See : XXXX Clarification : The previous response from Unifund seemed to have thought I was accusing Mrs/Ms. XXXX 's office of wrongdoing by releasing my address information to the Constable. This is untrue, I simply said that it was obviously incorrect ( my address on file ) if the gentlemen, the original creditor, and Unifund all said the correct address, minus the apartment number which would result in mail not being received. - I just wanted to make sure we understood this, because there was nothing done wrong by the lawyer and her office. 

-- -- -- -- -- Now, I'd like to bring your attention to the Original Creditor - " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' hereinafter " XXXX '' and the letter received via postal service in response to XXXX. In paragraph two, the letter states : " XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX is prohibited from reselling or transferring your account to an entity other than XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. '' I would also call to attention the chain of custody documents sent to me, as well as the referenced fraud form which was never sent. The chain of custody documents show a 'TRANSFER OF DEBT '' from XXXX XXXX to XXXX  who on the same day transferred this debt once again to it's other branch. Although the letter mentions the " affiliation '' of XXXX XXXX XXXX, according to FDCPA ( Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ) - an affiliate must share the same entity or organization. As seen by a simple search, one company is an XXXX, one is not. This clearly shows that they are not the same organization, and may be a DBA or XXXX, but mot certainly are not part of the parent company who XXXX transferred the debt to, and swore that such debt would stay in the possession of said company ONLY without transfer. The XXXX is seperate, the address is seperate. 

I never received the promised " fraud document '' to report the fraud. 

XXXX XXXX actually told me in the same letter to contact XXXX XXXX directly. Come to find out, they said to contact XXXX XXXX. Therefore, clearly they are not the same entity, and as said by the XXXX XXXX who responded : " XXXX XXXX and UCCRP are affiliates. '' Therefore, FDCPA clearly stipulates that an affiliate is not " the same entity '' - and therefore, my debt was transferred outside the FIRST agreement from XXXX and XXXX XXXX. This precedence is never followed by a further disclaimer that my rights of " no transfer or reselling of debt to any other company '' was terminated : which it could not do legally. 

Thank you for your prompt response, your professionalism, and your candidness in handling this matter. I have been very pleased with all of the documentation received, and with the exception of the misunderstanding regarding the address statement to Mrs/Ms XXXX, as well as my lack of receiving a document to report fraud, I am extremely pleased to know this is how seriously and honestly you folks report debt collection. Given my financial situation, I really appreciate the help and would like to handle this without having to file Chapter in my state. After a thorough evaluation of the " claimed debt '' I have come to the conclusion that only 8 of the more than 150 charges are even plausible given my location and job at the time. ( IE : Charges 27 miles away while at work. ) I would like to point out the legal issue regarding the transfer of the debt without consideration of the ORIGINAL agreement that was furnished by XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) and the later transfer of the same debt to two entities, one of which is not a " agent by association '' aka a legal term for an assumed affiliation by similar name.