On XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX EST, I received a call from a company called XXXX ( sp ) claiming they called on behalf of XXXX XXXX in regards to a debt that they obtained from XXXX XXXX XXXX. I informed the gentlemen that I had not received any communication from either his company nor XXXX XXXX and that I was formally requesting information regarding this alleged debt from them. I had not received any communication from either company prior to that date and I requested validation of the account via the phone. Initially, the guy refused to provide me something via the mail, but when I informed him it was a violation of my rights to refuse this, he hung up on me. I called back and spoke with someone else who said the request had been processed for me to receive something in the mail. Again, this was the first time I heard from them and I initiated my rights to validation on XX/XX/XXXX. 

I received a notice on XX/XX/2018 dated XX/XX/2018 stating " we received your dispute and have been unable to resolve your request because we need additional information ... ''. I never received a dunning letter from this company regarding this debt. 

This is in violation of the FDCPA 809 ( a ) 1-5 because : 1 ) This is the first written communication I have received from  XXXX XXXX and it is dated 6 days from when I spoke to someone attempting to collect the debt. The law states they must send me notification within 5 days of the initial communication. 

2 ) Initial communication is required to include : " ( 3 ) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector ; ( 4 ) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector ; and ( 5 ) a statement that, upon the consumer 's written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. '' NONE of the above was included with my initial communication letter. 

They are also in violation of the FDCPA 809 ( b ) because : 1 ) I requested validation of the debt ( they acknowledged based on the verbiage of the attached letter - referenced above ), but they did not supply any supporting documentation for the validation, yet requested additional information from me to validate their collection practices. They are required to validate the debt, not me as the consumer. They were unable to validate this debt. 

2 ) On XX/XX/2018 this account showed up on my credit report as a collection. This is within the 30-day time frame from their initial contact, where they DID NOT PROVIDE A DUNNING LETTER, and my request for validation, WHICH THEY DID NOT HONOR. They did not provide validation AND they took adverse action against my report during that validation period. This is a direct violation of ( b ), " ... the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any  disputed 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. '' They did not cease collection of the debt while in the validation period. 

XXXX XXXX is violating my rights under the FDCPA in many ways, so I am formally requesting this tradeline be removed from my credit report due to their blatant disrespect for the law and my rights.