Product: Debt collection

FDCPA Complaint Regarding Lack of Communication and Notice Post-Merger by XXXX XXXX and Ratchford Law Group I am submitting a complaint against XXXX XXXX  and Ratchford Law Group for their failure to provide any form of communication before, at, or after, or notice post-merger regarding the existence of XXXX XXXX or the status of my alleged debt from XXXX. This failure has directly impacted my ability to knowingly manage or address the debt in question, constituting a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). There are many similar complaints online regarding Ratchford Law Group and this violation of the FDCPA. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I was served with a debt collection lawsuit in XXXX XXXX, Pennsylvania. It was served on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed Preliminary Objections to the Complaint under XXXX XXXX against XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX, instead of responding, filed an amended complaint. On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed Preliminary Objections to the amended complaint under Pa.R.C.P. XXXX against XXXX XXXX. The statute of limitations bars XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX claim. In Pennsylvania, per XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, actions upon a contract must be commenced within XXXX years. However, XXXX XXXX  in what's tantamount to legal bullying, filed a lawsuit anyhow in violation of the FDCPA. 

The last payment to XXXX, per XXXX XXXX XXXX own XXXX XXXX, was on XX/XX/XXXX. No subsequent payments are recorded on XXXX 's XXXX ledger, and the account statement dated XX/XX/XXXX, demonstrates a delinquency of XXXX days at that time. XXXX XXXX did not file its lawsuit until XX/XX/XXXX and it wasn't served until mid XX/XX/XXXX ; this timeline exceeds the four-year limitation period by a substantial margin. XXXX XXXX alleged in their lawsuit that I entered a new agreement with Ratchford Law Group on XX/XX/XXXX, which required $ 300 monthly payments due by the XXXX of each month to be made out to Ratchford Law Group, and XXXX  alleged to their complaint that I made payments until XX/XX/XXXX, which is NOT TRUE. By XX/XX/XXXX, the alleged debt was in breach for failure to make a payment by XX/XX/XXXX, and only XXXX {$300.00} payments were ever made to Ratchford Law Group or XXXX ; it was never clear or communicated to me who I allegedly owed or who allegedly owned the alleged debt or why I had to make anything to Ratchford, not XXXX  because neither XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, or Ratchford ever communicated to me EVER. 

Other than a superseding new agreement in XX/XX/XXXX, I never received a writing from Ratchford Law Group. There was only ever XXXX conversation with a collection representative from Ratchford Law Group in XXXX or early XX/XX/XXXX where I was told not to worry about anything. Then, there was complete radio silence for the next, at least, XXXX days until the complaint was served. 

With no notice, with XXXX communication but XXXX conversation at least XXXX days ago, and then radio silence for XXXX days until a complaint is suddenly unfairly and surprisingly served, no reasonable person would think they still owe something, and no reasonable person would spontaneously think, " I wonder if a new financial behemoth has entered the market and acquired my alleged debt without any notice to me. '' Especially when the financial behemoth in question has yet to emerge from the shadows of a complex merger, it defies logic to expect an individual to navigate through the silence and corporate obfuscation, piecing together the existence of a debt obligation to an entity that has made no effort to introduce itself, let alone give notice of its claim. 

Lack of Communication/Notice Post-Merger : Violation of FDCPA for Failure to Communicate : XXXX XXXX and Ratchford Law Group have violated the FDCPA by failing to notify me of the merger between XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX & XXXX, which resulted in the formation of XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, and then filed a lawsuit after the statute of limitations on XX/XX/XXXX, which wasn't served until mid XXXX XXXX. This lack of notification deprived me of the opportunity to understand to whom my alleged debt was allegedly owed, effectively obscuring my ability to respond or engage with the correct entity regarding my financial obligations. They continue to ignore and refuse to communicate. 
Impact on Consumer Rights : The absence of communication regarding the merger and the subsequent rights to collect the debt under the new entity XXXX XXXX is misleading and obstructs my rights as a consumer to be informed of my alleged debts status. This conduct falls within the purview of deceptive practices prohibited by the FDCPA, as it misleads debtors about the nature and status of their debts. 
Misrepresentation of Creditor Identity : By initiating legal action without previously establishing or communicating their standing as the new creditor, XXXXXXXX XXXX and Ratchford Law Group have misrepresented the identity of the creditor, which is a direct violation of the FDCPA. Consumers are entitled to clear information about who owns their debt, and any changes to this ownership must be communicated promptly to prevent confusion and ensure transparency. 
Request for Remedial Action : In light of these violations, I request a thorough investigation into the failure of XXXX XXXX and Ratchford Law Group to provide necessary communication and notice post-merger. This investigation should also examine the broader implications of such practices on consumer rights and the integrity of debt collection processes under the FDCPA. 

The lack of communication from XXXX XXXX and Ratchford Law Group regarding their merger and the implications for my alleged debt has not only hindered my ability to make informed decisions but also constitutes a significant breach of the FDCPAs requirements for fair and transparent debt collection practices. I seek immediate rectification of these issues, including the dismissal of any legal actions taken against me based on these violations. 

I have since reached out to XXXX XXXX of Ratchford Law Group and he continues to ignore me.