On XX/XX/2023 I sent a request for validation of debt to Acima via certified mail ( Tracking no. : XXXX ) with green return receipt which was delivered on XX/XX/2023 and marked as " left with Individual ''. Enclosed in the envelope with the letter was the account number for the account in question, a utility bill for my current mailing address, my Driver 's License for ID purposes, a copy of my social security card, which was also for identification purposes, and a copy of my credit report that shows that they are in fact reporting to my consumer report. 

The letter that Acima has sent back to me is an inadequate response to a request for validation of the debt as they insist that I either do not have an account with them or that they do not have to investigate my request at all because I've asked them in investigate before and they satisfied their duty within the law. This is false. They have not once verified the debt with me or been cooperative in any capacity. They have sent the same letter both times I requested verification and both times they have insisted I do not have an account with them or that the information I have given them is inadequate, even thought I have given them every possible thing piece of identifying information I can give, along with the account number that is listed on the credit report. 

At this point they are practicing willful and negligent noncompliance pursuant to 15 usc 1681n, 15 USC 1681o, as well as being in direct violation of federal law 15 USC 1681a ( 1 ) ( A ) by refusing to investigate or reinvestigate the request for debt validation. 

The dispute does not relate to my identifying information as they have suggested. If they are unable to validate the debt and refusing to follow the law by falsly claiming protections under laws that do not allow to them in this situation then I have no choice but to file a police report for identity theft as I do not assume the debt as my own. I am will not continue sending letters or CFPB complaints for them to ignore, as I have done that for that for the third time now and they are ouright refusing follow federal guidelines that were set in place to protect me, the consumer.