Product: Debt collection

I will include XXXX XXXX as part of this complaint so that they will receive copies of your correspondence and response. I am also e-mailing a copy of this complaint to XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. for their review. This matter is not going to go away because you respond citing some company policy or your own personal ideology and refuse to remove this account from my credit report. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received a dunning/collection letter from XXXX XXXX regarding the Macys XXXX XXXX credit card account On XX/XX/XXXX, Defendant mailed a debt validation request to XXXX XXXX via certified mail tracking number XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX received my debt validation request. I never received a response to my validation request which may be a violation of the FDCPA and 12 C.F.R. 106.34 ( a ) ( 1 ) and instead XXXX XXXX filed suit instead of responding. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX filed this civil suit/action against me on behalf of Department Stores National Bank in the State Court of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed an answer to the lawsuit/complaint along with discovery motions/request Interrogatories, Request for the Production of Documents and Notice to Produce, and Request for Admissions. A copy of the Answer along with the discovery request was sent to you via certified mail tracking number XXXX. A copy of the Interrogatories, Request for the Production of Documents and Notice to Produce, and Request for Admissions. According to the post office, the package picked up at a postal facility by your agent, representative, or employee at XXXX XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX. The thirty days to respond to the discovery request started on XX/XX/XXXX, and ended on XX/XX/XXXX. I never received a response to the discovery request. Pursuant to Georgia law O.C.G.A 9-11-33 ( a ) ( 2 ), 9-11-34 ( b ) ( 2 ), and 9-11-36 ( a ) ( 2 ), the party upon whom the discovery has been served shall serve a copy of the answers, and objections if any, within thirty ( 30 ) days after the service of the discovery request, except that a defendant may serve answers or objections within 45 days after service of the summons and complaint upon that defendant. The court may allow a shorter or longer time at the courts discretion. The party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order under subsection ( a ) of Code Section 9-11-37 with respect to any objection to or other failure to answer any discovery motion/request. Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 9-11-36 ( a ) ( 2 ) The matter is admitted unless, within 30 days after service of the request or within such shorter or longer time as the court may allow, the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter, signed by the party or by his attorney. Any matter admitted under this Code section is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission O.C.G.A. 9-11-36 ( b ). On XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX, I reached out to XXXX XXXX  office by e-mail pursuant to rule 6.4 ( b ) and prior to filing a motion to compel pursuant to XXXX. XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I mailed a certified letter ( tracking number XXXX ) to XXXX XXXX office and the letter was delivered and received by your office on XXXX, XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX filed for voluntary dismissal without prejudice in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Georgia XXXX XXXX XXXX No XXXX. Now on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a XXXX letter from XXXX XXXX  listing Citibank N.A. instead of Department Stores National Bank or ( DSNB ) as the creditor. This is the same claim or action just listing a different creditor. On XX/XX/XXXX, I mailed a second request for validation to XXXX XXXX via certified mail tracking number XXXX. According to the post office the item was delivered on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an e-mail from XXXX of XXXX XXXX attorneys confirming receipt of the validation request. Good afternoon, Our office is in receipt of your request and is gathering the requested documents for your review. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Lead Litigation GA Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX Phone : XXXX Ex. XXXX Fax : XXXX XXXX THIS COMMUNICATION IS FROM A DEBT COLLECTOR. PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE : This e-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the party or parties addressed and named in this message. This communication and all attachments, if any, are intended to be and to remain confidential, and it may be subject to the applicable attorney - client and or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and its attachments. Do not deliver, distribute, or copy this message and or any attachments if you are not the intended recipient. Do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments. Although this E-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for damage arising in any way from its use. XXXX XXXX is a debt collector as defined by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692a ( 6 ) and is required to comply with the FDCPA. If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer request the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector must cease collection of the debt, or any portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ). The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( c ). As of the date of this letter, no response or validation/verification has been received by me. Any failure by XXXX XXXX to comply with or any violation of the FDCPA by XXXX XXXX may result in XXXX XXXX being subject to civil liability as outlined in 15 U.S.C. XXXX. XXXX XXXX was notified and is aware that this is a second attempt to collect this alleged debt for the same account with Department Stores National Bank ( DSNB ) which is a subsidiary of Citibank N.A and that as of XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX has merged with Citibank. Any refiling or renewing of a case would be subject to XXXX. XXXX and O.C.G.A. XXXX. XXXX XXXX has received two requests for validation and has failed to respond to both of them. XXXX XXXX has had approximately ten months to respond to my request for validation. Dont you think if XXXX XXXX intended to collect this alleged debt that they would have responded to the validation request a required by law by now? As of the date of this letter, there has been no refiling of any lawsuit against me to collect this alleged debt. XXXX XXXX would have to consider all the things discussed in this letter when deciding whether or not it wants to refile the case in any court. XXXX XXXX would have to consider that if the Request for Admissions in the previous and now dismissed lawsuit is deemed admitted pursuant to Pursuant to XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) and O.C.G.A. XXXX ( b ) then it will be difficult for you or XXXX XXXX to pursue a new claim because if certain admissions are deemed admitted then you will probably lose your case. XXXX XXXX is aware of this fact. XXXX XXXX had the option to motion the court to allow withdrawal of the admission and or work with me to resolve any issues with discovery instead XXXX XXXX chose to dismiss the lawsuit. In the event of any renewal or refiling of any lawsuit, XXXX XXXX would essentially be refiling the same claim involving the same parties. If you or your attorney admitted the previous case away for failing to respond, then it will be difficult to refile the case and win or be successful. It seems as if you dont think about this or take this into consideration when deciding not to delete this account from my credit report. Because you disagree with the decisions made by XXXX XXXX, the laws of the XXXX of Georgia, and the information that you have been provided is not reason or grounds for you to dismiss and ignore the information that you have been provided and make decision based on your personal ideology or beliefs under the guise of some unnamed/specified law, government regulation, or company policy where you do state the specific law and section of the law, the specific government regulation, or provide a copy of the company policy you are citing and relying upon. You only provide a selective cursory response on items that you want to respond to and its like your response is scripted. Additionally, it seems that you copy and paste previous responses. You position is As a credit provider, we are obligated to report the account accurately to the credit reporting agencies. This statement is designed to end any discussion regarding credit reporting and to justify not removing an item from a credit report and is misleading, while you are required by law to report accurate information to the credit reporting agencies, you are not required to report account to the credit reporting agencies. It seems as if this statement is crafted to make any credit reporting dispute go away. This statement also suggests that you have some kind of moral or ethical obligation and not a legal obligation to report this account to a credit bureau and suggest your decision not to delete this account from the credit report is a moral decision and not a legal one. DSNBs own customer agreement for the credit card states " We may report information about your account to credit bureaus. Late payments, missed payments, or other defaults on your account may be reflected in your credit report. We may report account information in your name and the names of authorized users. We may also obtain follow-up credit reports on you. If you think we reported incorrect information to a credit bureau, write us at the Customer Service address on the billing statement. We will investigate the matter. We will then tell you if we agree or disagree with you. If we agree with you, we will contact each credit bureau to which we reported and request a correction. If we disagree with you, we will tell you that. '' The card agreement states that DSNB can report information about a consumer and the account to a credit bureau if Citi chooses to do so however, the card agreement does not prohibit DSNB from updating or removing information about a consumer from a consumers credit file. Additionally, if DSNB were to assign or sell this account to a debt buyer or collection agency and that debt buyer or collection agency reported this account to the credit bureau, DSNB would be obligated or required by the FCRA to remove the account from my credit report because the FCRA prohibits duplicate accounts, or the same information or account being reported multiple times on a consumers credit report. DSNB also fails or neglects to mention that some debt collectors will offer to delete the account from a consumers credit report in exchange for payment especially if it is written in any settlement agreement or consent order. DSNB does not want to admit that credit reporting is nothing more than a debt collection tactic or practice which it sometimes uses to extort money ( in some cases more money than Plaintiff is entitled to ) out of consumers ( i.e. either pay us what we claim you owe us or well ruin your credit for seven years ). It seems DSNB as is not prohibited by contract, government regulations, or the law from removing Defendants account from his credit report with the three major credit bureaus out of revenge and spite because Citi did not get the outcome Citibank wanted in the Best Buy case and DSNB ( which is a subsidiary of Citibank ) most likely will not achieve the outcome DSNB desires in the Macys American Express credit card account case and some kind of righteous duty with the intent to annoy, harass, intimidate, embarrass, and humiliate me and is nothing more than an effort to make it difficult for me to apply for and/or obtain credit or to have to pay a higher interest rate if offered a line of credit is preventing DSNB from removing this account from Defendants credit report with the three major credit bureaus. If it is DSNB/Citibanks position that you are prohibited by law or government regulation from removing this account from my credit report, then you should have to identify any specific section of the FCRA or any other law or government regulation that would prohibit you from removing this account from my credit report and to provide any other information that you are relying upon. Based upon my information 15 U.S.C. 1681i and 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) there is no law or government regulation that would prohibit DSNB/Citibank from removing this account from my credit report. I have requested this information previously and DSNB/Citibank has refused to respond and only wants to respond to what it determines or decides it wants to respond to or address. This was also requested by me in the now dismissed collection lawsuit. It also seems that your decision is not based on the law but an alleged company policy. I would ask that you provide a full and complete copy of the policy you are referencing in your previous communications. Please dont carelessly or mindlessly state that the information requested is confidential and proprietary business information and can not be disclosed. In the event of any refiling of any lawsuit regarding this account and alleged debt I will include the request for this information in a Request for the Production of Documents pursuant to XXXX. XXXX. Any failure to respond appropriately to any discovery request is subject to a motion to compel pursuant to XXXX. XXXX. DSNB/Citibank has not been truthful in their previous responses to the CFPB and the XXXX  and there will be potential problems for you in the event of any refiling or renewing of this case. In your previous correspondence you claim that DSNB regularly reviews credit report data to determine if cardholders continue to qualify for their accounts. You also claim, " Macys credit card account are reviewed on a regular basis to determine if an adjustment to the accounts credit limit is needed and to ensure the customer still meets the established eligibility requirements to maintain the card. You refuse to provide the eligibility requirements and credit criteria claiming, Our credit criteria is proprietary business information and can not be disclosed. I do not believe that you review accounts on a regular basis as you claim in your correspondence. On two occasions my credit limit was lowered as a result of your so-called review of my account which you claim that my credit limit was reduced due to the number of revolving accounts with high usage. This is not the whole and complete truth. DSNB has omitted an important fact that in XXXX of XXXX a late fee was assessed on the same day as the payment due date XX/XX/XXXX, and the late fee was eventually credited back to the account even though payment was made and did not post until the next day XX/XX/XXXX. The following month the credit limit was reduced by {$100.00}. The other time the credit limit was reduced was in was in XXXX of XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX ( the same day as the payment due date ) a late fee was assessed to the account even though a payment was made but did not post to the account until the next day XX/XX/XXXX. Then I received a letter from DSNB dated XX/XX/XXXX, stating that my credit limit would be reduced by another {$100.00}. Based on my research it seems the only time my account was reviewed was after a late fee was assessed and that the credit limit reduction is in retaliation and response to a late fee being assessed to the account. In the now dismissed collection lawsuit DSNB was asked in a discovery filing interrogatory to identify each and every time my account was allegedly reviewed. DSNB and their attorney XXXX XXXX failed to respond to the discovery request. The failure to respond to the discovery request is probably one of the factors that lead to the decision by XXXX XXXX to dismiss the lawsuit. When DSNB conducted the review in XXXX of XXXX the Best Buy Visa credit card account was listed on my credit report as a negative item. DSNB was aware of this account being listed as a negative item on my credit report and did not use it as a reason or basis to not lower the credit limit {$100.00} instead, you used the reason number of account with high usage however, when you allegedly reviewed the account for renewal the Best Buy being listed as a negative item on my credit report was used as a basis and reason for not renewing my account. When you conducted the review of my account in XXXX of XXXX, you were made aware of the Best Buy account being a negative item on my credit report and instead of exercising your right to terminate use of the account without giving notice in advance ; unless we are required to give you notice by law. You also failed to explain why the decision was made to only lower the credit limit and how you determined the amount to lower the credit limit. This was addressed in the Interrogatories that were filed in the now dismissed lawsuit against me. In other words you failed to mitigate you damages. You will have to explain this in court. You allegedly reviewed the account again XXXX of XXXX, and then sent a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, that my account would not be renewed beyond the expiration of the card. This time the Best Buy Visa credit card account being a negative item on my credit report was used as a reason to not renew my account beyond the expiration date of the card. You will have to explain this in the event of any refilling or relitigating of this case. XXXX XXXX is aware of this because it was included in the answer to the now dismissed collection lawsuit. This alleged review was conducted approximately nine months prior to the cards expiration and notice was not sent to me until approximately eight months prior to the cards expiration. According to the XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX letter that talks about XXXX conducting reviews of accounts the letter also states Under federal law, we must determine the applicants ability to repay credit. My account was left open and not closed until XX/XX/XXXX. After DSNB determined that I no longer qualified for the account and or no longer had the ability to repay credit my account was left open and DSNB allowed me to use the account until the expiration date. This will be a problem for DSNB/Citibank in the event of any litigation because you as a plaintiff have a duty and responsibility to mitigate your damages. As your agents, employees, and representatives love to cite the customer agreement that we have the right to limit or terminate use of your account without giving you notice in advance ; unless we are required to give you notice by law. You will be required to explain this in the event of any refiling or relitigating of this case. You will have to explain why you made the decision approximately nine months prior to the cards expiration and why you left the account open and allowed continued use of the card after determining that I no longer had the ability to repay credit until the card expired. This was included in the answer to the now dismissed collection lawsuit and XXXX XXXX is aware of this. Additionally, you charged {$41.00} late fees and interest for six months and then charged the account off after six months of receiving no payments because you were required to do so by law. If you determine that someone no longer has the ability to repay credit how is charging that person {$41.00} in late fees for six months or {$240.00} in late fees and interest going to incentivize or get someone to pay when they no longer have the ability to repay credit? The aforementioned issued are also addressed in the discovery request that were filed in the now dismissed collection lawsuit and you nor your attorney XXXX XXXX responded to the discovery request. You have repeatedly rejected any request by me to settle this case for less than the full balance, which in no way should be construed as an admission of liability or indebtedness by me. In the event of any refiling or renewal of this case, you may have to have to explain why you reject the request and then made a settlement offer in XXXX of XXXX giving me until XX/XX/XXXX, to respond. The letter also indicates if I choose not to accept the offer there may be other opportunities to settle may be available at a later date. And once again in a XXXX of XXXX correspondence by XXXX XXXX reject any offer to settle this account for less than the full balance, which in no way should be construed as an admission of liability or indebtedness by me. You also failed to make any reasonable efforts to collect this alleged debt and artificially inflated the balance with unnecessary interest, fees, and penalties. Then you made a settlement offer at the end of XXXX and approximately one month prior to you being required by law to charge off the account and when the late fees and interest stop. You issued a Macys store credit card that can only be used at Macys. When the account was opened the credit limit was {$800.00}. The credit limit has now been reduced to {$100.00}. The card has no expiration date and is still active. In the event of any renewal or refiling of the Macys XXXX  case you may have to explain this. Specifically, if I dont qualify and or dont have the ability to repay credit on the Macys XXXX  account how do you expect me to repay credit on this account and why you have not closed this account. This is a valid issue and defense. This information was included in the answer to the previous lawsuit that has since been dismissed. XXXX XXXX is and should be aware of this. You have lied about and denied and continue to deny and ignore the fact that the decision not renew the account is in retaliation to a dispute I had with Citibank ( which you were a subsidiary of ) regarding a Best Buy Visa credit card account even though the available evidence supports my claim of retaliation. First, we have the fact that my credit limit was reduced on two occasions as a result of and in retaliation to late fees being assessed to my account. Second, we have the fact that the Best Buy account being listed on my credit report as a negative item ( i.e., the serious delinquency item listed on my credit report reason ) on my credit report and was used as a reason for not renewing my account and included in the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, informing me that my account would not account would not be renewed. Finally, we have the fact the Citibank ( which DSNB is or was a subsidiary of and has now merged with Citibank ) closed and refused to renew my XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card account and flat out admitted it was due to a to a charge-off of the Best Buy account. I am not asking you to address issues or concerns regarding other accounts but just merely stating the facts and using this information to prove my point or position. You have also omitted other important information from your correspondences with me, the CFPB, and the XXXX. In your XX/XX/XXXX, letter by XXXX XXXX, you state Our review of your account found the statement with the closing date of XX/XX/XXXX, your account had a balance of {$1400.00} with a minimum payment of {$44.00} due by XX/XX/XXXX. No payment was received for this balance and in accordance with the terms of the credit card agreement, each month the required minimum payment due was not received, the account was charged a late fee and interest charge. This continued until the account balance reach {$1900.00} and charged off on XX/XX/XXXX. This is somewhat misleading because you omit the fact that you are required by law to charge-off an account after you have not received any payments and the account is past due for over 180 days or six months. You also omit and fail to admit or mention that the account was closed and could not be used by me but not charged off so that you can continue to act as if the account is still open and assess late fees, penalties, and interest until the balance is paid in full because once the account is charged off ( after 180 days or six months ) the late fees and interest must stop. You wanted the ability to still assess late fees, penalties, and interest to the account. This was discussed and addressed by the answer to the now dismissed lawsuit and you will have to have to explain this in the event of any new litigation. You seem to have forgotten that I can demand a jury trial. Do you think that going in front of a jury and demanding that they give you late fees and interest for six months just because you can charge those fees when you made little to no effort to collect this alleged debt and after you determined that I no longer had the ability to repay credit. What are you are you accomplishing by charging by charging interest and late fees for six months just because you can and until you are required to charge off the account? In the event of any renewal or refiling of your claim the answer will be amended to include the fact this is your second attempt at filing the same claim against me and that you are subject to XXXX. XXXX. The discovery request will also be refiled. You should also be aware that some judges have issued standing orders and instructions regarding how cases are handled by that particular judge. One example is State Court of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Section seven of the order addresses extension of time and section seven addresses discovery. Extensions of time for discovery will be granted only upon consent motion or in exceptional cases in which the parties promptly commence and diligently pursue discovery yet are unable to complete discovery in the timeframe set forth above due to circumstances not reasonably anticipated at the time that the parties prepare and submit the Scheduling Order. Any motion for an extension of time for discovery must be filed with the Court prior to the expiration of the existing discovery period. A copy of the standing order is attached for your review. This case was NOT assigned to XXXX XXXX and this order did not apply. You are required to respond to the discovery request truthfully and accurately within the timeframe provided by law. Failure to respond or to respond truthfully and accurately could result in you having to pay expenses incurred by me to prove that you did not respond truthfully and accurately and any failure to respond at all could result in a motion to compel. XXXX XXXX is aware of this fact. This case has already been filed and then dismissed. If the case is refiled and then dismissed voluntarily again that will serve as an adjudication upon the merits ( and is the same as a dismissal with prejudice ) O.C.G.A. 9-11-41 ( a ) ( 3 ). In other words, you will be prohibited by law from filing any additional lawsuits, claims, or actions, regarding this account and alleged debt and then would have no means to collect this alleged debt and no remedies available to you. It would be a violation of the FDCPA for any debt collector to threaten to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 5 ) or the use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 10 ). As previously stated, XXXX XXXX was sent a validation request on XX/XX/XXXX and it was received by them on XX/XX/XXXX. As of the date of this letter, no response other than the attorney acknowledging receipt of the request and stating that they are gathering the requested information and documents. XXXX XXXX is also aware of the previous lawsuit and will have to decide whether or not they will renew or refile this claim. Factors that could affect their decision include the failure to respond to the discovery request in the previous case and the defenses I have raised and outlined in this letter. You are not taking this fact into consideration when denying my request to delete this account from my credit report. You should be aware that XXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of Georgia have copies of all of your correspondence and communications with me, the CFPB, and the XXXX  except any that were received after the case was dismissed. The documents were provided to the court by me because they were attached to the answer as exhibits. In the event of any new litigation all communications received after the answer was filed will be attached as exhibits to an amended answer. You should also be aware that any documents filed with the court are public records and can be made available to anyone who request them provided they pay any fees imposed by the court or court clerks office for researching and printing of the request documents. The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of Georgia also uses an online system https : //www.peachcourt.com to file cases and to obtain documents filed in cases if available. Anyone can register and create a peachcourt account and obtain copies documents filed in cases if available for a per item fee. Attorneys are required to file all cases online using the peachcourt website. Attorneys will have unlimited access to all of the documents available on and through the peachcourt website. You also may use XXXX XXXX XXXX to look up information regarding cases. This is a free service for anyone to use and you dont have to register. This site will not provide you with access to documents filed in the case and will only provide you with a list of any actions, events, or filings in the case. If you were to hire a new attorney, you must make them aware of the fact that you previously filed a lawsuit and then dismissed it approximately three months later and the fact they you and your attorney failed to respond to the discovery request then that attorney will make a decision whether or not to represent you or not. If you fail to inform the attorney and provide the attorney with all information regarding the case and account and withhold or omit information the attorney could withdraw from your case and or dismiss any pending court action/litigation. In this case it would be a second notice of dismissal and would serve or operate as an adjudication upon the merits and would be the same as a dismissal with prejudice O.C.G.A. 9-11-41 ( a ) ( 3 ).