Product: Debt collection

Follow up to Claim # : XXXX - Resurgent Capital Services, LP/LVNV XXXX XXXX XXXX # : XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX  Good morning CFPB, I am following up with a second complaint on case # : XXXX as I don't feel LVNV answered to satisfaction to close the case. 

These companies are accustomed to pointing fingers at each other because it creates confusion and they report longer. 

After 9 months of confusion I have it down to a science. These companies are accustomed to writing responses to you guys that effectively close the complaint, but that doesn't mean they are accurate and the situation is resolved just because the person I'm accusing of wrongdoing just says he isn't committing any wrongdoing. It doesn't work that way. 

You closed the case based on the Bank 's response and LVNV response conflict each other and I completely disagree with accepting Resurgent LVNV Funding 's response as sufficient. 

They didn't even address the problem I stated so I'm opening a brand new claim to be published based now not only on the original offenses, but also the attempts to skirt legally having to be held accountable and it down for being innacurate by pawing the account off back and forth. 

LVNV Funding has been adversely reporting/collecting on an account that I had been paying for XXXX XXXX XXXX on until the day it charged off. 

I don't think Resurgent Capital Services/LVNV Funding understands their own claim response, despite my several letters and follow up phone conversations phone conversations with them to attempt bipassing the automated validation system and trigger a manual review. 

The one letter that differs from the rest was back a few months ago when I was frustrated and over the phone I asserted that I am XXXX, I became XXXX at the time this account went bad, I communicated with XXXX XXXX XXXX  about it regardless of the logistics, the bank has conceded to what I said and verified what I said was accurate with only minor technical discrepancies. 

LVNV responded with a letter stating they are suspending collections indefinitely. They are still collecting. 

Why did Resurgent Capital Services validate the account each time I disputed or I called to clarify called or I requested documents such as the purchase agreement to establish that XXXX XXXX XXXX  sold you an account that I had claimed a hardship and exercised XXXX  XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX per the Bank. 

When you conducted your reasonable investigation into my dispute that all asserted there was a hardship prior to charge off, I assume you contacted the original creditor to verify that information. Whom did you speak with at XXXX XXXX XXXX, on what dates and what documents did they provide you that led you to determine it was still a valid collectible debt that you didn't have to get the original creditor involved on a financial hardship claim where the claim involved was a financial hardship claim? What date and time were these phone calls? 

In Resurgent 's response, they provided many months of account statements to show that this account actually does exist. Well again, I didn't dispute whether it existed to begin with or not, I disputed the balance of the collection because that is 100 % impossible to be accurate and after that was verified I started to dispute the investigation methods because if an actual human read the file as Resurgent claims they " personally went over, '' why is it still being reported? That makes no sense. If he personally reviewed my account he would have done the following : - Noticed charges for XXXX XXXX XXXX on all billing statements. 
- Considered the disputes claim that it is innacurate. 
- Inquired with the original creditor if the documents provided by me were original and legitimate. 
- When they gave their answer which they gave the CFPB and Comptroller of the Currency, you would see that they agree the account was covered under XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and they verified that they are not reporting on my credit report. 
- The bank asserts that I must take up my claim with LVNV Funding because you are the one responsible for reporting the account and investigating disputes into the account and the original account. 
- You assert that I must take it up with XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
- Who is responsible for investigating the completeness and accuracy of the current reporting of the account based on a Credit XXXX XXXX  assertion that they have removed the account, validated that I was enrolled in XXXX XXXX and it was brought up on XX/XX/XXXX? 
- In other words, what parties were involved in your investigations into my disputes all this year? 
- Who were the parties you spoke with? Date? Time? Phone number? 
- What was said in response by XXXX XXXX XXXX  when you relayed my dispute information? ( this response would have been provided in writing )., but you never provided it to me. 
- That brought me to actually question not only the validity of the account but also you as a company, and my mission went from being about cleaning up a misunderstanding to uncovering Shady schemes to keep a bad account parked on my credit report through closing so I pay it to not lose out on the money. 
- What documents were provided in by any 3rd parties companies involved in the investigation of my dispute response to my claim of hardship? ( There will be documents. I had credit protection so I wouldn't recommend making up that you contacted them if you don't have supporting documents. ). Were there third parties? Did you involve the original creditor? 

I assure you that I have no intention of ever paying a debt I don't owe. That's why I paid XXXX XXXX and not you. 
Now that you've verified and validated this account over 8-10 times for accuracy .... You can see my pull from XX/XX/XXXX from IdentityIQ.com that shows not only inconsistencies and innacuracies, but missing information, contradicting information, contradicting status and type of account. 

IT IS NOW ILLEGAL TO REPORT THIS ACCOUNT TO THE BUREAUS AND IT IS ILLEGAL FOR BUREAUS TO ALLOW YOU TO REPORT IT. 

In it, you have broken the law to report this account at all per the FCRA and FDCPA and FCCPA. You further try to skirt around technicalities of collection reporting by removing Collection Account status/type from the proper field and noting it with emphasis in several notes sections and sections used for other purposes. 

Questions That must be answered : 1. As a debt buyer who, how did you investigate my disputes claiming I was having hardship at the time of discharge with the original creditor and that I had XXXX  XXXX? 
2. You saw all of the documents and you saw the charges for credit  protection, why would you validate/verify accurate reporting when that element of uncertain truth entered into your mind ... Or did you not quite go over it in as great detail as you said? 
3. When I informed you that I was XXXX and my sole source of income was SSDI, I informed you that I couldn't be garnished ... I'm pretty much judgement proof anyway, the hardship is real, the credit protection is real ... Why did you not send it back to the original creditor? 
4. When I called Resurgent Capital Services/LVNV FUNDING and explained the situation several times. Why did you request certain documents like my award letter and credit protection documents, assure me you'd review it and take care of it and 30 Days later I'd get an automatically generated validation. 
XXXX. XXXX Resurgent Capital Services, LP/LVNV Funding have a formal dispute investigation process? If so, can you send me an outline of the steps taken to investigate all disputes? If not, why not? 
XXXX. Please provide me with all documents utilized in investigating all of my disputes through the bureaus and directly. 
XXXX. Please list all parties involved in your investigation of the dispute. 
XXXX. THE ACCOUNTS ARE NOW MISSING REQUIRED FIELDS SUCH AS eq. ORIGINAL CREDITOR, exp. DATE OF FIRST DELINQUENCY, tu. DATE OF FIRST DELINQUENCY. 

The facts are, the original creditor responded to this complaint basically saying, yeah we know you had credit protection and it's been removed from your account. 

XXXX XXXX on the other hand has validated the debt without even putting human eyes on it nevermind investigating it. 

I'd this guy personally reviewed the file and my disputes he would have easily picked up that each statement has a charge for the the XXXX XXXX program, would have put more weight into deciding to contact XXXX XXXX XXXX, and got their answer and all of this would not be happening. 

They neglected that responsibility. They knowingly refused to investigate my Disputes and kept referring me to XXXX XXXX XXXX  for resolution. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  has verified my claim and assured me they are not reporting. Remove this account from all bureaus immediately. 

Thank You, XXXX XXXX