Consumer complaint received 2025-06-04 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Rausch Sturm LLP
State: IA

Complaint narrative:
Subject : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ongoing Dispute of Alleged Debt / CFPB Complaint # CFPB XXXX XXXX. : XXXX & XXXX To Whom It May Concern : I am writing in response to XXXX XXXX Services, XXXX XXXX XXXX to comply with lawful debt verification requirements under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and to formally object to the generic and unsupported statements they have submitted in reply to my complaint. 

Despite multiple prior complaints submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) under case numbers XXXX and XXXX, and repeated requests dating back to XXXX, XXXX has consistently failed to provide the essential documentation legally required under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). 

Key Issues : Failure to Validate the XXXX XXXX has repeatedly failed to provide adequate verification of the alleged debt despite multiple written requests going back as far as XXXX. To date, they have not provided : A signed original contract bearing my wet-ink signature Full account-level documentation, including itemized billing history Evidence of consideration given ( required to enforce any alleged contract ) Proof of ownership or assignment, showing Cavalry legally acquired this debt Any disclosure under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) or otherwise, required to validate the origin of this account Their CFPB Response Is Insufficient and Unsubstantiated The mere statement that a debt is valid is not equivalent to proper validation. Courts have consistently held ( e.g., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) ) that debt collectors must provide sufficient evidence that a debt is owed and that they have the legal right to collect it. XXXX CFPB response fails to meet this standard. 

Failure to Appear in Court On XX/XX/XXXX, neither XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nor their attorneys from Rausch & Sturm LLP appeared in court as scheduled regarding this alleged debt ( XXXX XXXX XXXX Small Claims Case # [ XXXX ] ). Their failure to appear is another clear example of disregard for legal process and suggests a lack of evidence to substantiate the debt. 

Licensing and Regulatory Concerns It remains unclear whether Rausch & Sturm LLP is properly licensed to collect debts in Iowa. I request that this issue be investigated, as unlicensed collection activity may be a violation of both Iowa law and FDCPA provisions.

Securitization/ Pooling of Debt I request full transparency as to whether this alleged account has been securitized, bundled, or otherwise sold as part of a pool of receivables. If so, XXXX may no longer possess legal standing to pursue collection. 

Relief Requested : I respectfully request that the CFPB direct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to immediately provide all documentation as listed above, or withdraw their claim entirely. 

I also request investigation into potential violations of the FDCPA and other consumer protection statutes. 

In addition to full dismissal of this alleged debt, I reserve the right to pursue punitive damages for emotional distress, time lost, reputational harm, and XXXX willful failure to comply with the law. 

XXXX and its legal representatives are hereby placed on notice that continued collection activity without proper documentation may be reported to the Iowa Attorney General, FTC, and appropriate licensing boards.

Timeframe for Response : I am granting four ( 4 ) business days from the date of this letter to receive a complete and fully compliant response. If no adequate proof is presented within that timeframe, I will escalate this matter accordingly.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation