Consumer complaint received 2025-12-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.
State: IA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this updated complaint because XXXX XXXX, the credit bureaus, and now a third-party law firm ( Gurstel Law Firm , P.C . XXXX are reporting and attempting to collect on inaccurate, unverifiable, and inconsistent information. The original creditor can not validate the accounts, XXXX did not validate the debt, and the credit bureaus falsely marked the XXXX account as verified. 

This complaint includes new evidence : XXXX  deleted one XXXX account but left another related account on my report, proving the data associated with this debt is inconsistent and unverifiable. 

XXXX. XXXX XXXX received my validation request but never validated the debt. 

I mailed XXXX XXXX a debt validation letter. 
It was NOT returned, proving XXXX received it. 

XXXX : Did NOT validate the debt Did NOT provide documentation Did NOT provide a signed contract Did NOT provide chain of title Did NOT prove assignment from XXXX Did NOT provide any evidence at all This violates FDCPA 1692g ( b ) because XXXX continued reporting and collection without validation. 

2. My validation letters to XXXX CEO & CFO were returned. 

I mailed dispute/validation letters to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Additional corporate addresses XXXX returned all of them as : RETURN TO SENDER UNABLE TO FORWARD ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN UNDELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED This confirms the original creditor did NOT validate the debt, meaning no documentation exists. 

3. XXXX  & XXXX  falsely marked the XXXX account as verified. 

Both bureaus claimed the XXXX XXXX account was verified. 

This is impossible because : XXXX did NOT validate XXXX did NOT validate anything The original creditor never received my dispute No contract or proof of ownership exists No investigation was possible This violates : FCRA 611 ( a ) failure to reinvestigate FCRA 607 ( b ) unreasonable procedures FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) unverifiable information must be deleted FDCPA 1692g ( b ) continued collection without validation 4. XXXX  deleted the {$350.00} XXXX account but not the {$1800.00} XXXX  account. 

XXXX reinvestigation deleted the {$350.00} XXXX account XXXX it could NOT be verified. 

This is crucial evidence. 
It proves : XXXX XXXX NOT have sufficient documentation Their records are incomplete or unreliable Validation for XXXX-originated accounts is not possible However : The related {$1800.00} XXXX Funding account remains on my report. 

This is inconsistent and inaccurate because : If the original creditor can not verify the smaller account Then XXXX can not verify the larger account that came from the same data. 
If XXXX could not validate their own reporting Then a debt buyer ( XXXX   ) certainly can not validate derivative data. 

Continuing to report the {$1800.00} account violates : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) FCRA 607 ( b ) FDCPA 1692g ( b ) The remaining account MUST be deleted. 

5. XXXX is reporting inconsistent and inaccurate information. 

XXXX reports : Multiple different balances Conflicting dates Missing DOFD No original contract No proof of assignment No chain-of-title No validation And different reporting across bureaus This violates : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) DOFD requirement CFPB Regulation V XXXX XXXX accuracy standards 6. New Attempted Collection by Gurstel Law Firm ( Attorney Collector ) I recently received a collection letter from Gurstel Law Firm, P.C., attempting to collect the same unvalidated XXXX debt. 

This is a new violation, because : The debt is disputed XXXX never validated The original creditor never validated XXXX  deleted the OC account The remaining XXXX data is unverifiable Collection can not continue without validation This violates FDCPA 1692g ( b ), 1692e, and 1692f This confirms the account must be removed entirely.

REQUESTED CFPB ACTION I request that the CFPB require : Immediate deletion of the {$1800.00} XXXX Funding account from all bureaus. 

A full investigation into XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

Correction of XXXX  and XXXX false verified responses. 

Removal of any unverifiable or inaccurate information. 

Confirmation that no further collection attempts may occur.

Investigation into Gurstel Law Firms attempted collection of an unvalidated debt. 

ATTACHED EVIDENCE I will attach : Returned XXXX envelopes Yellow Return to Sender labels Certified mail receipts Validation letter sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX  deletion letter for the {$350.00} account Screenshots showing the {$1800.00} XXXX account still reporting Screenshots showing XXXX  & XXXX marked XXXX as verified Attorney collection letter from Gurstel Law Firm All evidence supports the fact that the LVNV account is unvalidated, unverifiable, inaccurate, and illegally reported.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation