XXXX/XXXX/2015 @ XXXX my cell phone rang from incoming call ID XXXX. So, I placed it on speaker thinking is was a telemarketing company. The man asked me by my full name, full DOB ( with year ). He said his full company OF William and Fudge regarding an XXXX matter and anything said would be using those purposes, and that the call was recorded ( not exact words but close to it ). 

I explained the debt is not valid not to call me back contact me again. Also, I sent a XXXX XXXX using tracking # XXXX XXXX XXXX asking 1 ). Verification of any debt related to my so called account 2 ). The nam and address of the original creditor and current creditor 3 ). Forms to assist disputing accuracy of such items. Also, I wrote they compromised my ID data by sharing it without first validating the person he was speaking to before sharing DOB and his agency name. 

Then, on XXXX/XXXX/2015 the same agency called my same cell phone number using a totally different incoming number of XXXX at XXXX. There is a clear violation of the law here. Clearly, the agency was attempted to work around my call blocking of the original number and perhaps hoped in 90 days the number dropped off my cell phone log as must drop off in 90 days. I am requesting CFPB fine them in the amount for the violations of the law. I have XXXX phone records and copies for proof. 

Also, they failed validate their claimed debt. I shared I dropped with XXXX XXXX AND instructor XXXX XXXX if it was related that a dropped class. Also, I provided the school an obituary, and I agree to pay payment plan. The University has a past practise of working with students that had an immediate family member pass. I had other reasons to drop, but they are no about this matter. 

The University contacted me stating they are investigating too. For any balance due, I already have agreed with XXXX to pay them for prorating dates without any upcharges, and they agreed after I am employed. Also, XXXXXXXXXXXX is not accepting payments after I agreed to a payment plan for money not owed once employed. Now, I am advised by legal professionals the debt is clearly not valid given all the documented facts and record that go back two years.