Consumer complaint received 2022-09-10
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (CA)

XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX served with summons from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX representing Bank of America. Case ongoing since, set for trial XX/XX/XXXX with trial conference mgt hearing XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXXXXXX XXXX  & XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  first time any communication with BofA ever & Prior to hearing XX/XX/XXXX, I called BofA Account recovery Dept @ XXXX spoke with the following individuals : XXXX s/w XXXX  -advised me both accounts ending inXXXX & XXXX were both transferred to a new agency for collection as of XXXX, XXXX called for chain of assignment s/w XXXX who refused. Transferred to manager, XXXX XXXX who advised me and Bank of America is NOT involved in any lawsuit with me. 

XXXX XXXX asked for chain of assignment she put me on hold came back saying shes only allowed to give me the last 4, which she did. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who refused to verify if theres a lawsuit involving BofA these accounts and myself.She responded only certain only higher offices can give that information. Then she proceeded to act like she couldnt hear me. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX, unaware I spoke with BofA, appeared in court for plaintiff asked for trial postponement until XX/XX/XXXX to investigate a hardship request from me. I had no idea why she would do this because clearly I dispute the debt, denied it by requesting a trial & online with XXXX who back in XX/XX/XXXX, sent dispute results not verification of debt belonging to me.The very next day, XX/XX/XXXX I received letters from XXXX on same dispute letterhead as disputed results written on from BofA, stating we have not been able to reach a payment agreement with you so we are now assigning these accounts to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX I received two more letters containing the same info but the company name different read now as XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Depending on which licensed state depends on company name ie., my state the name should read XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX.This company uses their legal status as lawyers to intimidate and make the court believe they have legal rights collect debts which theyve never seen prior to summons and. Complaints issue from another state signed by robosigners. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX have been sued for working collection agencies to provide accounts falsely use courts to get default judgments hoping the customer unaware of this doesnt fight the case by not responding. Currently they are allowed to do business in Oregon only pending application for license in California.it should be noted that the letters I received make no sense because how is it Bank of America is represented by XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, but BofA failed to verify debt within 30 days, BOFA advised me XX/XX/XXXX. & XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX now assigned to collect it, Then Lawyers try to discredit that with a hardship I never requested from BofA ( if I did I would have responded to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  recent letter offer to pay it instead of a trial ) which I didnt respond to, plus the letter sent after hearing has wrong font used by BofA and website address always listed underneath bank name appears letter isnt genuine.