Consumer complaint received 2015-10-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed — Debt is not mine
Company: CITIBANK, N.A.
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
continuation to Case number : XXXX : XXXX answer - with my dispute : Their Answer : Please note that the last payment towards the Citibank account was on XXXX XXXX, 2008 for {$94.00}. XXXX 's business records indicate that the suit that was filed against you for the Citibank account XX/XX/XXXX, within the applicable statute of limitations period. No judgment was ever obtained in this suit, and the suit was subsequently dismissed. The above-mentioned account was closed as the Statute of Limitation had expired and there is no longer a balance due and owing. 

My response to dispute this noThe suit was dismissed per the Judge - to state I made a payment for {$94.00} on XX/XX/XXXX is another misrepresentation:1. ) - The judge teleconferenced the paralegal with XXXX XXXX and had asked for documentation showing I made this payment ( which would have the only thing that would have restarted the Statute Of Limitations on this account ) and she said they do not have anything - no statement - no bank that it was paid from. 
2. ) Then the question arose if the minimum payment due was {$200.00}??? why would I make such an odd payment of {$94.00}? of course as I said under oath - I did n't make a payment. 
3. ) I also had submitted to court bank statements of accounts for that time period and there were NO debits to XXXX XXXX ever made. 
4, ) The Statement I have attached shows the statement dated XX/XX/XXXX was for XX/XX/XXXX and it shows no payments made that month. 
5. ) The other attachment only shows that I had a balance at that time. 
6. ) The XXXX attachments were the only items the Plaintiff provided in this case - along with the sale from CITI. 
7. ) It was dismissed twice - once from the Court Commisioner and once from the Judge as there was no burden of proof whatsoever that {$94.00} was paid so start over the SOL. 
8. ) XXXX XXXX has been on trial for numerous misrepresentations to mislead and falsify information to the consumer and in laymens terms - The tried every which way in the 4 times they took me to court. 
9. ) The judges final question to me before his decision was " Why do I think I should prevail in this case? '' and I stated " Because the law is the law and they are breaking it right here in court. 
10. ) This was clearly a time-barred account that information was misrepresented in order to collect time-barred debt. 
11. ) Lastly - their Attorney from XXXX XXXX : Approached and followed me to the entrance the first 3 times in court stating that " All you need to do is just pay {$50.00} now and then just {$50.00} or {$75.00} a month - whatever I could afford and they would give me a great settlement. 
The meeting with the court commissioner - XXXX had set up a teleconference with the plaintiff for him give a statement and he would n't answer his telephone when they were called from the courtroom. 
Under FTC Settlement, Debt Buyer Agrees to Pay XXXX for Alleged Consumer deception - - - XXXX : *****misrepresenting that consumers owed a debt when it could not substantiate its representations ; *****failing to disclose that debts are too old to be legally enforceable or that a partial payment would extend the time a debt could be legally enforceable ; failing to conduct a reasonable investigation when it received a notice of dispute from a credit reporting agency ; repeatedly calling third parties who do not owe a debt ; informing third parties about a debt ; using illegal debt-collection practices, including misrepresenting the character, amount and making false representations to collect a debt ; andfailing to provide verification of the debt and continuing to attempt to collect a debtThis is what XXXX did to me - 4 times to court- each time XXXX miles roundtrip

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation