Product: Debt collection

In the XX/XX/XXXX I became aware of a debt collection effort by a firm called " XXXX XXXX '' which was reporting an outstanding debt in the amount of {$4200.00} for services from XXXX, on an account opened XX/XX/XXXX. I became aware of this information as I was in the process of refinancing my home. I contacted the credit reporting agency " XXXX '' to followed up on this matter. I learned of the reporting part and contacted them " XXXX XXXX '' : They informed me the debt was ultimately being reported because they could not locate the individual, and no payments had been made. The address provided to XXXX was apparently invalid. It also had not association with me. 

I freely provided this agency my address and confirmed my social security number. The firm informed me the social security number associated to the account, was a match and the basis of their reporting. I informed them I have never had a XXXX account nor resided in MN ( where account was opened ), and that XXXX and their firm was dealing with a matter of fraud by the person or persons who purchased this equipment and services. I had no knowledge of the debt, and only became aware of the negative credit reporting due to my refinancing. 


The confirmation of the social security number was the only basis to associate to me, and they would not remove or stop reporting, even as they knew all other pieces of information in their possession was clearly falsified- grossly unfair. I contacted my family Attorney, who engaged in the matter, and I filed a dispute with XXXX credit services Report # XXXX. I followed the instructions of my attorney completing any needs forms and or reports. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX reported that I had prevailed in the matter, and the item was removed from my credit report. 

However, on XX/XX/XXXX, I learned another firm now called " Source Receivables Mng '' started reporting collections and negative credit information as of XX/XX/XXXX, again in the amount of {$4200.00}, with the original creditor of XXXX. I immediately submitted another dispute XXXX. These collections are clearly the same debt, with sprint and its collections firms failing to communicate the status of disputes and their resolutions, subjecting me to ongoing unfair negative credit reporting and damages. Further, it appears, Source Receivables only engaged a few days before the original dispute was due to be resolved. 

I now see that my attorney has been in communication with " Source Recievables Mng '' since inception of this dispute but in fact the dispute was never moved to " source Recievables Mng ''. I can not speak of the reasons for XXXX XXXX/Source Recievables transferring of accounts, and XXXX reporting of the matter. I can clearly state this is the same debt, and the same fraudulent matter. 

Further, it is completely unfair for credit agencies and collection firms to be allowed to report on a single piece of collaborating information - especially when they freely admit, they have conflicting pieces of information and know they are victims of fraud. All they are doing is extending the damages of theft upon innocent victims. Rather, phone companies like XXXX, need to take positive steps to confirm consumer identity.