Gulender Ozkaya wrote a check for $1,041.55 to pay an automobile dealership for repairs to her car. When she realized that her car had not been properly repaired, Ozkaya stopped payment on the check. The canceled check was then purchased by Telecheck Services, Inc., which sent Ozkaya a form dunning letter attempting to collect payment. In the letter, Telecheck said, “Until this is resolved, we may not approve your checks or the opening of a checking account at over 90,000 merchants and banks who use Telecheck nationally.” It also warned, “We have assigned your file to our Recovery Department where it will be given to a professional collection agent. Please be aware that we may take reasonable steps to contact you and secure payment of the balance in full.” To resolve the issue and update her record quickly, Ozkaya was instructed to send a cashier’s check or money order for the amount due in a return envelope that was provided. Telecheck added a $25 service charge, listed as a “fee” at the top of the letter, to the amount of the original check. Finally, it cautioned that “[a]ny delay, or attempt to avoid this debt, may affect your ability to use checks.”

At the bottom of the page, the reader was referred to the back “for important legal notice and corporate address.” The reverse side of the letter contained a standard debt validation notice, which indicated that if the consumer disputed the debt, she should contact Telecheck in writing within thirty days.

Ozkaya filed suit against Telecheck. What claims could she make against the company? What are Telecheck’s strongest defenses? [Ozkaya v. Telecheck Services, Inc., 982 F. Supp. 578 (N.D. Ill. 1997).]