The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Joseph E. Irenas
IRENAS, Senior District Judge:
Plaintiff, Adam D'Addario, alleges that Defendant, Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC, violated the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act*fn1 (the "FDCPA") by making a debt settlement offer that expired before the thirty-day window for D'Addario to contest the debt's validity elapsed. Pending before the Court is Enhanced Recovery's Motion to Dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6), and D'Addario's Motion for Class Certification under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 23. For the reasons below, the Motion to Dismiss will be granted. The Motion for Class Certification will be dismissed as moot.
D'Addario is a "consumer" and Enhanced Recovery is a "debt collector" as defined by the FDCPA. (Compl. ¶¶ 2-3.) Enhanced Recovery sent an initial letter to D'Addario dated October 15, 2010, offering a "REPAYMENT OPPORTUNITY" on a debt of $8,744.70 to Chrysler Financial, LLC. (Compl. ¶ 4, Exhibit "A"; caps in original) The letter reads, in relevant part:
We recognize that you may have gone through some financial difficulty and have been unable to repay your account. We would like to offer you a few positive and flexible options to satisfy your account.
CHRYSLER FINANCIAL, LLC will release the title upon receipt and successful clearance of your settlement. If your automobile is still within the lease period or has been liquidated during auction the title will not be available for release.
Option 1: Settlement: $3,497.88, please remit by 10/30/10. Option 2: Settlement: $3,935.12, payable over the next 2 months.
Option 3: Settlement: $4,372.35, payable over the next 3 months. . ..
P.S. We are very interested in helping you resolve this debt. If one of the above options does not suit your financial situation, please contact one of our recovery specialists to assist you in setting up a repayment plan that will . . . .
NOTICE - SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR IMPORTANT NOTICES AND CONSUMER RIGHTS.
(Compl. Exhibit "A".) On the back of letter are the notices of D'Addario's rights, including his right to dispute the debt within thirty days of receiving the letter, in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a).*fn2
D'Addario alleges that this letter is a "misleading and inaccurate" "demand" for payment because Option 1 (i.e., payment on October 30, 2010) falls within the 30-day window for disputing the debt. (Compl. ¶¶ 4, 6.) The Complaint asserts one count--violation of the ...