Consumer complaint received 12/18/2017 about Debt collection (I do not know) with CITIBANK, N.A. (TX).
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not yours

Complaint: Citi Bank representative XXXX XXXX responded to my CFPB complaint that was filed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. I have attached ( as one file ) any and all letters sent to XXXX, response from XXXX, certified mail receipts, CFPB complaints, Texas Attorney General Complaints, Bond Requirement search results, Third party collection agency letters, etc. 

First, as Citi states in its own response dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX on ( paragraph 4, lines 4 & 5 ) : " Citibank responded to your validation request, however, due to an error your credit bureau was not updated to disputed by consumer. Failure to mark a trade line disputed as prescribed by FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 3 ) is punishable under FCRA XXXX XXXX. XXXX ; and XXXX U.S.C. XXXX. 
To see the repeated failures on Citis part to follow FCRA 15 U.S.C.  1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 3 ) Please see the attached letter as the table will not paste into this complaint. 

Date Mailed - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Date Rcvd - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - Roelita Ruddy Tracking # - XXXX Reply/Dispute on CRs - No/No Date Mailed XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Date Rcvd XXXX/XXXX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX Reply/Dispute on CRs - Yes/No Date Mailed - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Date Rcvd - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX - XXXX XXXX Tracking # - XXXX Reply/Dispute on CRs -Yes/No CFPB Complaint - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Response - XXXX/XXXX/XXXX XXXX Complaint # - XXXX Reply/Dispute on CRs -Yes/Yes As evidenced above, Citi representative XXXX XXXX XXXX signed for my initial dispute on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. However, Citi failed to ever respond, and failed to mark my credit reports disputed as prescribed by FCRA Section 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ). Although in your response letter dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, signed by XXXX XXXX, you state you responded to my initial dispute of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, you did not do so within the 30 days as required by Furnisher Rule 660.4 ( a ). In fact, you did not respond until after my second dispute letter dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Furthermore, in XXXX XXXX, Citi sold the disputed debt to XXXX XXXX XXXX, an unbonded third party collection agency who started attempts to collect which is a violation of TEX. FIN. CODE 392.001. In XXXX XXXX, I filed a Consumer Complaint with the State of Texas Attorney General and sent XXXX XXXX XXXX certified, return receipt mail informing them of the violation. It was not until I filed said complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that Citi recalled the debt from the unbonded collection company they had hired, and finally marked the tradeline disputed. 

Second, creditor threats, as defined by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ; are illegal and punishable in a court of law. As Citi states ( paragraph 5, lines 4 & 5 ) : This does not mean that collection activities will cease, it is possible that other permissible collection activity may occur. As the consumer, I take this as a threat of a possible pending lawsuit because I have used the Consumer Protections afforded to me by Federal and State laws to dispute the validity of a debt. Unlike Citi, I have not broken any Federal or State laws. 

Third and final, for Citis informational purposes, the distinction between a debt collector and a creditor is not relevant under the Texas Debt Collection Act ( TDCA ).  The TDCA applies not only to professional debt collectors, but also to any person who directly or indirectly engages in debt collection ... TEX. FIN. CODE 392.001 ( 6 ).  Accordingly, the TDCA applies to creditors attempting to collect their own debts. TEX. FIN. CODE 392.001 ( 3 ). While I appreciate that Citi does not need a license to collect a debt in Texas, they are required to have a XXXX XXXX on file with the Texas Secretary of State pursuant to TEX. FIN. CODE 392.001 et seq. Continued attempts on Citis part to collect on this disputed debt will continue to violate TEX. FIN. CODE 392.001 ; and the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act ( DTPA ) TEX.  BUS. & COM. CODE Subchapter E 17.41, et seq. 

This is my FINAL letter to you demanding that you cease collection attempts, cease reporting of this trade line, and delete this trade line from all three credit bureaus, or I will seek all legal and lawful means available in order to remedy the multiple violations of TEXAS FINANCE CODE 392 ; TEXAS BUSINESS & COMMERICAL CODE DECEPTIVE TRACE PRACTICES-CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT ; as well as the violations of the FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT ; and FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation