I am making Kansas Uniform Consumer Credit Code complaint with the “Consumer Credit State Bank

Commissioner” against debt collector Regional Adjustment Bureau, 7000 Goodlett Farms
Parkway, Cordova, TN 38016.

The above named entity has failed to register as per The Kansas Uniform Consumer Credit Code
(K.S.A. 16a-6-201) and they continue to do collection activities and taking assignment of an auto
retail Installment agreement that is four years in default so clearly they are unregistered assignee
attempting to collect.

As Evidence See Exhibit “AA1” which clearly shows that Fifth Third Bank sold the account to Regional
Adjustment Bureau.

“Fifth Third Bank” has sued me (Crawford County District Court Kansas case number 2012LM356P) over
an alleged loan I had with them where they do not have any evidence of an enforceable validly dated
contract.

Fifth Third Bank insists that on November 22, 2006 I signed a contract with them while in truth on that
day I signed a contract with Harris N. A. As Evidence See Exhibit “H”. In other words Fifth Third Bank is
making a false and misleading statement that I somehow signed two contracts with two separate
creditors for the same vehicle on the eve of thanksgiving 2006?

I found out during my case that the 1st attorney for “Fifth Third Bank” was Pendleton and Sutton and
they had actually purchased the account from “Fifth Third Bank”. As Evidence See Exhibit “A1” which
clearly shows that Fifth Third Bank sold the account to Pendleton and Sutton.

Pendleton and Sutton lied during an entire court case about not purchasing the debt from “Fifth Third
Bank” but my August 2011 credit report - shown As Evidence Exhibit ‘A1” - shows they in fact did buy if
from the Original Creditor “Fifth Third Bank”.

“Fifth Third Bank” had previously sold my account to Regional Adjustment Bureau and Pendleton and
Sutton LLC. As Evidence See Exhibit “AA1” which clearly shows that Fifth Third Bank sold the account to
Regional Adjustment Bureau.

I sent Regional Adjustment Bureau adjustment bureau a debt verification request and they never
responded to my debt verification request. As Evidence See Exhibit “AA2”.

I made a complaint against Pendleton and Sutton with the “Office of Disciplinary Action” and they
withdrew from the case for a conflict of interest. As Evidence See Exhibit “W”.

Mr. Werner another debt collector and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian takes
over the case as the debt collectors but he shows no “Notice of Assignment” and does not alert me that
they are debt collectors. As Evidence See Exhibit “MAW” which shows Mark A. Werner’s “Entry Of
Appearance” in the case and NO mention that he is a debt collector as required by 15 U.S.C. SECTION
1692(g)(a) (3), (4) and (5). As of this date they have never stated for the record that they are debt
collectors.

Page 1 of 3
The fact is that Pendleton and Sutton and Fifth Third Bank both knew that this account has been
charged off and turned in as in insurance loss but yet they are trying to double dip on the account. They
are lying and saying there is no bill of sale which is absolutely impossible!!!!! I have looked up the
following violations that I feel that Mr. Werner, Fifth Third Bank, Thompson Coburn LLP via their
attorney David M. Mangian and Pendleton and Sutton have all committed:

1. Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian are the new debt
collectors for “Fifth Third Bank” even though “Fifth Third Bank” has already sold the alleged debt
to “Regional Accounts Bureau” and “Pendleton and Sutton” which was evidenced by the
Transunion Credit Report of August of 2011 above. Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via
their attorney David M. Mangian did not send me a notice indicating that they are debt
collectors for “Fifth Third Bank” and instead just sued me. This violates K.S.A. 16a-3-203 UCCC
Notice of Assignment and are trying to collect fees and I don’t know if they are for attorney fees
or for debt collection which violates K.S.A. 16a-2-507(1)(2)(3). Mr. Werner has not shown me a
verification of debt even though I requested the original contract showing who the contract is
with and yet none has been provided.

2. I have informed Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian
that I have 2 bills sent from Regional Accounts Bureau and Pendleton and Sutton but he has
ignored my evidence. As evidence see Exhibit “Rab3” and Exhibit “Pen1”.

3. I feel my credit on that alleged loan was never properly backed by the FDIC and several
misrepresentations occurred and failure to comply with the uniform consumer credit code and
this violates K.S.A. 16a-2-310(b)(c)(d)(f)(m).

4. Pendleton and Sutton the original debt collector (and Fifth Third Bank) have already lied under
oath during Interrogatories about purchasing the alleged debt from “fifth Third Bank” after it
was entered as a “PROFIT LOSS/WRITE OFF”. As evidence See Exhibit “3B”.

5. Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian are not admitting
that they are the new debt collectors and will not reveal if he/they bought the debt from
“Pendleton and Sutton” or “Fifth Third Bank” or “Region Adjustment Bureau” which violates
K.S.A. 16a-2-310(b)(c) and they both have misrepresented information as a debt collector.

6. I also don’t feel that the alleged loan with “Fifth Third Bank” was not supervised which would
violate K.S.A. 16a-2-301 (UCCC) “Authority to Make Loans”. I think the reason Mr. Werner will
not reveal the price that was paid for the unknown “Bill of Sale” is because “Pendleton and
Sutton” and “Fifth Third Bank” and “Region Adjustment Bureau” violated K.S.A. 16a-5-301(1)
(UCCC) Intentional violations; penalties which is a very serous matter since this is a class A
nonperson misdemeanor for an intentional violation and Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP
via their attorney David M. Mangian may have possibly violated this code as well.

Page 2 of 3
 7. Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian have violated K.S.A.
16-118(a) which says that a debtor or a creditor may not maintain an action for legal or
equitable relief or a defense, based on either case upon failure to perform on an alleged credit
agreement, unless the material terms and conditions of the agreement are in writing and signed
by the creditor and the debtor and they have not shown any validly dated contract for this
alleged debt.

8. Mr. Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian are attempting to
keep the vehicle included in the alleged loan and that should exceed the amount an attorney or
debt collector can receive for compensation.

9. K.S.A 16-118(b) was violated as well as there has been no written credit agreement or including
the reduction to writing of a previous oral credit agreement and an affirmation, signed or
initialed by the debtor and the creditor, that no unwritten oral credit agreement between the
parties exists. Mark Werner and Thompson Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian and
“Fifth Third Bank” have not complied with the rules and regulation; truth in lending which
violated K.S.A. 16a-3-206 (UCCC) and the rules and regulations adopted by the administrator
under K.S.A. 16a-6-117 and this section. See K.A. R. 75-6-26 and K.S.A. 16a-5-203(7).

10. I feel that Pendleton and Sutton, Regional Adjustment Bureau, Mr. Werner and Thompson
Coburn LLP via their attorney David M. Mangian, and “Fifth Third Bank” have all violated
K.S.A. 16a-5-201(1) because they are creditors/collectors that violated the provisions of
this act applying to collection of excess charges or enforcement of rights and according to K.S.A.
16a-5-201(2) the alleged loan should be void and the consumer is not obligated to pay either
the amount financed of finance charge.

Kindly do an investigation…

By: Eric Muathe

Page 3 of 3