Consumer complaint received 2025-10-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Rausch Sturm LLP
State: WI

Complaint narrative:
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAIT represent myself in this action. 
After reviewing the documents provided by the Plaintiff, I would ask the court to dismiss this case based on the following : Defendant acknowledges the address provided, but does not have information about the plaintiff 's address from the caption. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Defendant acknowledges the purpose stated but makes no admissions regarding the debt. 
Defendant incorporates responses to paragraphs XXXX through XXXX as stated above. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
Not enough information to admit or deny. 
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Plaintiff has not provided documents showing a contract between Defendant and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with Defendants Wet Signature. 
Plaintiff has not provided any document authorizing the handling of Defendants personal data. 
Plaintiff has not provided a complete account number for Defendant to review for the alleged debt. 
Plaintiff has not provided a full accounting of alleged debt for the amount of {$11000.00}, account number unknown. Defendant requests to review all original creditors ( payments, credits, interest rates, disputes ) including a signature or digital pin code approving alleged charges claimed. 
Plaintiff has not provided any documentation showing the debt is 100 % accurate with no errors oromissions. 
Plaintiff has not provided communications between the Plaintiff and Defendant. 
The original creditor has possibly filed a 1099 C Cancellation of Debt with the IRS ; this would void any ability to collect on any alleged debt. Defendant requests proof XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have not filed a 1099 C Cancellation of Debt write-off to the IRS. 
Plaintiff did not provide a Dunning Letter giving Defendant the opportunity to dispute alleged debt. 
Plaintiff has excessively delayed in bringing this lawsuit to my disadvantage due to non-availability of communication and document requests being cut off with the original creditor to establish concrete proof of the claimed amount by Plaintiff. 
Plaintiff Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX of RAUSCH STURM LLP is a debt collector has a requirementa ccording to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to notify Defendant by mail with a Dunning Letter giving the Defendant the opportunity to dispute alleged debt. 
Plaintiff Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX of RAUSCH STURM LLP is a debt collector has a requirement according to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) to review and provide documentation to show proof of alleged debt and how Plaintiff provided proof of how the alleged debt was accumulated with true accounting records and statements. 
Plaintiff Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX of RAUSCH STURM LLP is a debt collector has a requirement according to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) to provide a proper validation of debt with in XXXX days of initial contact. Because Plaintiff Attorney never provided a Dunning Letter to the Defendant, Plaintiff Attorney did not comply with FDCPA Requirements ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ). 
Defendant reserves the right to amend his answer after receipt of additional documentation from Plaintiff.

This friday, the XXXX of XX/XX/year>.

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