sued over allegedly unlawful debt collection practices. According to the complaint, the supposed obligation arose from the City of Chester Fire Department’s response to a car accident in which the plaintiff was involved in October 2016. The man claims the fire department provided no assistance to him or his vehicle, yet non-party PA Fire Recovery Service reportedly sent him a letter demanding $600 for services purportedly rendered.
Then, on May 15, 2018, the plaintiff supposedly received a letter from the defendant seeking an amount of $800.40 for the same alleged obligation, which the case says represents a 33 percent increase from the balance stated in the previous letter. The lawsuit argues that the defendant’s letter contained false representations and attempted to collect an unlawful amount in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). As summarized in the complaint:
“The FirstStates Letter contained several false representations and deceptive and misleading misrepresentations, including but not limited to a false statement of the character, amount or legal status of the alleged debt, in violation of section 1692e(2)(A) of the FDCPA; the threat that FirstStates would communicate credit information which it knew or which should have known to be false, in violation of section 1692e(8); and, the false statement that [the plaintiff] had agreed to ‘pay the obligation,’ in violation of section 1692e(10) of the FDCPA.”
The lawsuit argues that the defendant had “no legal basis” to collect the alleged debt and sent the letter at issue in order to confuse and mislead the plaintiff into paying the requested amount.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.