Consumer complaint received 2025-06-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Absolute Resolutions Corp.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint ADA Civil Rights Violation Date : XX/XX/year> Respondent : XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX Subject : Failure to Comply with Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA ) Title II and Title III Obligations in Debt Collection Litigation To the CFPB Civil Rights Division, Statement of Intent : As is my right under federal law, I am submitting daily complaints to the CFPB regarding XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX for their ongoing actions against me. I am a XXXX, judgment-proof individual with no income beyond SSDI, and I believe this firm is engaging in unethical and abusive tactics that target my XXXX, confusing legal protections, and weaponized procedure. Each complaint highlights different aspects of their conduct or restate key points for recordkeeping and policy oversight. 

This letter is also part of a broader goal : to generate an administrative record, piece by piece, showing the pattern of conduct and the human response to it. If these daily complaints feel burdensome to process, I ask you to consider how burdensome the experience is on the other side not just once, but constantly. 

If the CFPBs mission includes the long view of consumer protection, then I hope this series contributes to a better understanding of how power functions quietly, legally, and destructively behind the scenes. 


I am filing a formal complaint against XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for ongoing violations of federal XXXX law, specifically Title II and Title III of the Americans with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), as well as associated due process protections under the XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX jurisprudence.

This complaint should be evaluated not as a dispute about a consumer debt, but as a civil rights violation rooted in the firms : 1. Failure to accommodate a federally recognized psychiatric disability, despite multiple written notices.

2. Discriminatory litigation tactics that exploit cognitive impairments for procedural advantage. 3. Refusal to provide accessible communication, as
mandated under 28 CFR Part 35 and 36. 



Background I am a XXXX consumer living on Social Security Disability Insurance ( SSDI ) due to documented psychiatric and neurocognitive impairments, including executive dysfunction and XXXX spectrum disorder. My impairments substantially limit XXXX or more major life activities as defined in 42 U.S. Code 12102 ( 2 ).

Despite this, Pressler, Felt & Warshaw has pursued legal action against me in a manner that : Ignores ADA notice and accommodation requirements.

Fails to tailor litigation communications to my XXXX. 
Continues to escalate court action despite my indigency and inability to participate effectively in court.

ADA Failures and Regulatory Breach Under the ADA and accompanying regulations, XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is required to : XXXX. Engage in an interactive process upon being notified of a XXXX. 
XXXX. Provide reasonable accommodations to ensure equitable participation in legal proceedings. 
XXXX. Avoid discriminatory litigation tactics that have a disparate impact on XXXX individuals. 

The firm has failed all three. They have ignored written accommodation requests submitted in accordance with 28 C.F.R. 35.130 ( b ) ( 7 ) and continue to communicate in formats that trigger psychiatric distress.

Furthermore, their litigation strategy appears designed to extract default judgments by leveraging my inability to cognitively process timelines, respond to filings, or appear in court.

Specific Requests for Bureau Review I request that the CFPB conduct a targeted investigation into XXXX, XXXX & XXXX : XXXX XXXX policy and protocols for consumers with psychiatric or neurocognitive XXXX. 
Internal training materials provided to staff regarding interaction with XXXX debtors. 
Procedural safeguards ( if any ) to prevent disparate impact in civil litigation against known XXXX parties. 
Use of boilerplate litigation in cases where the debtor is judgment-proof, XXXX, and unable to mount a defense. 

Additionally, I request that the CFPB demand from the firm : A copy of their XXXX coordinator designation ( if applicable ) ; A record of accommodations granted to similarly situated consumers within the past XXXX  months ; Any documentation demonstrating compliance with the Department of Justices ADA Title III Technical Assistance Manual ( Section III-4.6200 ) regarding XXXX  XXXX, communication barriers, and litigation adjustments. 



Conclusion This is not merely a debt collection issue. This is a failure of civil rights complianceone that places disabled litigants at a systemic disadvantage. The XXXX is not optional. It applies to law firms, debt collectors, and any entity participating in the legal process when they interact with the public.

I request immediate review, regulatory pressure, and possible referral to the DOJ Civil Rights Division if warranted.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation