Consumer complaint received 2022-09-06
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: A.R.M. Solutions, Inc. (NC)

This is a complaint about the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a newspaper doing business at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, North Carolina XXXX. 

The XXXX XXXX XXXX incorrectly and, I believe, unethically requested that a debt collection service send us a bill for {$58.00} claimed to be owed as of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( see enclosed form sent to us by A.R.M. Solutions, Inc. ). The account in question was our XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX account ( # XXXX ) and was in the name of my wife, XXXX XXXX XXXX. Due to her deteriorating vision, I must write this for her. 

We were subscribers to the XXXX XXXX XXXX for over 50 years it used to be a good newspaper. However, our last 3 years as subscribers were a nightmare in terms of receiving what we had paid for : 1. We contracted for daily ( there is no Saturday paper ) home delivery of the XXXX XXXX XXXX newspaper. Beginning about 3 years ago, delivery was skipped about 1 day per week. Gradually, missing deliveries occurred more-and-more often. By XX/XX/XXXX, we were receiving a paper about once every other week in other words, 11 of 12 papers were not being delivered. 
2. Because of this delivery record, we cancelled our subscription last XXXX ( XXXX ). We received from the XXXX XXXX XXXX an email acknowledgment of our cancellation, effective XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( see enclosure for copy of this acknowledgment ). At no time did we renew our subscription. 
3. Unfortunately, I neglected to carefully monitor our credit card charges after canceling our XXXX XXXX XXXX subscription. Despite our cancellation, the XXXX XXXX XXXX continued to charge our credit card account about $ XXXX ( auto payment ) for delivery of a print newspaper which we did not receive. 
4. In early XXXX, the XXXX XXXX XXXX notified us that 1 ) a print edition would no longer be available to us as of early XXXX ( one had not been delivered to us for over 4 months! ), and 2 ) at a reduced rate ( $ XXXX, I believe ) we now had access to the e-edition of the newspaper. This is when I finally realized that the XXXX XXXX XXXX had continued to charge us even though it was not providing us with a print newspaper as contracted. ( I now regret not taking action to recover the money that was fraudulently obtained from us during the years that we received fewer-and-fewer newspapers. ) 5. In the early months of XXXX, I did access the e-edition of the XXXX & XXXX. However, in XXXX, XXXX and XXXX there were many times when I was unable to access the online e-edition because the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX website would not allow me access, including one extended period when I was traveling. I sent messages to XXXX XXXX XXXX Customer Service asking for help. Most of my messages were not answered ; the few that were answered did not resolve the problems I frequently encountered when trying to access the XXXX XXXX XXXX e-edition. ( In contrast, Ive never had problems with access to the online e-edition of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) 6. In XX/XX/XXXX, we contacted the company that handles our XXXX XXXX  credit card the card that the XXXX XXXX XXXX  continued to charge after our subscription was cancelled effective XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. We told them that the XXXX XXXX XXXX had continued to charge our account for 6 months after this cancellation, and asked them to recover as much of the subscription charges as possible. 
7. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, our XXXX XXXX account was credited with 3 payments of {$39.00} each that had been made to the XXXX & XXXX this would have been for 3 months access to the XXXX XXXX XXXX e-edition. Presumably, it is these refunds that triggered the XXXX XXXX XXXX assertion that we owe them {$58.00}. ( Note : The letter from the collection agency was the first time we knew that the XXXX XXXX XXXX claims that we owe them money. ) 8. The XXXX XXXX XXXX claim that we owe them {$58.00} is incorrect. By their acknowledgment, our account was cancelled XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Perhaps they are trying to claim money is owed them because I accessed their online e-edition in XXXX, XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX? However, because of problems with their website, my access was limited, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX  was unable or unwilling to provide help that would have enabled me to have reliable access. They should not be paid for this. And, we had no subscription after XX/XX/XXXX.