Case Information
*1 IN CLERK'S OFFICE
US DISTRICT COURT E.D.N.Y. * NOV 2 7 2017 ^
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BROOKLYN OFFICE
X BLIMA KRAUS, On Behalf of Herself and All Other Similarly Situated Consumers,
Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 17-CV-3402 against - PROFESSIONAL BUREAU OF COLLECTIONS OF MARYLAND, INC.,
Defendant. X
GLASSER, Senior United States District Judge: Plaintiff Blima Kraus ("Kraus") brings this putative class action against Professional Bureau of Collections of Maryland, Inc. ("PBCM")» alleging violations of the Fair DebtCollection PracticesAct ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § \692 etseq. Beforethe Court is PBCM's motion to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6)of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Kraus's claim is essentially as follows: She allegesthat PBCM's June 6,2016 letterto her (the"Letter"),whichtransmitted an offerto settle her debtfor 40% of her accountbalance, violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692e because it listed her account balance but did not indicate that the account balance might increase due to interest or other charges. Section 1692e prohibits the use of "any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt," including "[t]he false representation of. . . the character, amount, or legal status of any debt." 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(A). In Avila v. Riexinger & Associates, LLC^ the Second Circuit held that a debt collector violates § 1692e if it notifies a consumer of his or her account balance but fails to disclose that the consumer's balance may increase due to interest and fees. See 817 F.3d 72, 76-77 (2d Cir. 2016). But Avilaalso providesa safe harbor for a debt collector who "fail[s] to disclose that the consumer's balance may increase due to interest and fees" but