| 08/07/2023 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- I do not know
|
- Written notification about debt
- Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
|
|
Web |
|
|
What started as a quest to recover an attorney fee has turned into something much more with further research.
I am requesting an investigation of XXXX XXXX Cress who has broken FDCPA law. XXXX Cress received my debt of {$280.00} from his client on XX/XX/2022 and filed a suit on XX/XX/2022. My initial contact with Cress was the Notice of the lawsuit received on XX/XX/2022. I also verified this with my phone records.
Under FDCPA law it is stated that initial contact can not be Legal Pleadings, but that was the initial contact I had from Cress.
I attempted to settle my debt with his office but was informed I was now also responsible for a {$750.00} attorney fee. We could not come to an agreement because I refused to pay the {$750.00} attorney fee as I did not understand how such a fee came to be for a debt less than {$300.00} and no one I spoke with at Cress Law Group could explain the fee. I strongly feel that my case and many others need to be investigated.
The statute of limitations of 1 year to submit an investigation should not apply to the cases of those affected more than 1 year ago could have them opened and reversed with a Discovery of Fraud.
I now have a better understanding of my rights and realize XXXX Cress has broken FDCPA Law by skipping the most elemental aspect of the Laws by not allowing the debtor to verify the debt or come to terms before accruing an attorney fee by filing a lawsuit nearly immediately. By claiming such extreme fees for relatively small balances they are making the collection process unreasonable for the debtor.
There are many collections cases represented by XXXX Cress visible through the Mycase.IN.gov website that date back more than 10 years.
Sincerely and thank you, XXXX XXXX ADDITIONAL INFO SINCE FIRST REPORTING : Since reporting Cress for FDCPA fraud to local and federal authorities, I have had trouble sleeping, stress manifesting physically, increased paranoia, fear for myself and my wife, and my children. I worry about my kids going to school safely. I fear legal retribution from Cress and my faith in the justice system has been shaken with his more-than-decade long history of dishonesty and fraud. No other lawyers or judges caught him after all that time. Why did it have to be me? I am already not the same person I was. I'm a very sensitive person and I was not mentally prepared to destroy someone. I am a creator by nature and wish to live in peace. A peace that has now been taken from me with my obligation to report XXXX Cress.
The garnishment for the collection case started right before my daughter is starting XXXX and my son begins XXXX XXXX. The garnishment plus the added stress of my discovery and consequences is causing me to miss out on this once in a lifetime event with my kids. These are irreparable damages caused by XXXX Cress and his dishonesty.
This discovery is large and long reaching. I struggle with what I've done in terms of my own way of life. I wonder if I should have let it be to feel safe. However, this needed to be done to prevent the people of Indiana from falling victim to Cress 's criminal collection practices.
XXXX Cress has made a lot of money with his dishonest practice, and with the investigation he may stand to lose a lot of that money. He may not have a criminal record now, but losing large sums of money can change a man. And that's what I'm afraid of.
I truly hope that nothing happens to me or my family.
|
| 08/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- I do not know
|
- False statements or representation
- Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
|
|
Web |
|
|
More evidence of unfair collection practices by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IN XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney debt collectors, simply by virtue of their profession, are especially susceptible to claims under the FDCPAs general prohibitions against using false, misleading, and unconscionable means to collect a debt. There have been a number of recent complaints in and around the 7th Circuit against attorney debt collectors, which allege violations of 1692e and 1692f by sending form debt collection letters that falsely imply the attorney has meaningfully reviewed the case. See e.g., Knack-Toms v. Meyer Njus Tanick , PA 345 F. Supp. 3d 1033 ( N.D.I.L Nov. 2018 ), see also, Bucholz v. Meyer Njus Tanick, PA, 2018 WL 4625740 ( W.D. Mich. Sept. 2018 ). These plaintiffs cite Avila v. Rubin for the proposition that a delinquency letter from an attorney conveys authority and implies that the attorney supervised or actually controlled the procedures by which the letter was sent. 84 F.3d 222, 228-29 ( 7th Cir. 1996 ). Instead of challenging the substance of the attorney debt collector letter, the plainiffs attorney generally allege that because ( 1 ) the letter was sent by an attorney debt collector on attorney letterhead that the attorney must have meaningfully reviewed/analyzed the debt and ( 2 ) because the collection letter is a mass-produced template letter which has an indiscernible signature that no meaningful attorney review has occurred which makes the letter a false, misleading, and/or unconscionable attempt to collect the debt in violation of 1692e and 1692f of the FDCPA. '' This is exactly what XXXX XXXX does and has been doing for 17 years. A misleading letter from an attorney with no signature.
|
| 08/08/2023 |
Yes |
- Debt collection
- I do not know
|
- False statements or representation
- Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
|
|
Web |
|
|
More evidence of unfair collection practices by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IN XXXX From : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, simply by virtue of their profession, are especially susceptible to claims under the FDCPAs general prohibitions against using false, misleading, and unconscionable means to collect a debt. There have been a number of recent complaints in and around the 7th Circuit against attorney debt collectors, which allege violations of 1692e and 1692f by sending form debt collection letters that falsely imply the attorney has meaningfully reviewed the case. See e.g., Knack-Toms v. Meyer Njus Tanick , PA 345 F. Supp. 3d 1033 ( N.D.I.L Nov. 2018 ), see also, Bucholz v. Meyer Njus Tanick, PA, 2018 WL 4625740 ( W.D. Mich. Sept. 2018 ). These plaintiffs cite Avila v. Rubin for the proposition that a delinquency letter from an attorney conveys authority and implies that the attorney supervised or actually controlled the procedures by which the letter was sent. 84 F.3d 222, 228-29 ( 7th Cir. 1996 ). Instead of challenging the substance of the attorney debt collector letter, the plainiffs attorney generally allege that because ( 1 ) the letter was sent by an attorney debt collector on attorney letterhead that the attorney must have meaningfully reviewed/analyzed the debt and ( 2 ) because the collection letter is a mass-produced template letter which has an indiscernible signature that no meaningful attorney review has occurred which makes the letter a false, misleading, and/or unconscionable attempt to collect the debt in violation of 1692e and 1692f of the FDCPA. '' This is exactly what XXXX XXXX does and has been doing for 17 years. A misleading letter from an attorney with no signature.
|