Being used by a well known debt collector for a debt that I contend is fruit of identity theft. Plaintiff provided a bill of sale from orig creditor to another party and a papered over trail leading to them. My questions lies in, upon serving requests for spec interrogotories, document demand etc, Plaintiff counsel, who is EMPLOYED by debt collector, claims not once but 3 times that there was no other party sold or assigned this debt and that it was purchased or assigned DIRECTLY from original creditor yet AGAIN provided the contradictory documents to support this claim. Is this an acceptable practice for a licensed attorney in state of CA? If fraud what remedies can I exercise?