In Rhodes v. Olson Associates, P.C., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2015 WL 1136176 (D.Colo. 2015), Judge Arguello recognized that the FDCPA’s $500,000 liability cap in class actions would reduce the per-classmember’s potential recovery to less than $1,000 in an individual case. But, Judge Arguello found that this fact did not make the class action devise not the superior way of adjudicating a mass action.
Application of these factors shows that a class action is the superior method to adjudicate this case. No class member has demonstrated an interest in prosecuting a claim individually, there are no other cases against Defendant involving the issues presented in this case by a proposed class member, the forum is desirable as the proposed class contains Colorado residents only, and there will be no difficult case-management issues because the facts and claims are very straightforward and the evidence necessary to prosecute the case is within Defendant’s records. Additionally, the FDCPA permits individual plaintiffs to recover up to $1,000 in statutory damages. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692k. Thus, the potential recovery for an individual plaintiff is unlikely to provide sufficient incentive for individual members to bring their own claims. Moreover, courts have held that FDCPA class actions are usually superior for reasons of judicial economy. See, e.g., Abels v. JBC Legal Grp., P.C., 227 F.R.D. 541, 547 (N.D.Cal.2005); Piper v. Portnoff Law Associates, 262 F.Supp.2d 520 (E.D.Pa. May 15, 2003); Brink v. First Credit Resources, 185 F.R.D. 567 (D.Ariz.1999).