OPINION & ORDER Plaintiffs Navindra Rajkumar and Raymond Junmok Kim (“Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, bring this action against FBCS, Inc. (“FBCS” or “Defendant”) asserting violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692, et seq. (“FDCPA”). Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. BACKGROUND1 Plaintiffs commenced this action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated on January 9, 2020. ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”). Plaintiffs alleged that FBCS, a “debt collector” with its principal place of business in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, id.
11, 16, violated the FDCPA. Plaintiffs’ allegations stem from a collection letter received by Ms. Rajkumar dated January 7, 2019, id. 30, and a collection letter received by Mr. Kim dated May 23, 2019, id. 31. See also id. Exs. 1-2; Stoughton Aff. Ex. 1.2 The collection letters received by each Plaintiff are substantively identical. At the top right of the letter is Defendant’s name in bold, followed by Defendant’s address in Hatboro, PA and phone number. Compl. Exs. 1-2; Stoughton Aff. Ex. 1. At the top left corner is the word “From:” in caps, bold and italicized, followed by a P.O. Box address in Charlotte, North Carolina. Id. Directly below that are the words “Personal & Confidential,” bolded and in caps. Id. Further below is the Plaintiff’s address and to the right of that is the date of the letter. Id. The body of the letter begins with the question “Interested in saving $[___.___]?” Id. It goes on to state that the current creditor has “authorized [FBCS] to accept a reduced amount to resolve [Plaintiff's] account.” Id. This is then followed by details of the amount owed to the current creditor. Id. It then provides four options to pay the “reduced amount”: (1) “Pay the reduced amount of $[___.___] to us in one payment;” (2) “Pay $[___.___] as a down-payment and the remaining balance of $ [___.___] 30 days after your 1st payment is received;” (3) “[S]plit your reduced amount into 3 payments of $[___.___] each” and directing Plaintiff to “call [FBCS's] office for details;” or (4) Plaintiff could “[c]ontact one of [FBCS's] agents, who have been specially trained to listen to your circumstances and guide you through the process,” as there could be “other payment options available based on [Plaintiff's] specific situation.” Id. The fourth option provides a phone number to call, which is the same phone number as the one provided at the top right of the letter, beneath Defendant’s address. Id. Below the payment options provided, Plaintiff is also invited to visit Defendant’s website. Id. The letter is signed by “Mike Sacco.” Id. Below Mike Sacco’s “signature,” is the text “*** Please see reverse side for important information.***” Id. The very bottom of the letter also includes a detachable payment slip which lists Defendant’s Hatboro, PA address twice, both times beneath Defendant’s name in bold. Id. The payment slip can be used to select Plaintiff’s preferred payment option and sent to Defendant with payment. Id. The back of the letter contains Defendant’s hours of operation, id., as well as the following notices: This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. This communication is from a debt collector. Unless you notify this office within 30 days after receiving this notice that you dispute the validity of this debt or any portion thereof, this office will assume this debt is valid. If you notify this office in writing within 30 days from receiving this notice, that the debt or any portion thereof is disputed, this office will obtain verification of the debt or obtain a copy of a judgment and mail you a copy of such judgment or verification. If you request this office in writing within 30 days after receiving this notice, this office will provide you the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. FBCS, Inc. is not obligated to renew this offer. Id. Under these notices is Defendant’s New York City license number. Id. Lastly, the back of the letter provides the following notices: i. Debt collectors are prohibited from engaging in abusive, deceptive and misleading debt collection efforts including but not limited to threats of violence, obscene or profane language and repeated phone calls made with the intent to annoy, abuse or harass you. ii. If a creditor or debt collector receives a money judgment against you in court, state or federal laws may prevent the following types of income from being taken to pay the debt: Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security, Public Assistance, Spousal support, child support, alimony, Unemployment benefits, Disability benefits, Workers’ compensation benefits, Public or Private pensions, Veterans’ benefits, Federal student loans, Federal student grants, Federal work study funds and ninety percent of your wages or salary earned in the last sixty days. Id. Plaintiffs allege that these letters violate the FDCPA in multiple ways. First, Plaintiff alleges that the language on the back of the letter indicating that Defendant “is not obligated to renew this offer” violates the FDCPA because it “could lead the least sophisticated consumer to believe that Defendant is not obligated to accept disputes,” “not required to obtain [or send Plaintiff] verification of the debt if requested,” and “not required to send information concerning the original creditor if requested by Plaintiff.” See, Compl.
