Consumer complaint received 2023-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
Company: Patenaude & Felix A Professional Corporation
State: PR

Complaint narrative:
From : XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX to the Social Security XXXX  XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To and XXXX XXXX of : XXXX : Family of XXXX XXXX Trustee of XXXX Social Security XXXX XXXX  XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX and XXXX XXXX. 
Be It Known : This establishes a Common-Law contract between us under the XXXX rule, which states The postal rule ( also known as the mailbox rule or deposited acceptance rule ) is a term of common law-contracts which determines the timing of acceptance of an offer when mail is contemplated as the medium of acceptance. The general principal is that a contract is formed when acceptance is communicated to the offeror. The mailbox rule is an exception to the general principal. The mailbox rule provides that the contract is formed when a properly prepaid and properly addressed letter of acceptance is posted. One rationale given for the rule is that the offeror nominates the post office as implied agent and thus receipt of the acceptance by the post office is regarded by that of the offeree. The main effect of the mailbox rule is that the risk of acceptance being delivered late or lost in the post is placed upon the offeror. If the offeror is reluctant to accept this risk, he can always require actual receipt before legally bound. 
As a reference, it is the same contract method that is used when courts issue a summons to appear. 

In addition, the debt of the account is not valid. It does not meet the XXXX essential conditions to a lawful binding contract-Namely : XXXX. Full XXXX. ( I was not told that I was creating a credit with my wet ink signature ) ; XXXX. Equal consideration. ( XXXX and XXXX XXXX. brought nothing of value to the table and so had nothing to lose ) ; XXXX. Lawful terms and conditions. ( Yours were based on fraud ) ; XXXX. The wet signatures of both parties- ( XXXX cant sign because they have no Right or Mind to contract since they are soul-less legal fictions ; and furthermore, no third party can sign a contract on their behalf ). 

One can not owe you money when the dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the American people. You did not lend me your money. You were paid from the trust when you allegedly received my wet ink signature on said contract ( which was based on fraud as mentioned above. ) Not only have you been paid, but you are also requesting more money and double dipping on the money you received. House Joint Resolution 192, Public Law 73-10 states that all debt public and private are paid for. There is no debt.15 USC 1681b - FCRA - Under the permissible Purpose Law the original Creditor has a written agreement with the consumer to make your payments directly to them they do not have my permission/written consent to give out my information and sell it to a third party ( that being XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX THAT IS ILLEGAL! FCRA 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [ 15 U.S.C. 1681n ] " ( b ) Civil liability for knowing noncompliance. Any person who obtains a consumer report from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose shall be liable to the consumer reporting agency for actual damages sustained by the consumer reporting agency or {$1000.00}, whichever is greater. " Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for {$1000.00} or actual damages ( whichever is greater ) to both the consumer and to the consumer-reporting agency from which the report is procured. '' Please explain your permissible purpose for your obtaining my credit file. Should you not have a permissible purpose, please arrange for payment of $ XXXX Section 605A-15USC 1681 c-1 Section 605B- 15USC 1681 c-2 You are in clear violation of numerous things and attempting to collect a debt that legally needs to be removed - You have NOT sent any validation and or purchase agreements as the above Permissible Purpose Law altogether puts you in violation - I DO NOT CONSENT - Further Investigation of your fraud should be pursued as you are in direct violation and harassing an elderly person to boot after he said to stop calling. CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTSUSC 18 241 If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. CONSPIRACY TO INTERFEREUSC 42 1985 If two or more persons in any State or territory conspire for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly any persons rights the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages against any one or more of the conspirators. NEGLECT TO PREVENTUSC 42 1986 every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done or are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. he is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow- man without his consent. THE REAL LAW ( Marbury -v-Madison, 5th US ( 2 Cranch ) 137, 174, 176, 1803 ) RIGHTS AND SOVEREIGNTY ( hurtado v. People of the State of California, 110 U.S. 516 ) The assertion of federal rights [ Bill of Rights ], when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice. ( davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24 ) Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law. ( yick Wo v. hopkins, 118 US 356, 370 ). to deprive the People of their sovereignty, it is first necessary to get the People to agree to submit to the authority of the entity they have created. That is done by getting them to claim they are citizens of that entity Constitution for the U.S.A., XIV Amendment Isbill v. Stovall LAW OF THE LAND This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof ; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land ; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. US Constitution If any statement, within any law, which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional. ( Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137, 1803 16Am Jur 2d : 16Am Jur 2d., Sec . 97 ; Bary v. United States - 273 US 128 16Am Jur 2d., Sec . 114 16Am Jur 2d., Sec . 256 Mudook v. Penn. 319 US 105, 1943 Owen v. lndependence 100 Vol. Supreme Court Reports. 1398 : [ 1982 ] ; Main v. Thiboutot 100 Vol. Supreme Court Reports. 2502, 1982 Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 ; 1958 davis v. Burris, 51 Ariz. 220, 75 P.2d 689 ; 1938 In re duncan , 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.ed. 219 ; Minor v. happersett, 88 U.S. ( 21 Wall. ) 162, 22 L.ed. 627. Blacks Law dictionary, Fifth edition, p. 626 People v. Skinner, Cal., 110 P.2d 41, 45 ; State v. Rossi , 71 R.I. 284, 43 A.2d 323, 326 ; direct Plumbing Supply Co. v. City of dayton, 138 Ohio St. 540 , 38 N.e.2d 70, 72, 137 A.L.R. 1058 ; Stoner v. higginson, 316 Pa. 481, 175 A. 527, 531 Schware v. Board of Bar examiners, 353 U.S. 232 ; 1957 Schware v. Board of examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239 Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 ; 1925 Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, at 113 hertado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 Miller v. U.S., 230 F 2d 486. 489 14th Amendment Article I, section 1 Waring vs. the Mayor of Savanah Chisholm v. Georgia State v. dallas City United States -v- Williams Reminder A reminder that this is a trust action.

Contacted and advised they were a lawyer but refused to give me Bar Number and threatened to take legal action. They would not disclose who they were or who they represented. They would not disclose what debt was owed and by whom. This company is fraudulently attempting to collect an invalid debtAvouchment I, XXXX XXXX XXXX, do hereby avow that based upon my firsthand knowledge and information relayed to me from research, this XXXX XXXX XXXX, is true, accurate and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and conveys the requirements set forth as intended by me without prejudiceIf you correspond with me by mail. Address me by my name which you did not do in your response letter to me. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX - beneficiary Reminder A reminder that this is a trust action. You are in a fiduciary position as trustee because you are handling and working with my Social Security XXXX XXXX  XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX directly or indirectly as part of the service you provide. As a fiduciary everything you do MUST be for my benefit. If this debt is not placed in satisfactory status you are acting in your own best interest which makes you malfeasant of office. It is trust fraud and that is a felony.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation