Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan

Consumer Protection Agency Complaint Regional Financial Personal Unsecured Loan XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
A subsidiary of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 


When shouldnt a consumer of credit find out your initially established XXXX XXXX XXXX previously meant to cover a loan note as prescribed to in such agreement is invalid? Apparently, not until they attempt to use it, but instead finds : In this instance, Regional Financials failure to provide adequate disclosures regarding the XXXX XXXX XXXX  is a violation of - 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Subpart C ) - Section 1026.17 of the Truth in Lending ( Regulation Z ) which, as advised by personal legal representation, should lead to civil legal action and penalties.

Pursuant to 12 CFR 208.84 ( c ) ( 5-7 ) ( Timing and method of Disclosures ) states : A person, ( Regional Financial Agents ) must provide the disclosures orally and in writing before the completion of the sale of an insurance product or annuity to a consumer. The disclosures concerning the prohibition on tying an extension of credit to an insurance product or annuity purchase must also be made orally and in writing at the time the consumer applies for an extension of credit in connection with which an insurance product or annuity will be solicited, offered, or sold. 
I am XXXX XXXXXXXX, although authorized to engage in limited work capacity accommodations. The initial Regional Financial unsecured loan was predicated on these two financial facts back in XXXX when the loan was first established and granted a loan with the XXXX insurance rider. 
In this circumstance, the loan was guaranteed by the Regional Financial underwriters who work with their insurance company to provide the loan protection insurance. Moreover, the XXXX XXXX XXXX would cover loan payments in cases of Death liability, but no of XXXX, or involuntary unemployment. Regional Financial alleged intentional misrepresentation of insurance coverages led to deceptional practices by excluding the XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX riders as all clandestinely designed as a one-size fits all inclusive package that works in correlation incumbent upon the assignment of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX agreement note. 
However, during the XXXX pandemic of XXXX XXXX, a period of involuntary unemployment mandated lock-down and stay-at-home measures enacted by Federal, State, and City ordinances inhibiting my ability to make regularly scheduled payments, Regional Financial agents covertly removed that XXXX and Involuntary Unemployment Insurance rider without my knowledge. Moreover, Regional Financial agents engaged in a series of loan flipping refinancing in order to keep the note out of default, which increased the amount of the loan ( through higher interest rate of 35.99 % accrual ) and allegedly eliminated that XXXX insurance option. 
When Regional Financial local representatives were advised of my inability to continue scheduled payment due to the increased severity of my XXXX, the revelation was exposed that a XXXX claim was not viable. 
When a Personal Loan Company ( Regional Financial ) writes off the Unsecured Loan debt as a loss, which was insured by their guarantor underwriters and thus becomes an IRS business deduction. Then Regional Financial turned around and sold that debt for a profit to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who are now attempting to collect on that purchase. 
Pursuant to under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), specifically under Regulation F the due diligence requirements set out rules that debt collectors, such as XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, must follow when they are attempting to collect alleged debts, including verifying the accuracy of the debt. 
While Regional Financial minimized their losses through tax deductions and by selling the debt, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, allegedly seeks profit through aggressive collection efforts on their discounted purchases. As part of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX strategic collection efforts that overtly holds the misrepresentation of debt is now tied to my consumer report and subsequent credit under-rating is used to coerce, bully and browbeat the borrower into submission is intentional. 
When Regional Financial wrote off this debt as a loss, it generally meant they considered the debt uncollectible and removed it from their books. This write-off can be considered a bad debt deduction for tax purposes. 
The Consumer Financial Protection Act and the FDPCA prohibit Professional Collection Agencies such as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. who had been previously warned in XX/XX/XXXX regarding alleged debt to cease and discontinue all future electronic, verbal and written communications, but to no avail. 
Moreover, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. turn around and continue to notify such parties through their subsidiary company, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 1692e specifically addresses false or misleading representations, and 15 U.S.C. 1692f covers unfair practices. Together, these statutes ensure that debt collectors can not use deceptive tactics, such as rebranding their communications under a subsidiary, to circumvent a debtor 's request to cease communication. 
Pursuant to XXXX XXXX Code XXXX - Civil liability, XXXX XXXX XXXX has been given legal advice to explore potential legal civil remedies against Regional Financial, such as filing a civil complaint in US District Court, as well as filing an official complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and Federal Trade Commission pursuing legal action for failure to provide adequate disclosures regarding the XXXX Insurance Coverage is a violation of - 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Subpart C ) - Section 1026.17 of the Truth in Lending ( Regulation Z ), XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAPs ).