Messerli and Kramer Collections Division

RE: Capital One Bank (USA) N.Avs [redacted] Our File Nos: [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted] : Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Mr***We are a law firm representing Plaintiff in each matter referenced, Capital One Bank (USA), N.AWe appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matterIn response to the complaint filed on May 9, 2017, I reviewed Mr***’s concerns and offer this response We respectfully disagree with Mr***’s assertion that the telephone call with our representative was harassing and that our employee was not willing to work with himWe reviewed the recording of the May 3, 2017, phone call with Mr [redacted] and find his recollection of the call seriously deficientWhen Mr [redacted] contacted our office on May 3, 2017, he spoke with our representative and explained his situation and what caused him to default on his accountsOur employee was understanding and sympathetic with Mr [redacted] and his current financial situationOur representative did not sarcastically ask how he could make the payments if he did not make enough to pay his house payment; he simply inquired where the funds would come fromAt no point in any call was Messerli & Kramer “harassing” or “angry”Overall the tone conversation between Mr [redacted] and our representative was very calmSpecifically: SEE ATTACHMENT FOR FULL RESPONSE CHARACTER LIMIT REACHED Very truly yours, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A Electronically Submitted Electronically Submitted

Ms [redacted] MINNESOTA Revdex.com SRiver Ridge Cir Burnsville, Minnesota RE: [redacted] as successor in interest to Capital One vs [redacted] Our File No: [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted] : Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Mr***We are a law firm representing the Plaintiff, [redacted] as successor in interest to Capital OneWe appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matterIn response to your letter dated October 18, 2016, I reviewed Mr***’s concerns and offer this response We sent a bank levy to [redacted] on or around March 3, 2014, a copy of the levy is attached [redacted] disclosed to our office that they were withholding $53.71, these funds should have been remitted to our office immediately because our paperwork included the Writ of ExecutionRegardless, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 571.79, “Except as provided in paragraph (h), the garnishee, after disclosure, shall be discharged of any further retention obligation to the creditor with respect to a specific garnishment summons when one of the following conditions are met: (d) If the garnishee was served with a garnishment summons after entry of judgment against the debtor by the creditor in the civil action and the garnishee has retained any disposable earnings, indebtedness, money, or property of the debtor, days after the garnishment summons is served the garnishee is discharged and the garnishee shall return any disposable earnings, other indebtedness, money, and property to the debtor.” Thus, Mr [redacted] should contact [redacted] to request his moneyMr***’s concerns appear to be misdirected; the bank should have returned the funds to Mr***Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rightsThank you for your attention to this matter Very truly yours, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A Electronically Submitted

Ms [redacted] MINNESOTA Revdex.com SRiver Ridge Cir Burnsville, Minnesota RE: Capital One Bank (USA) N.Avs [redacted] Our File No: [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted] : Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Ms***We are a law firm representing Plaintiff in regarding this matter, [redacted] We appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matterIn response to your letter dated August 29, I reviewed Ms***’s concerns and offer this response We have spoken to Ms [redacted] on several occasions and informed her that our office has not received her documentationOn August 25, 2016, we spoke to Ms [redacted] and informed her that she was welcome to fax, mail or drop off her exemption claim to our officeShe is also welcome to contact our office to set up a payment plan in lieu of the wage garnishmentIn her discussions with our office she suggested paying $bi-weeklyIf Ms [redacted] would like to set up that arrangement she can contact us to set up a voluntary wage assignment Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rightsThank you for your attention to this matterPlease let us know if you have any questions or need additional information Very truly yours, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A Electronically Submitted

I am rejecting this response because: The amount owed I do not agree withThis is much more than the principal balance and [redacted] did not work with me on removing fees that I did not consent toI also filed a complaint with the Attorney General Office and they have just called meYou will receive a formal response from the AGIn an effort to resolve this matter, I will accept an offer of payment in full of $to be paid on September 2, This is the amount that the AG will present on my behalf as well [redacted] is a deceitful and dishonest company with many public complaintsThey are liars and thieves and refuse to work with their customers

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/07/28) */
Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Ms***We are a law firm representing the Plaintiff,***, as successor in interest to ***This matter refers to the garnishment of Ms***' bank
accountIn response to your July 15, 2015, letter, received in our office on July 20, 2015, I reviewed Ms*** concerns and offer this response,
Ms*** did not contact our office to set up an approved payment arrangementShe did send in three unsolicited nominal payments of $We are required to apply Ms***/***/***'s payment, but, because this was not an approved payment arrangement our client proceeded to collect the judgment as permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section A bank garnishment was sent on or around May 20, The garnishment attached $1,476,47, this amount is sufficient to resolve the accountThe garnishment payment was applied to Ms***' account in on July 21, 2015, and it is now closedWe acted appropriately, and in accordance with the law
Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers' rightsThank you for your attention to this matterPlease let us know if you have any questions or need additional information

Ms*** *** Minnesota RevDex.com SRiver Ridge Cir. Burnsville, Minnesota RE: *** *** *** as successor in interest to *** *** *** vs*** *** Revdex.com Case No.: *** Our File No.: *** Dear Ms***: Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of *** ***. We appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matterMr***’s concerns relate to the balance due on his account. Mr***’s account was placed with our office for collection on June 22, Messerli and Kramer is a law firm representing its client, *** *** ***Messerli and Kramer was not privy to the way Mr***’s account was serviced by *** *** ***Attached are the billing statements we received from our client regarding Mr***’s accountIf Mr*** is interested in resolving his account please have him consider paying a lump sum payment of $representing a discount on the balance on or before August 15, 2016, or monthly payments of $until the account is paid in full with the first payment due on August 15, and the 15th of each consecutive month thereafter Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rightsThank you for your attention to this matterPlease let us know if you have any questions or need additional information Very truly yours, Messerli & Kramer P.A. Electronically Submitted

Ms*** *** Minnesota Revdex.com SRiver Ridge Cir. Burnsville, Minnesota RE: *** *** *** as successor in interest to *** *** *** and *** *** Revdex.com Case No.: *** Our File No.: *** Dear Ms***: Thank you for your recent follow up correspondence on behalf of *** ***. We appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matterMr***’s concerns relate to the balance due on his account and the servicing of the account by the original creditor Mr***’s complaint relates to another company, not Messerli and Kramer, nor its client, *** *** ***We were not privy to the servicing of Mr***’s account prior to it being placed with our firm for collectionWe do, however, have a copy of billing statements showing his last payment and the last statement balance when the account was closed(Attached for your reference) We are willing to work with Mr*** in an attempt to resolve the accountMr*** can pay monthly payments of $by the 26th of each month until the account balance is paid in fullHis first payment would be due by August 26, Alternatively, Mr*** can pay $if received by September 2, 2016. Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rightsRespectfully, we request that you close this matter as it relates to Messerli and KramerThank you for your attention to this matterPlease let us know if you have any questions or need additional information Very truly yours, Messerli & Kramer P.A Derrick N*** Attorney at Law DNW/tmw Enclosure

Ms. [redacted] MINNESOTA Revdex.com
220 S. River Ridge Cir.
Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
RE: Capital One Bank (USA) N.A. vs [redacted] Our File No: [redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Thank you for your recent correspondence...

on behalf of Ms. [redacted]. We are a law firm representing Plaintiff in regarding this matter, [redacted] We appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matter. In response to your letter dated August 29, 2016. I reviewed Ms. [redacted]’s concerns and offer this response.
We have spoken to Ms. [redacted] on several occasions and informed her that our office has not received her documentation. On August 25, 2016, we spoke to Ms. [redacted] and informed her that she was welcome to fax, mail or drop off her exemption claim to our office. She is also welcome to contact our office to set up a payment plan in lieu of the wage garnishment. In her discussions with our office she suggested paying $75.00 bi-weekly. If Ms. [redacted] would like to set up that arrangement she can contact us to set up a voluntary wage assignment.

Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rights. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information.
Very truly yours,
MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A.
Electronically Submitted

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.I am actually the one who did all the contacting, I faxed the information they asked for 30 times and they continuously lied about not receiving it. The only reason they ar deciding to honor anything is because they realized I know my rights. Thank you for your help in this matter. I read many complaints about them doing the same thing to other people. It's sad really.

RE: Capital One Bank (USA) N.A. vs [redacted]
Our File Nos: 1[redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Mr. [redacted]. We are a law firm representing Plaintiff in each matter referenced, Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. We...

appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matter. In response to the complaint filed on May 9, 2017, I reviewed Mr. [redacted]’s concerns and offer this response.
We respectfully disagree with Mr. [redacted]’s assertion that the telephone call with our representative was harassing and that our employee was not willing to work with him. We reviewed the recording of the May 3, 2017, phone call with Mr. [redacted] and find his recollection of the call seriously deficient. When Mr. [redacted] contacted our office on May 3, 2017, he spoke with our representative and explained his situation and what caused him to default on his accounts. Our employee was understanding and sympathetic with Mr. [redacted] and his current financial situation. Our representative did not sarcastically ask how he could make the payments if he did not make enough to pay his house payment; he simply inquired where the funds would come from. At no point in any call was Messerli & Kramer “harassing” or “angry”. Overall the tone conversation between Mr. [redacted] and our representative was very calm. Specifically:
     SEE ATTACHMENT FOR FULL RESPONSE CHARACTER LIMIT REACHED.
Very truly yours,
MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A.
Electronically Submitted
Electronically Submitted

Ms. [redacted] MINNESOTA Revdex.com
220 S. River Ridge Cir.
Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
RE: [redacted] as successor in interest to Capital One vs [redacted]
Our File No: [redacted]
Dear Ms....

[redacted]:
Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Mr. [redacted]. We are a law firm representing the Plaintiff, [redacted] as successor in interest to Capital One. We appreciate the opportunity to answer your questions regarding this matter. In response to your letter dated October 18, 2016, I reviewed Mr. [redacted]’s concerns and offer this response.
We sent a bank levy to [redacted] on or around March 3, 2014, a copy of the levy is attached. [redacted] disclosed to our office that they were withholding $53.71, these funds should have been remitted to our office immediately because our paperwork included the Writ of Execution. Regardless, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 571.79,
“Except as provided in paragraph (h), the garnishee, after disclosure, shall be discharged of any further retention obligation to the creditor with respect to a specific garnishment summons when one of the following conditions are met:
…
(d) If the garnishee was served with a garnishment summons after entry of judgment against the debtor by the creditor in the civil action and the garnishee has retained any disposable earnings, indebtedness, money, or property of the debtor, 180 days after the garnishment summons is served the garnishee is discharged and the garnishee shall return any disposable earnings, other indebtedness, money, and property to the debtor.”
Thus, Mr. [redacted] should contact [redacted] to request his money. Mr. [redacted]’s concerns appear to be misdirected; the bank should have returned the funds to Mr. [redacted]. Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers’ rights. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A.
Electronically Submitted

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/11) */
[redacted]response has been scanned in and converted to text below (original document is available using the online complaint system).
Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Ms. [redacted]. We are a law firm representing the Plaintiff,...

[redacted], as successor in interest to [redacted]. This matter refers to a judgment against Ms. [redacted]. In response to your June 3, 2015, letter, received in our office on June , 2015, I reviewed Ms. [redacted]s concerns and offer this response.
Ms. [redacted] was served on November 20, 2007, personally, and again on May , 2008, by sub-service, both at 55 Pleasant Street in Anoka, Minnesota. Judgment was entered on July 11, 2008 and is valid for ten (10) years, Minn. Stat. 548.09. The attached Writ of Execution issued by the Court is dated July 1 1, 2008, Not June 23, 2008. On July 16, 2008, Ms. [redacted] responded to the judgment by claiming an exemption based upon her receipt of Medical Assistance. Her exemption claim was followed up with a call. In neither instance did Ms. [redacted] express concern over lack of service. On January 28, 2009, Ms. [redacted] sent another exemption claim. Similar communications occurred on September 28, 2009, July , 2010, and September 1, 2010, Multiple other communications exist confirming the existence of judgment in this case. The entry of judgment is final and was not appealed.
Because these accounts are within the courts jurisdiction, we believe the Revdex.com should close its complaint . Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/11) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I did not respond to service because it did not happen. I can prove this quite easily. I have the original writ with the June 23rd date. It has no case number or anything indicating that it was a real court document. To my surprise, I found the identical document on the MN State Revisor website. There was NOT one sent July 11th. I have ALL of the correspondences. I filled out the exemptions because of the wording on them.."Please take notice that a garnishment summons or Levy may be served upon your employer or other third partied, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER COURT PROCEEDINGS OR NOTICE TO YOU,...This led me to believe that they could indeed garnish my wages, but I had NO IDEA that there was a judgement. The deceptive paperwork I received made me feel harassed. My calls to their office cemented that as they would harass me to the point of me losing my temper and hanging up as they laughed at me. I never did get any kind of confirmation via phone. I have asked, via the Attorney Generals office, for a full debt validation and proof beyond their statements, that prooves that I made this supposed payment in 2003. They continuously refuse, assumably because the information no longer exists. It further shows me that they are breaking laws and that this whole collection/judgment thing is a sham. This debt should have been wiped clean many years ago when the government and private legal office shut [redacted] down. My "debt" is all of the fees that they were illegally charging cardholders. I never owed a dime, as the charges are NOT mine. I did not have this card active while they were charging illegal fees. It was closed, so I thought, in the late 90's. I made some payments at one point to [redacted] because I was trying to purchase a home. At the time of the judgment, the amount owed was in the $1800 range. My balance had been at zero when I asked for it to be shut down. My name changed twice, the card could not be used after 1999 when my name changed from the name on my card and on their lawsuit to my maiden name. It changed again when I remarried and again when I took my maiden name back in the divorce. If necessary I will absolutely add all of the paperwork backing every statement I have made. Now, M&K, you should also provide validation and proof to back yourselves up, if you can...
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 10, 2015/06/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I did not respond to service because it did not happen. I can prove this quite easily. I have the original writ with the June 23rd date. It has no case number or anything indicating that it was a real court document. To my surprise, I found the identical document on the MN State Revisor website. There was NOT one sent July 11th. I have ALL of the correspondences. I filled out the exemptions because of the wording on them.."Please take notice that a garnishment summons or Levy may be served upon your employer or other third partied, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER COURT PROCEEDINGS OR NOTICE TO YOU,...This led me to believe that they could indeed garnish my wages, but I had NO IDEA that there was a judgement. The deceptive paperwork I received made me feel harassed. My calls to their office cemented that as they would harass me to the point of me losing my temper and hanging up as they laughed at me. I never did get any kind of confirmation via phone. I have asked, via the Attorney Generals office, for a full debt validation and proof beyond their statements, that prooves that I made this supposed payment in 2003. They continuously refuse, assumably because the information no longer exists. It further shows me that they are breaking laws and that this whole collection/judgment thing is a sham. This debt should have been wiped clean many years ago when the government and private legal office shut [redacted] down. My "debt" is all of the fees that they were illegally charging cardholders. I never owed a dime, as the charges are NOT mine. I did not have this card active while they were charging illegal fees. It was closed, so I thought, in the late 90's. I made some payments at one point to [redacted] because I was trying to purchase a home. At the time of the judgment, the amount owed was in the $1800 range. My balance had been at zero when I asked for it to be shut down. My name changed twice, the card could not be used after 1999 when my name changed from the name on my card and on their lawsuit to my maiden name. It changed again when I remarried and again when I took my maiden name back in the divorce. If necessary I will absolutely add all of the paperwork backing every statement I have made. Now, M&K, you should also provide validation and proof to back yourselves up, if you can...
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/07/08) */
Dear Mr. [redacted]:
Thank you for your recent correspondence on behalf of Ms. [redacted]. We are a law firm representing the Plaintiff, [redacted], as successor in interest to [redacted]. This matter refers to our client's judgment against Ms. [redacted]. In response to your June 15, 2015, letter, received in our office on June 18, 2015, I reviewed Ms. [redacted]'s concerns and offer this response.
It appears that Ms. [redacted] is confused by the legal process. She references a writ dated June 23, 2008, but appears to be referencing the Summons. (Dated June 23, 2008) A Summons is served to initiate the litigation. A Summons will always pre-date a judgment. The writ is issued after the judgment. This matter is currently under the jurisdiction of the Anoka County District Court. To the extent that Ms. [redacted] feels that she needs redress from this judgment, she must seek it from the Anoka County District Court. We have reviewed Ms. [redacted]'s file multiple times, and we believe that our client's judgment is valid, and we have lawfully validated the account, Enclosed are copies of our responses to the Minnesota Attorney General's Office regarding this matter,
Once again, we respectfully believe that you should close your file. Messerli & Kramer considers consumer complaints a serious matter, and fully respects consumers' rights, Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information.

I am rejecting this response because:
The amount owed I do not agree with. This is much more than the principal balance and [redacted] did not work with me on removing fees that I did not consent to. I also filed a complaint with the Attorney General Office and they have just called me. You will receive a formal response from the AG. In an effort to resolve this matter, I will accept an offer of payment in full of $450.00 to be paid on September 2, 2016. This is the amount that the AG will present on my behalf as well. [redacted] is a deceitful and dishonest company with many public complaints. They are liars and thieves and refuse to work with their customers.