SHORT VERSION : They are attempting to collect on a debt that has been settled on back on XX/XX/XXXX. They have violated a Cease and Desist Letter and have continued collections efforts after being provided proof of the settled account. UCC 3-311 outlined the settlement of the debt. They failed to send back the settlement payment to void the agreement- they did NOT. They have violated the following Federal ans state laws. Section 805 ( c ), 807 ( 8 ), of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Section, North Dakota Century Code XXXX and XXXX Fraud & XXXX ( d ) Harassment, Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ), 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) ,623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ), 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ,623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ), knowingly and willfully reporting inaccurate information regarding XXXX has caused Defamation and Financial Injury as outlined in the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. XXXX, XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX. 

LONG VERSION : 1. The Defendant, for its Answer and Counter Claim against the Plaintiff, states and alleges as follows : 2. The Defendant, XXXX ( hereinafter XXXX ) is a resident of North Dakota. 

3. The Plaintiff, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ( hereinafter XXXX ), is a Nebraska Corporation, with its principle address is in XXXX, Nebraska XXXX. 

4. The Defendant strongly asserts this is a frivolous lawsuit which is wasting the courts time and the Defendants time.

5. The Defendant affirmatively states the account was a CLOSED and SETTLED account on XX/XX/XXXX and does not owe the Plaintiff {$13000.00}.

6. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX sent XXXX a Cease and Desist Letter stopping all forms of communication from the Plaintiff and reminding them the account was SETTLED and CLOSED. 

7. There is evidence the Plaintiff received the letter on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX in XXXX, Nebraska XXXX. ( USPS Tracking Number XXXX ). 

8. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX sent XXXX 3rd party collector Rodenburg Law Firm, with an address of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX, XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX, N.D. XXXX, a Cease and Desist Letter stopping all forms of communication from the Plaintiff and reminding them the account was SETTLED and CLOSED. They were provided proof with a copy of the front and back of the cashed check. 

9. There is evidence the Plaintiff received the letter onXX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX in XXXX, North Dakota. ( USPS Tracking Number XXXX ). 

10. The Plaintiff had three ( 3 ) times in which the agreement was conspicuously brought to their attention. The time the cashed the check on XX/XX/XXXX, the time XXXX received the Cease and Desist Letter on XX/XX/XXXX, and the time Rodenburg Law Firm received their Cease and Desist letter on XX/XX/XXXX. 

11. As outlined in Uniform Commercial Code 3-311, the Plaintiff knowingly accepted the payment, and cashed the payment, for the settlement of the account. Had the Plaintiff NOT agreed with the agreement then the Plaintiff should NOT have cashed the check OR since they did cash the payment they had the option to send the money back to the Defendant, which they did NOT. 

12. UCC Accord and Satisfaction by use of instrument in section 3-311 ( c ) ( 2 ) states the Plaintiff had the opportunity to send back the payment within 90 days to null and void the agreement as outlined on the check IF there was a non-agreement. 

13. The Plaintiff cashed the check on XX/XX/XXXX, they had until XX/XX/XXXX ( 90 days ) to send the payment back to the Defendant to void the agreement which they did not. 

14. The Plaintiffs failure to send back the payment and keeping the payment is informed and implied consent to the acceptance of the settlement which was written on the check. 

15. Rodenburg Law Firm was informed of the settlement however, ignored it and continues to attempt to collect on a SETTLED Account.

16. Rodenburg Law Firm was provided proof of the settlement with the copy of the check front and back. They are aware of the law UCC 3-311.

17. Rodenburg Law Firm FAILED to advise XXXX  to RETURN the cashed check amount to XXXX to void the settlement. 

18. The Defendant has several credit reports which shows the Plaintiff failed to report accurate information regarding the account to the credit reporting agencies.

19. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) are federal laws outlining what the Plaintiff should and should not have done regarding the Defendants account information. One of which is to provide ACCURATE information to the credit reporting agencies, which they failed to do and is explained as follows : DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 1 20. On XX/XX/XXXX, the XXXX 3rd party collector, Rodenburg Law Firm, violated the Cease and Desist letter by sending the Defendant several account statements. 

21. This contact with a 3rd party concerning XXXX violates section 805 ( b ) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Section.

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 2 23. XXXX & Rodenburg Law Firm are fraudulently attempting to collect on a CLOSED/SETTLED account, Violating North Dakota Century Code XXXX and XXXX Fraud. 

24. XXXX & Rodenburg Law Firm were informed by the Defendant that the account had been SETTLED and yet XXXX  knowingly and willingly is attempting to collect on the account DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 3 26. By XXXX & Rodenburg Law Firm knowingly and willfully attempting to collect on a SETTLED AND CLOSED account and bringing this frivolous lawsuit against the Defendant is Harassment. 

27. XXXX & Rodenburg Law Firm has violated North Dakota Century Code 12.XX/XX/XXXX ( d ) Harassment which stated : A person is guilty of an offense if, with intent to frighten or harass another, the person : it goes on to say under section d : d. Communicated a falsehood in writing or by electronic communication and causes mental anguish. 

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 4 29. XXXX failed to report to the credit reporting agencies the item was being disputed due to inaccurate information being reported. 

30. XXXX failed to abide by Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ) by not reporting the item as disputed.

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 5 32. XXXX failed to report to the credit reporting agencies the item was being disputed due to inaccurate information being reported. 

33. XXXX failed to abide by Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) by not reporting the item as disputed.

34. A reminder to the Court for the Plaintiff willful non-compliance, as per FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [ 15 U.S.C.1681s-2 ].

a. ( 3 ) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer. 

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 6 36. XXXX failed to report to the credit reporting agencies the item was being disputed due to inaccurate information being reported. 

37. XXXX failed to abide by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Section 807 ( 8 ) by not reporting the item as disputed. 

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 7 39. XXXX failed to report to the credit reporting agencies the item was being disputed due to inaccurate information being reported. 

40. XXXX failed to abide by the Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) by not reporting the item as disputed.

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 8 42. XXXX failed to conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information being reported. 

43. XXXX failed to abide by the Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) by not conducting an investigation.

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 9 45. XXXX failed to modify the dispute information upon the investigation with respect to the disputed information being reported. 

46. XXXX failed to abide by the Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ) by not reporting the modified disputed information to the credit reporting agencies.

DEFENDANTS COUNTER CLAIM # 10 48. By XXXX reporting inaccurate information to the credit reporting agencies an account that is CLOSED and SETTLED caused XXXX extreme mental anguish and further caused financial damage by having a lower credit score.

49. By XXXX knowingly and willfully reporting inaccurate information regarding XXXX has caused Defamation and Financial Injury as outlined in the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. XXXX, XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX.