Consumer complaint received 2019-06-11
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit
Company: London & London (CT)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CT. XXXX Email : XXXX RE : Judgement and Collection attempts made in violation of my rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act & CT FTC C.G.S.A. 36a-646 Prohibited acts *No creditor shall use any abusive, harassing, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representation, device or practice to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 

London & London XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   XXXX, Ct. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.. 
Corporate Headquarters XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, VA. XXXX I am at the mercy of my Attorney State General, CFPB, & Superior Courts. I was never given a fair or just trial, never received official court documents. I have no knowledge as to why other Firms and their Attorneys were involved in a case that was only assigned to London & London. I need your help desperately in resolving this serious matter. I believe whole heatedly I am the victim of misconduct, and deceptive tactics that have been used against me. I will provide any documentation to support my claim. 

1. ) XX/XX/XXXX Attorney XXXX XXXX ( juris id # XXXX ) filed an appearance on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX   against me for an alleged debt owed. Not only did I NEVER receive this court document it was being sent allegedly to my sisters home whom NEVER received it. 

I have no idea if this attorney was allowed to practice in Connecticut at this time. The reason I want to shed light on this concern is because he checked a box on the appearance that states the following : This appearance is in place of the following attorney, firm or self represented party on file ( XXXX. sec 3-8 ) and lists XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX juris id # XXXX. 

This is quite confusing to me as XXXX XXXX XXXX has been deceased since XX/XX/XXXX. Furthermore, the London & London Law Firm is a completely different law firm & address as opposed to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. There are 2 different firm ID 's on this appearance? It is also here I would like to point out what a believe to be a blatant misconduct by XXXX XXXX. 

Attorneys have a set of Rules and Conduct that must be maintaining the integrity of the profession. Rule 8.4 : MISCONDUCT section ( c ) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. I have the court document to prove my claim their was deceit on the part of XXXX XXXX, deception using a deceased mans name and firm when you have your own, and misrepresentation. More conclusive deception on the part of XXXX XXXX is that XXXX XXXX XXXX assigned my case ONLY to London & London. My case was NEVER assigned to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

2. ) XX/XX/XXXX, there was a small claims writ and notice of suit filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. and allegedly sent to my sisters home at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CT. XXXX. I NEVER received this communication as I did not live with my sister and my sister never signed documentations for me from this firm. A point worth mentioning, again a firm that was never assigned to my case and XXXX XXXX and London & London appear no where on this document? 

Furthermore, this document states that it was mailed first class at least 4 weeks before the small claims action was filed and that the letter was not returned by US Postal Service and dated XX/XX/XXXX. Which was signed by an XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
I have no idea yet again why this attorney appears on this document? I have no idea if she was allowed to practice in Connecticut at this time. XXXX XXXX is most associated with XXXX XXXX Massachusetts and Vermont online and a law firm ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) who shows all of their team but not XXXX XXXX . I can not even find her on CT Attorney lookup? Also under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX is not found there here is the link XXXX XXXX XXXX 

3. ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX an attorney that works for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. signed a Statement of Service that delivery of small claims writ was sent to me. I NEVER received it and to boot XXXX XXXX was never assigned to my case. London & London were. 
Not to mention XXXX XXXX is listed on page 2 of this document under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 's address and not even listed as an attorney? How is it possible that XXXX XXXX signed off on an official document saying that it was in fact delivered to me by her when the return address has a XXXX XXXX named? Why was it not also sent by XXXX XXXX?. Also a point worth mentioning, my sister never signed for this allegedly sent document. 

4. ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX charged of the alleged debt they claim I owe of {$3300.00}. I have no idea how this alleged debt was calculated or arrived to be said amount. I do not know if London & London purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX for pennies on the dollar? 

XXXX XXXX told me when I spoke with a XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX approximately XXXX XXXX that XXXX XXXX still owns the alleged debt. She also told me that London and London was the ONLY firm assigned to my case. Additionally, the last payment I made to XXXX XXXX was in XX/XX/XXXX. 

5. ) XX/XX/XXXX there was a Judgement Without Trial. A Disposition that I NEVER received and stated I answer by XX/XX/XXXX was filed against me. Checked was a Judgment for the Plaintiff after Default without Hearing in Damages. The total in damages was {$3300.00} and it also had payment arrangements I never made on it. This document was dated XX/XX/XXXX. 

Most importantly this document was only signed NOT Printed as well and signature looks nothing like XXXX XXXX 's which should have appeared there since he was assigned to my case? More-so, I beg someone to answer this who was the Plaintiff in my case? London & London, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or XXXX XXXX because I am beyond confused? This is not only misrepresentation, that would be understatement this is deceit! 

6. ) On XX/XX/XXXX Attorney XXXX XXXX filed for an execution of my bank account. This time using a different Juror Id # XXXX. He had sent the information to my sisters home in XXXX again. He checked on this document that I defaulted on an installment payment order of {$35.00} I NEVER agreed to or saw! I never was given my right to file the affidavit of claim exemption because I never received it. In XXXX of XXXX I was so busy with the holidays, my daughters, bills and so forth I never even realized that {$320.00} was taken from my XXXX XXXX account! I just learned of that today. XXXX XXXX never gave me any notification? They even charged a {$110.00} fee on top of it all! I just learned of this today. 

7. ) On XX/XX/XXXX an application for execution was filed with the court against me again! Again the document was sent to my sisters home. I NEVER received them nor did she. This brings us back to the present day and current status in which they drained my ENTIRE account {$1000.00}. I realize there is a 15 day period in which to send in the form for exemption however I just found out today because London & London are not sending the official documents to me. 

The funds levied on XX/XX/XXXX were exempt funds and the ENTIRE account was drained. These were funds for living costs, groceries, gas back and forth to work, tools needed for jobs, insurance, clothing, and air conditioner for the summer. 

Under Connecticut State law I believe there should have been only 25 % of my funds taken. Amount subject to levy. The maximum part of the aggregate weekly earnings of an individual which may be subject under this section to levy or other withholding for payment of a judgment is the lesser of ( 1 ) twenty-five per cent of his disposable earnings for that week, or ( 2 ) the amount by which his disposable earnings for that week exceed forty times the higher of ( A ) the minimum hourly Enforcing Money Judgments - 11 wage prescribed by Section 6 ( a ) ( 1 ) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, USC Title 29, Section 206 ( a ) ( 1 ), or ( B ) the full minimum fair wage established by subsection ( i ) of section 31-58,  in effect at the time the earnings are payable. Unless the court provides otherwise pursuant to a motion for modification, the execution and levy shall be for the maximum earnings subject to levy and shall not be limited by the amount of the installment payment order. Only one execution under this section shall be satisfied at one time. Priority of executions under this section shall be determined by the order of their presentation to the employer. Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-361a ( f ) ( 2017 ). 

I am having this document notarized to be sent to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and my CT. State Attorney General. I never signed for or received any court related documentations. A judgement was executed without any correspondence or notification sent to me. I was never sent any interrogatories by London & London, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or XXXX XXXX. 

I implore you to find a signature of mine having received one document from any of these entities. Please help me get my money back and resolve a horrible wrong. The Rules of Professional Conduct have been violated as well as my rights. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX them nor did she. This brings us back to the present day and current status in which they drained my ENTIRE account {$1000.00}. I realize there is a 15 day period in which to send in the form for exemption however I just found out today because London & London are not sending the official documents to me. 
The funds levied on XX/XX/XXXX were exempt funds and the ENTIRE account was drained. These were funds for living costs, groceries, gas back and forth to work, tools needed for jobs, insurance, clothing, and air conditioner for the summer. Under Connecticut State law I believe there should have been only 25 % of my funds taken. 
Amount subject to levy. The maximum part of the aggregate weekly earnings of an individual which may be subject under this section to levy or other withholding for payment of a judgment is the lesser of ( 1 ) twenty-five per cent of his disposable earnings for that week, or ( 2 ) the amount by which his disposable earnings for that week exceed forty times the higher of ( A ) the minimum hourly Enforcing Money Judgments - 11 wage prescribed by Section 6 ( a ) ( 1 ) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, USC Title 29, Section 206 ( a ) ( 1 ), or ( B ) the full minimum fair wage established by subsection ( i ) of section 31-58, in effect at the time the earnings are payable. Unless the court provides otherwise pursuant to a motion for modification, the execution and levy shall be for the maximum earnings subject to levy and shall not be limited by the amount of the installment payment order. Only one execution under this section shall be satisfied at one time. Priority of executions under this section shall be determined by the order of their presentation to the employer. Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-361a ( f ) ( 2017 ). 
I am having this document notarized to be sent to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and my CT. State Attorney General. I never signed for or received any court related documentations. A judgement was executed without any correspondence or notification sent to me. I was never sent any interrogatories by London & London, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or XXXX XXXX. I implore you to find a signature of mine having received one document from any of these entities. Please help me get my money back and resolve a horrible wrong. The Rules of Professional Conduct have been violated as well as my rights. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX