Product: Debt collection

I am writing to formally lodge a complaint against Patenaude & Felix, APC concerning their repeated failure to validate an alleged debt they claim I owe. I have made multiple requests to Patenaude & Felix, APC for proper debt validation, but they have not complied with my requests, contrary to the requirements of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ).

My specific concerns are as follows : Failure to Provide Proper Debt Validation : Despite numerous requests, Patenaude & Felix, APC has only sent me statements, which do not qualify as proper debt validation under the FDCPA. I have not received any of the required documentation that substantiates the legitimacy of this debt.

Lack of License Proof : I have requested Patenaude & Felix, APC to provide a copy of their license to prove that they have the legal right to collect debts in the state of California. To date, they have failed to provide this documentation. 

Chain of Custody for the Alleged Debt : I have asked Patenaude & Felix, APC to provide a chain of custody for the alleged debt to verify its transfer from the original creditor to them. They have not provided any such documentation.

Purchase Agreement : I have requested Patenaude & Felix, APC to provide the purchase agreement between the original creditor and their firm. They have failed to comply with this request.

Original Creditor Agreement with Wet Signature : I have also asked Patenaude & Felix, APC to provide the original agreement that I purportedly signed with the original creditor, bearing my wet signature. This, too, has not been provided.

Patenaude and Felix, APC are violating the following federal and state laws : Federal Laws : Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : Section 809 ( Validation of debts ) : This section requires debt collectors to provide proper validation of the debt within five days of the initial communication. They must provide the amount of the debt, the name of the creditor, and a statement informing the consumer of their right to dispute the debt within 30 days. The documentation should include the original agreement or sufficient evidence of the debt. 
Section 807 ( False or misleading representations ) : By failing to provide the requested documentation and continuing collection efforts, the debt collector may be engaging in deceptive practices.

California State Laws : California Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( CFDCPA ) : Section 1788.17 : This section incorporates the FDCPA into California state law, making any violation of the FDCPA a violation of state law as well.

Section 1788.13 ( Misrepresentation ) : This section prohibits debt collectors from falsely representing the character, amount, or legal status of the debt.

California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act : Section 1788.18 ( Debt Validation Requirements ) : Similar to the FDCPA, this requires debt collectors to provide adequate validation of the debt and documentation supporting their right to collect it.

California Consumer Protection Act ( CCPA ) : By failing to provide proper debt validation, the necessary licensing proof, chain of custody for the debt, the purchase agreement, and the original creditor agreement with your wet signature, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX be violating both federal and state debt collection laws. These actions can constitute misleading and deceptive practices under the respective laws.