Consumer complaint received 09-09-2017 about Debt collection (Other debt) with ERC (NM).
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not yours

Complaint: 1. XX/XX/XXXX- XXXX XXXX ad promised internet service packaged with cable service with XXXX XXXX. We bit. The initial bills were from the firm with whom I contracted, XXXX XXXX, being account number ending XXXX ( See Exhibit 1 ). Later, XXXX XXXX passed the buck and the bills started from XXXX XXXX, account number ending XXXX. 
2. No modem and no service from either firm for almost 2 months -- the XXXX XXXX bills did n't stop, however. I attempted to contact XXXX XXXX many times. Understand, that each contact with XXXX XXXX takes hours because, when you finally get to a real person who knows anything, they tell you that the problem is with XXXX XXXX ; and, you go through the same menus and wrong assistants again. 
3. One problem turned-out to be that the XXXX XXXX modem was sent to the wrong address ( although the billings all came to the correct address ) maybe 4-5 times. As stated, the billing continued with no service. I complained to XXXX XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX in the XXXX XXXX XXXX office on XX/XX/XXXX, who promised to resolve the matter ( conversation confirmed by email from XXXX, See Exhibit 2 ). 
3. That never happened but I finally got the modem. Installed it. Discovered that XXXX XXXX had not enabled internet service. That made the whole " deal '' useless. After futile attempts to get through all the menus and unqualified personnel to get the contracted-for internet service, I cancelled the whole deal. I did go through the menus again and got the prepaid mailer to return the modem ( returned via USPS, See Exhibit 3 ). Then, I had XXXX install service for the cable and internet service ; and have not had a problem since. 
4. XXXX XXXX has directly dunned me directly for amounts ranging from approx. {$400.00} - {$700.00}. Then, XXXX, XXXX got the collection account ; then XXXX XXXX, then XXXX XXXX XXXX, finally Enhanced Recovery Co. ( ERC ). My standard response to XXXX XXXX and to each collection firm was tell them that the services were not earned ; and, that XXXX XXXX would get paid when a judge ordered payment ( i.e. 'sue me ' ). These were notes done in Sharpie pen on their dun notices ( see, for example, recent response : Exhibit 4 ). 
5. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX made an unauthorized charge on my VISA for {$430.00} -- which was protested and credited-back after investigation by XXXX ( see Exhibit 5 ). Regardless, I kept getting dun letters from ERC. 
5. I wrote ERC on XX/XX/XXXX ( see Exhibit 6 ), telling them to sue me so I could countersue. No response. 
6. After another dun letter, on XX/XX/XXXX, I wrote XXXX XXXX of ERC ( see Exhibit 7 ) demanding that ERC cease communication pursuant to 15 United States Code Sec. 1692 ( c ). 
7. The only response to the XXXX letter was another dun dated XX/XX/XXXX ( see Exhibit 8 ), saying in part, " Even though this account was previously disputed pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692g [ sic ], we are required to notify you that.. .Unless you dispute the validity of the debt.. .within 30 days.. .the debt will be assumed to be valid by us. '' I am tired of doing the same protest each time. They can not be correct. The law says that they must cease communication. 

Kindly assist me in this matter. 

Thank you. 

XXXX XXXX NM XXXX XXXX

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation