This decision holds that separate acts in the course of a collection action may constitute independent violations of the FDCPA and that the FDCPA’s one-year limitations period runs separately from each of those violations. To constitute a separate violation, the litigation conduct must be the last opportunity for the debt collector to comply with the FDCPA and must occur on an easily ascertainable date. In this case, the debt collector served suit before filing it and later filed an affidavit asserting a new factual basis for claiming it owned the debt sued on. Each of those events constituted a separate alleged violation since plaintiff claimed the debt collector knew it did not own the debt. Suit brought more than a year after service but less than a year after filing and affidavit was timely as to those two alleged violations. The FDCPA statute of limitations cannot be tolled by delayed discovery or continuous wrong theories.