The following is a history of the complaint : I disputed a filing by Preferred Collection and Management via both XXXX and The Consumer Protection Financial Bureau ( # XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX. With CPFB, I requested " validation of debt '' and detailed the requests as follows : - Provide a statement which matches the balance being claimed. 
- Provide a list of charges that total the amount in your original letter. 

It was my understanding that a properly submitted Request for Debt Validation via certified return receipt mail afforded me the right to request proof of debt. Preferred Management, in turn, only verified the debt once again to CFPB and totally ignored my specific request for proof under the auspices of HIPPA.
They responded as follows to XXXX : " ... as a debt collection agency, we are subject to the 'Minimum Necessary Rule ' and will not have access to greater medical details but patients are able to get additional detail from the medical records department at the facility where services were received and/or from their own insurance company. '' And as follows to CFPB : Company 's Response We received a debt to collect on in the amount of {$86.00} from the client XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for a date of service of XXXX. The original charge amount was {$1800.00} so this is the coinsurance owed for services rendered. A validation notice was mailed to the patient XXXX. There was no mail return for the validation so pursuant to the mailbox rule, we can presume the patient received it. The account was subsequently reported to the credit bureau on XXXX. Since that time we have changed our software. The accounts from our old system were deleted from reporting and then re-reported using a new internal agency number ( so there would not be duplicated reporting ). The consumer disputed the account through XXXX ( the bureaus reporting mechanism ) around XXXX. The debt was re-verified and a letter was sent to the debtor stating this. Although we dont actively call on such small balances, the account is reported for 7 years from the date of delinquency pursuant to the FCRA. We would consider removing the account from reporting once the rest of the amount owed our client is paid. As far as the amount difference ( {$86.00} vs. {$87.00} ) we can only assume the bureaus round up if the amount owed is greater than fifty cents. 

I have always had medical insurance coverage and this collection agency expects me to pay without verification of neither the debt nor whether or not they have been duly contracted by the medical provider. Instead, they made an offer to collect and would " consider removing the account from reporting once the rest of the amount owed our ( their ) client is paid '. 

Please note that the medical debt listed is beyond the 5 year Statute of Limitations for the State of Florida for contracted debt. They list the first date of delinquency as XX/XX/XXXXand is most likely " written off ''. 

In addition, I disputed another collection agency for a debt incurred in XXXX and they deleted the charges ; perhaps due to lack of verification. While, on the other hand, this agency continues to damage my credit worthiness for {$86.00}. 

I am requesting that CFPB require Preferred Collection and Management to adhere to The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and provide, at a minimum, proof of debt. In short, that the account is really my responsibility and that the balance is accurate. Furthermore, that Preferred Collection and Management provide proof that it owns or has been assigned the debt by the original creditor.
Preferred Collection and Management has suggested that I ask the original creditor for validation. However, it is Preferred Collection and Management and NOT the original creditor that is holding me responsible and damaging my credit with XXXX. 

If they refuse to provide the information, please advise what other recourse I have to obligate them to provide the proof of debt?