Product: Debt collection

Received computer generated letter dated XX/XX/XXXX from Credit Systems Inc ( CSI ) claiming that I owed {$640.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX ( based on a principal of {$610.00}. They claim that are charging a statutory interest rate of 8 % per annum pro-rated daily XXXX Colorado Law 5-12-102. Said law states, " when there is no agreement as to the rate thereof, CREDITORS shall receive interest as follows .... '' I have written " creditors '' in all caps to emphasize that a dental/periodontal practice is not a creditor, but buy it's very definition, a service provider. At no time was credit discussed, requested or provided. For if they were a creditor, then terms of credit would have to have been disclosed in advance, and this did not occur. The fact that Credit Systems Inc ( CSI ) lists them as a " CREDITOR '' is also untruthful. Neither XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX nor CSI meet the legal criteria to qualify as creditors, and as such, neither have the legal right to collect statutory interest in accordance with the cited Colorado Law. Furthermore, in the same letter, CSI states, " insurance was billed and paid a portion of the balance for the services rendered in XX/XX/XXXX, but did not pay in full, leaving a balance of {$150.00}. '' XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX maintained a secondary account in camera for which I never received an invoice ( XXXX ) which shows an unpaid balance of {$460.00}, for services they never bothered to check my dental history for necessary nor eligibility, rather XXXX XXXX XXXX making the decision while I was in the chair, off the cuff, rather than exercising due diligence. {$150.00} was the amount that I was invoiced for on account XXXX, which was in dispute with the XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX up until XXXX XXXX that I started receiving harassment from CSI. I sent CSI a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX in which I revoked the ASSIGNMENT and RELEASE I had signed on XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX  XXXX formally revoking my assent and notifying them that such revocation was effective immediately, with the following explicit conditions, " By this revocation of assent and withdrawal of prior concurrence therewith all conditions of said ASSIGNMENT AND RELEASE, including all components and obligations outlined within in are hereby negated : all agreements sundered, all permissions and authorizations rescinded, and all assignments to XXXX XXXX XXXX  and all present and future assignees withdrawn with prejudice. Therefore, Credit Systems INC ( CSI ) no longer has any basis of authority upon which to pursue this matter and will immediately cease and desist in any and all further collection actions regarding this or any related matters, and furthermore, will not engage in any attempts in further assignment, but rather will immediately return this to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  CSI has failed to so, insisting " It is the patient 's responsibility to know policy restrictions and deductible amounts for your insurance. You signed an agreement stating you understood you are liable for the costs of the services whether insurance pays or not. '' This argument fails on a number of points : ( 1 ) When carrying XXXX dental insurances, and even with beneficiary ( customer ) knowing their coverage percentages, the patient can not know in advance how where and when their insurer will find a loophole to fail to meet their agreed upon contractual obligations, and so the customer can not effectively plan and budget accordingly ; ( 2 ) it can reasonably stated that such agreements as the one in question here obtain signatures under coercion, as a condition of service provision, in which the dental/periodontal practice 's patient ( customer ) is forced to agree to obligated themselves to pay for services of indeterminate amounts, as ( a ) no rates are published, ( b ) it is not uncommon for insurers to find loopholes to deny payment, ( c ) the practice has responsibilities to the patient as well : ( i ) it is expected to exercise professional discretion in making reasonable efforts to consult the patient 's document dental history, even if that means making some effort to contact other providers ( there is no evidence such effort was made ) ; ( ii ) it is expected to make some effort to check benefits coverage prior to provide treatment and advise the patient beforehand, before making treatment decisions ; ( 4 ) there was no life-saving urgency or medical necessity preventing the practice of due diligence as herein described, providing any justification of failure on the part of the practice to execute it. Also, CSI states on the banner of their letters and on their website, that they are " A LICENSED COLLECTION AGENCY ''. In my last letter to them dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, I asked them by whom they were licensed, and that they provide their license number in response. They have not done so.