Consumer complaint received 2020-04-28
Company: Rausch, Sturm, Israel, Enerson & Hornik, LLP
State: MD
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: Threatened to contact someone or share information improperly
Sub-issue: Talked to a third-party about your debt

Complaint:
Summary of complaint : 1. Creditor passed information about debtor, debtor home address, last four of debtor 's social, court case number, amount owed, on Writ of Garnishment to a business the debtor has never worked for or who the debtor has never been associated with.

2. XX/XX/XXXX - Creditor received payment and notice to attempt to establish payment plan and ignored this in favor of garnishment. Debtor reached out to start a payment plan. Was experiencing a financial hardship due to lost wages from military service connected XXXX. Following judgement debtor attempted to establish payment plan via email since website was not offering extended payment options. XX/XX/XXXX - Creditor accepted payment of {$75.00}, misrepresented total amount in future correspondence with court ( {$74.00} ), and did not acknowledge debtor attempt to establish payment plan. XX/XX/XXXX - Creditor instead attempted to garnish without contacting debtor as stated on the Writ of Garnishment on Wages ( see attached ). 

3. Creditor never notified debtor that they sent the Writ of Garnishment to the wrong employer of debt. Per page two of Writ ( see attached ), third party agency answers " The defendant { debtor name } is not employed by this Employer and the Employer requests dismissal of the garnishment. '' ( Debtor is only aware and in possession of the documentation supporting this because the debtor was instead forwarded a copy of the Writ of Garnishment by the third party in accordance with MD. Rule 1-321 per the Writ ). 

4. XX/XX/XXXX - Debtor established a payment plan with creditor for payment on the first of every month until XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX - Following the establishment of this agreement by both parties, the Creditor changed the agreed date of that payment twice ( in XXXX XXXX they moved the payment date to the seventh and then in XXXX XXXX they moved the payment date to the ninth of each month ) without the permission of the debtor. 

***************************************************************************** BACKGROUND. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a communication from a lawyer representing a collection agency. Rausch Sturm Attorneys at Law, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, MD XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ( fax ), XXXX, XXXX. They provided the following information : Re : My first and last name Creditor to Whom the Debt is Owed : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Our File Number : ( listed file # ) Account # : ************* ( last four of acct ) Account balance : ( amount listed ) They later filed a civil motion on behalf of this company. The judgement that they received substantiated the debt owed via their purchase from the original creditor. Debtor contacted to make payment offer via email and never received a reply. Debtor contacted agency via phone and established a payment plan, but it appears that the creditor also attempted to garnish the debtor 's wages. After payment plan was accepted, debtor made payments and appropriated funding for the payments as required. However, the creditor started to change the dates of the payment plan, which the debtor never agreed. Without speculation it is not entirely known why. 

Debtor then received a letter in the mail from a third party. This third party appeared to be some sort of private security agency somewhere in the state where the debtor resides. The creditor had submitted for a Writ of Garnishment around when the payment plan was accepted, and they attempted to reach out to the Debtor 's employer to establish the garnishment. The debtor had no affiliation with this third party at all. This Writ included personal information regarding this debt, his address, full name and the state case number for the civil suit against him. This violates the Fair Debt Collection Practice 's Act, Section 805, ( b ). Communication with third parties Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation