Consumer complaint received 2025-08-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Hunt & Henriques
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
On multiple occasions between XXXX and XX/XX/year>, I have attempted to resolve an alleged XXXX XXXX  account that Hunt & Henriques LLP ( H & H ) claims to be collecting on. Their conduct has been a textbook example of misrepresentation, bad faith negotiation, and illegal debt collection practices under the FDCPA. 

1. Contradictory claims about ownership of the debt H & H has repeatedly stated both verbally and in written CFPB responses that XXXX XXXX continues to own all right and title to this account. Yet, despite this claim, I have been explicitly told by both XXXX XXXX and H & H that I can not pay XXXX XXXX directly. If XXXX XXXX truly
owns this debt, blocking me from paying them directly is illegal and deceptive.

This forces me to deal solely with H & H, a third-party law firm, which is inflating the balance and attempting to collect unauthorized fees.

H & Hs refusal to facilitate direct payment contradicts their own ownership statements and constitutes a material misrepresentation in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692e.

2. Inflated balance & unauthorized charges The alleged balance has been inflated to {$4000.00}, which includes attorney fees and court costs not yet awarded by any judge. 
Demanding premature attorney fees before judgment is an attempt to collect an amount not permitted by law or the underlying agreement in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692f ( 1 ).

This is not a good-faith attempt to settle a debt it is an attempt to extract payment for amounts that do not yet exist as a legal obligation.

3. Bad faith negotiation tactics I made a good-faith settlement offer at 50 % of the alleged balance, payable immediately in a lump sum. H & Hs so-called counteroffer was the exact same {$2900.00} figure they had already quoted in prior communications there was no counter at all. 
This demonstrates an outright refusal to negotiate in good faith, despite my willingness to settle quickly and fairly.

H & H is leveraging the court process to extract inflated payments rather than resolve the matter reasonably.

4. Coordinated obstruction between H & H and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX refusal to accept direct payment while allowing H & H to claim they are the exclusive point of settlement is a coordinated tactic that : Deprives me of the right to pay the alleged owner directly.

Forces me into a controlled channel designed to increase consumer payment beyond the lawful balance. 
Creates confusion for the consumer, which is itself a prohibited practice under the FDCPA. 

5. Pattern of abusive collection behavior Across calls, H & H has dismissed factual disputes, ignored evidence, and repeated contradictory statements in writing to the CFPB. This pattern shows deliberate misrepresentation, not an accidental misunderstanding. The intent is clear : block payment directly to XXXX XXXX, demand inflated amounts, and mislead the consumer about their rights. 

Requested CFPB Action : I request that the CFPB open an investigation into both Hunt & Henriques LLP and XXXX XXXX for : 1. Misrepresenting debt ownership while restricting lawful direct payment to the alleged owner.

2. Attempting to collect unauthorized amounts, including premature legal fees.

3. Engaging in bad faith negotiations designed to pressure consumers into overpaying.

4. Coordinating between creditor and law firm to obstruct reasonable debt resolution. 

I am prepared to provide : Call recordings. 
Copies of all email communications. 
H & Hs written CFPB responses admitting the contradictions in their own statements. 

The evidence will show a coordinated bad faith collection effort that violates both the letter and the spirit of the FDCPA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation