Product: Debt collection

On Approximately XX/XX/XXXX I entered into a contract agreement also known as " the Program '' of which XXXX was deposited into my account by XXXX, XXXX XXXX 

It was not until the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX that I came to know that XXXX, XXXX filed a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX ] under false pretenses. I phoned the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and was told the lien will 'fall off ' in 5 years. 

After failed attempts to revisit the contract and make a payment of XXXX USD to satisfy the principal deposit [ XXXX ] I filed a complaint with the District attorneys office under XXXX # XXXX. There was no outcome from this complaint. XXXX, XXXX maintained that I owed them an amount exceeding the contract provisions. The deposit was made by XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of XXXX. The amount XXXX, XXXX is stating is repayment is XXXX in an email CC 'd to me via XXXX, XXXX and its legal representation, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX is representing XXXX, XXXX as of early XXXX. Although I asked in a PDF to XXXX 's paralegal when did XXXX, XXXX obtain legal counsel and representation, my question fell on deaf ears. 

I have sustained substantial damage in that the letters that the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote to my creditors, partners and merchants have resulted in suspension of my accounts and may not be recoverable or recouped. This has potentially cut off my future earnings and income. 

Because the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX refuse to answer my questions and have sent me documents that raise a brow and question the wherewithall of the contract : Please find a copy of what I wrote to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : " XXXX XXXX XXXX, I have contested the XXXX. I can forward the email communication regarding my efforts to payment with XXXX XXXXThere is nothing in the contract supporting the XXXX. Ipso facto the 'itemized ' process of payments [ you sent in an email to my request for an itemized schedule of payment ] do not support the claim of XXXX. The elements of the contract 's wherewithal are in question and beg an answer. 

Elements are as follows : >Defaulting on a contract that never ends and does not have a scheduled due date not explicitly states when the debt is satisfied ( unfounded debt values ) makes the XXXX non-applicable and is voidable. Meaning the contract does not Default and the XXXX is a debt category that does not exist due to the contract 's nature. 

>Your Client Refused Payment. Forwarding of this communication is possible via email to both you and XXXX >Intention to recoup has not been exercised as my communications have been met with a lawyer who has the discretion as to what and if he will answer according to an email sent by you. This is not how you enter into the recoup phase. 

>Amount deposited does not match the amount your XXXX XXXX is pursuing. It exceeds the amount of future receipts, it exceeds the amount of Total, the 25 % is an unfounded value and does not show performance, the surveillance fee does not add up to the total value of XXXX and it is absent from the itemized schedule of fees you sent to me in an email where as I requested an " Itemized '' schedule of fees. 

The deposit was XXXX. 

The contract agreement reads that this financial instrument is not a loan, however the CFPB views MCA 's as Credit. Credit acrews interest despite what your client 's contract states : henceforth the contract is Void ab initio. I signed to pay XXXX not exceeding the total future receipts. As discussed in a prior email, I have opened the case for review. 

For your due diligence : In a letter written to XXXX : " It is my understanding that according to the " Agreement '' of " the Program '' this is Not A Loan. There are no interests accrued, there is no repayment plan schedule, and no " Time Period '' where the purchased amount is payable, as written in the preliminary page of " the agreement ''. '' I have not made any payments because XXXX at Fundo LLC refused to take my payment. Not only was the principal deposit " denied '' [ as spoken by XXXX ] I filed a XXXX with the district attorney 's office denoting that there was an indifference in payment. XXXX ' remarkable rejection of payment also left my account in an un-updated status as my demographics changed. Still, two months into the contract, Fundo, LLC proceeded with an illegal process. 
Nonetheless, as written in a prior email to you, I am forced to open this case for review outside of our dialogue since your lawyer has chosen to refrain from answering my questions. 
Was it the intention of Fundo, LLC to create an undesirable, unilateral, indemnification upon me in order to push and exercise the Universal Commercial Code? 
Meaning, did your client deliberately refuse payment in order to obtain more funds ( payment in excess to the contracts provisions ) then was written for as stipulated in the contract agreement? '' Paralegal XXXX has not yet answered my questions. I was left with no other choice but to seek Fair Remedies.