Consumer complaint received 2016-01-26 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Federal student loan
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated an attorney or official
Company: Deutsche Bank
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Yesterday ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) had visited XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to verified her Student Loan Debts held in Default status and discovered, Illinois XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) had transferred her Student Loan Debts to XXXX XXXX , XXXX without XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) receiving a verification letter in the mail as similarly with the ongoing issues with XXXX XXXX XXXX. This letter is the same address location of a fraudulent XXXX letters sent to her in XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. In addition, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) had noticed link to XXXX XXXX , XXXX that she is being billed for some type of medical procedures in her Student Loan Debts by XXXX XXXX XXXX who is unknown to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX had acquired a third party, private collection contractor [ the Deutsche Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trusts ] to collected a forged debt from XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ). 

On XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) had written to the U.S. Department of Education [ third party, private collection contractor ( s ) ] in regards to acquiring an official " Security Clearance Letter '' to XXXX XXXX in determination, intended for the exclusionary of her student loan debts held in default statuses. Even though, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) had paid more than six months consecutive payments to the United States Department of Education from administrative offset by the Department of Treasury for collections against her federal and/or state income tax refunds and any other payments authorized by law. Why XXXX XXXX XXXX 's ( Complainant 's ) student loans are still in default, status even if, her student loans payments are voluntary paid each month from the administrative offset by the Department of Treasury? In addition, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) has official copies of her Student Loans promissory notes contractual agreements and official receipts of monthly administrative offset letters from the Department of Treasury for which, the last student loan disbursement dated on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, to XXXX XXXX therefore, no other financial aid was acquired until XXXX XXXX, to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) had evaluated, the U.S. Department of Education [ online www. XXXX ] online payment analytics that allowed, XXXX XXXX, private collection contractor ( s ) for contractual allowances collecting to aged accounts receivable on their behalf than she had discovered third party, private collection contractor ( s ) malfeasance in forged or fraudulent transfer of XXXX XXXX XXXX 's ( Complainant 's ) student loan debts without " Validation of Debt '' letter notification and details monthly statement inscribing current month principle balances, percentage rates applied and applicable fees notifications thus compromising her confidential information pertinent to any data collectors that triggered a breach of security data in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( Title 15 U.S.C. 1692 ). XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Complainant ) argues her Student Loans promissory notes contractual agreements does not includes litigation clause ( s ) for mandatory binding arbitration or transfer of student loans debts to private collection contractor ( s ) outlining that XXXX XXXX XXXX 's ( Complainant 's ) student loan debts are binding contractual agreements with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and Illinois XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) for the originate contractual agreements period. The U.S. Department of Education [ third party, private collection contractor ( s ) ] had acted with malice aforethought in premeditated criminal intents resulting, in extraordinary Cruel and Unusual, excessive conspiratorial objectives to commit Identity Theft.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation