Product: Debt collection

The basis for my dispute Credit Systems International , Inc. Mr. XXXX XXXX XXXX Vice President, CREDIT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL XXXX, {$190.00} - was required to notify me prior to XX/XX/XXXX, or no later than 30 days after. CREDIT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL failed to notify me about reporting derogatory info. to XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX  In section 603 ( p ) 15 U.S.C. ss 168s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) ( A ) ( I ) ; The notice required under subparagraph ( A ) shall be provided to the customer prior to, or no later than 30 days after XXXX, furnishing the negative derogatory information to a consumer reporting agency described in section 603 ( p ), 15 U.S.C. ss 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) ( B ) ( I ). Plus broke commercial law under UCC 9.501 that all notices were timely and properly given by dated certified mail receipt. They were not met. I asked for documentation & received no response. Also, CREDIT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL " failed to give me my " Mini-Miranda '' five days prior to placing this derogatory item on all of my credit reports, per Section 807 ( 11 ) & FDCPA 809, which is {$1000.00} per violation and the state of TX allows treble damages. Under 809. Validations of date and Mini-Mirandi under Section 807 ( 1 ) Credit Systems International , Inc. Mr. XXXX XXXX XXXX Vice President failed to send me my initial communication before placing this alleged derogatory status on my credit reports further violating the FCRA, I understand that according to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, failing to provide this notice can result in a penalty up to {$2500.00} and can be enforced by the FTC XXXX and that my state attorney general can also enforce this with a {$1000.00} penalty as well. I attached a copy of the law and the actual document from the federal reserve CREDIT SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL is held liable as well for defamation and in the state of TX a creditor is who collects their on debt is considered a debt collector under FDCPA. Smith v. Heard 980 S.W.2d693 ( Tex.App-San Antonio 1989 reh.den. ) citing Monroe v. Frank 936 S.W.2d 654 ( Tex.App-Dallas 1996 writ dism 'd w.o.j. ) RESOLUTION I will if the account is not taken back and removed from any and all credit bureau reports, I will turn this over to XXXX  XXXXXXXX FDCPA, XXXX, and FCRA  national Attorney to look and take over this complaint. Therefore, provide me documentation of notification ( i.e. a copy of the notification sent XXXX, and proof that it was delivered to me in a timely manner ( i.e. a dated certified mail delivery confirmation with my signature ) .. 30 days before or 30 days after XXXXthe date derogatory reporting was started with the bureaus as you have listed or DELETE the reporting. A strong presumption of receipt applies when notice is sent by certified mail, because it creates actual evidence of delivery in the form of a receipt. Santana Gonzalez v. Atty Gen., 506 F.3d 274, 279 ( 3d Cir. 2007 ) ( emphasis added ). A weaker presumption arises where delivery is sent via regular mail, for which no receipt, or other proof of delivery, is generated. I do not believe it is accurate and would rather not have to spend more time than necessary for both of us to resolve this situation. Even it's been transferred Credit Systems International , Inc. Mr. XXXX XXXX XXXX Vice President is still responsible for reporting under the FCRA I appreciate your help regarding this and look forward to an amicable resolution.