{"took":173,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":50,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17558165","_score":30.318346,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/year> PRODUCT Debt collection ISSUE Took or threatened to take negative or legal action Log in to view company response First time logging in? Set up your password They said they would remove from my report and I still cant buy a home because of it.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-27T13:58:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"35022","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17558165","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Eastern Account Systems of Connecticut, Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-27T13:50:45.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/year> PRODUCT <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> ISSUE <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> Log in to view company response First time logging in? Set up your password They said they would remove from my report and I still cant buy a home because of it."]},"sort":[30.318346,"17558165"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17853547","_score":30.161003,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Creditor/Furnisher : RentDebt Automated Collections , LLC ( RDAC ) Referenced Account : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Reason for Filing : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action ; false reporting ; identity theft ; failure to validate ; failure to block fraudulent information ; reinvestigation violations ; inaccurate credit reporting. \n\nThis submission is not a duplicate case. The prior case was closed without resolving the issues, therefore I am filing this as a rebuttal, consistent with CFPB guidelines. \n\nSECTION 1 RDACS THREATENING AND UNLAWFUL ACTIONS ( Took or threatened to take negative or legal action ) At several points in RDACs communications and conduct, the company took or threatened to take negative or legal action against me, despite having full notice of identity theft, fraud indicators, police documentation, and my FTC Identity-Theft Report. Specifically : RDAC continued to report a fraudulent debt to all major credit bureaus, knowing the account is disputed and linked to identity theft. \n\nRDAC continued to attempt collection, even after notifying me that I may be a victim of fraud. \n\nRDAC stated or implied that negative credit reporting would continue unless I complied with demands for extensive documentsshifting the burden to me, contrary to federal identity-theft protections. \n\nRDAC threatened ongoing damage to my credit rating by maintaining and updating the derogatory tradeline. \n\nRDAC indicated that legal consequences or continued collection actions could occur if I did not provide notarized affidavits, ID copies, and additional documentsdespite this request being procedurally unlawful following an identity-theft filing. \n\nUnder FDCPA 1692e ( 5 ), a debt collector may not threaten actions that can not legally be taken or that are not intended to be taken. \n\nRDAC violated this section by : Threatening continued collection while the debt was unvalidated. \n\nThreatening continued negative credit reporting after receiving an FTC identity-theft affidavit. \n\nThreatening legal consequences unless I completed their identity-theft packeteven though federal law requires YOU, the furnisher, to investigate and block the information once notified, not require the consumer to prove innocence. \n\nUnder FCRA 605B, once identity-theft documentation is submitted, the furnisher must block and remove the account, not continue furnishing and threatening consequences. \n\nRDACs actions fall directly into the CFPB violation category : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action. \n\nThis violation must be formally recognized and addressed. \n\nSECTION 2 FAILURE TO VALIDATE & ILLEGAL CONTINUATION OF COLLECTION RDACs response does NOT meet the validation requirements under FDCPA 809, which require the collector to provide : Legal ownership of the debt Contract with wet signature or verifiable digital authentication Complete accounting itemizing all charges Chain of assignment from original creditor to RDAC Explanation of how the balance was calculated Names of all persons involved in verification Method of verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) RDAC produced none of the above. \n\nInstead, they provided : A generic move-out statement ( not authenticated ) A request for ME to provide additional documents An affidavit-of-forgery form Instructions for me to gather evidence on their behalf This is not validation. \n\nThe Move-Out Statement you provided ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) contains conflicting data, unexplained charges, and inconsistent calculations that contradict RDACs claimed balance of {$9700.00}. \n( See pages 12 of the uploaded statement. ) RDAC made no attempt to reconcile the discrepancies, which demonstrates they did not conduct a reasonable investigation. \n\nSECTION 3 IDENTITY-THEFT NOTIFICATIONS IGNORED ( AND THREATS CONTINUED ) RDAC openly acknowledges in their own CFPB response that : They received an identity-theft alert from the credit bureaus They reviewed a federal trade commission identity-theft report They were made aware that I believed the account was fraud They received multiple disputes regarding this account Despite this, they continued : Furnishing the account Demanding payments Threatening ongoing negative reporting Requiring me to provide additional notarized documents after receiving an FTC identity report Claiming they could continue collection until I satisfied their demands Pushing responsibility onto me rather than conducting a legally required reinvestigation Under FCRA 605B, this is unlawful. \n\nFurnishers MUST block identity-theft accounts within 4 business days of receiving : FTC Identity Theft Report Consumer dispute Proof of identity RDAC ignored all three. \n\nUnder FDCPA 1692c, collectors must cease communications when identity theft is claimed. \n\nRDAC ignored this too. \n\nInstead, RDAC issued coercive demands for a notarized affidavit and police report, attaching consequences for failure to complyconstituting threatening action that can not legally be taken. \n\nSECTION 4 IMPROPER BURDEN SHIFTING ( UNLAWFUL THREAT VIA COERCION ) RDACs repeated demandsstating that failure to provide certain documents would allow them to continue reporting or collectionconstitutes : Coercion, Threat of continued harm, Improper burden shifting, Violation of identity-theft protections, and Violation of the FDCPA. \n\nFederal law places the ENTIRE investigative burden on the furnisher, not the consumer. \n\nTherefore, RDACs conduct is an unlawful attempt to : force compliance under threat of continued derogatory reporting and under implied threat of legal consequences This directly matches the complaint category : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action. \nSECTION 5 FAILURE TO PROVIDE METHOD OF VERIFICATION Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), when a consumer disputes an account, the furnisher must provide : The method of verification Detailed description of documents used Name of the individual who verified Credentials, systems, timestamps, and chain of custody Explanation of how accuracy was determined RDAC instead responded with : Vague statements No system logs No identity verification No chain-of-assignment documentation No ledger audit No contract authentication Threats and negative actions continued without validation. \n\nThis is a clear FCRA violation layered on top of unlawful threats. \n\nSECTION 6 RDACS INVALID RELIANCE ON CREDIT BUREAU VERIFICATION RDAC states that the CRAs verified the account after being contacted for reinvestigation. However : XXXX verification does NOT constitute legal validation Automated code responses do NOT meet the standards of FCRA 611 The furnisher must provide original documentation, not automated confirmations RDACs reliance on this process, followed by continuing derogatory reporting and collection, is another example of threatening negative action through the use of faulty and incomplete procedures. \n\nSECTION 7 SUPPRESSION REQUEST IGNORED Under FCRA, a disputed item must be : Suppressed during reinvestigation Blocked if identity theft is involved RDAC continued furnishing the account at all three bureaus. \n\nThis is yet another case where RDAC took negative action despite legal prohibition. \n\nSECTION 8 MISREPRESENTATION OF AUTHORITY ( Threatened legal action ) RDACs letters imply : They have legal authority to enforce the debt They may pursue additional collection activity Continued reporting is lawful They may take further action unless I meet their document demands This constitutes misrepresentation of legal status, violating : FDCPA 1692e ( 2 ) FDCPA 1692e ( 5 ) FDCPA 1692e ( 10 ) Threatening legal or collection consequences when the debt is : disputed, unvalidated, tied to identity theft, and potentially fraudulent is expressly prohibited. \n\nSECTION 9 AUDIT TRAIL REQUEST ( Still Ignored ) I again request : All XXXX communications All internal notes Full accounting ledger with explanations All dates, times, and individuals involved in verification Chain-of-assignment documents Communications between XXXX XXXX and RDAC All documents RDAC claims support the debt Method of verification RDACs failure to provide this information while continuing harmful reporting is another form of negative action taken without authority. \n\nSECTION 10 REQUIRED REMEDIES I formally request : 1. Immediate deletion of the RDAC account from all credit bureaus The account is fraudulent, unvalidated, and unlawfully furnished. \n\n2. Immediate blocking under FCRA 605B Identity-theft documentation was previously submitted. \n\n3. Suppression of the account during reinvestigation 4. Written confirmation that : No reinsertion will occur Furnishing has ceased Collection has ceased The furnisher has been notified 5. Civil and regulatory review Given RDACs repeated threatening of negative and legal action, the CFPB must evaluate for : Pattern of abusive practices Misuse of identity-theft procedures Illegal maintenance of fraudulent tradelines Improper verification processes FINAL STATEMENT This rebuttal makes clear that RDAC : Took and threatened to take negative and legal action, Ignored identity-theft protections, Failed to validate, Failed to reinvestigate, Furnished inaccurate information, Attempted coercion and burden shifting, Continued damaging my credit despite knowing the account is disputed and potentially fraudulent. \n\nI respectfully request that the CFPB intervene and compel RDAC to delete this account permanently and comply with all federal standards. \n\nI also confirm that I am personally submitting this complaint, and no third party is involved.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-09T00:15:10.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"33025","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17853547","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"RentDebt Automated Collections, LLC","date_received":"2025-12-09T00:07:47.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["SECTION 1 RDACS <em>THREATENING</em> AND UNLAWFUL <em>ACTIONS</em> ( <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> ) At several points in RDACs communications and conduct, the company <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me, despite having full notice of identity theft, fraud indicators, police documentation, and my FTC Identity-Theft Report."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed"],"company":["Rent<em>Debt</em> Automated <em>Collections</em>, LLC"],"sub_issue":["<em>Debt</em> is not yours"]},"sort":[30.161003,"17853547"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2763795","_score":30.032373,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/2017 Date sent to company : XX/XX/2017 Product : Debt collection Issue : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action The delay in resolving this matter is costing me money {$550.00} to date.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-12-25T17:22:27.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"30087","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2763795","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","date_received":"2017-12-25T17:14:18.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/2017 Date sent to company : XX/XX/2017 Product : <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> Issue : <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> The delay in resolving this matter is costing me money {$550.00} to date."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Other <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[30.032373,"2763795"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4991421","_score":26.711992,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"In Re : In The Matter Of : Name of Appellant : XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy Case # : XXXX ( Dismissed ) Civil Action Case # : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) This Topic : Appellants 4th Brief ( Due Date Not Specified by Court ) TOPIC 01 : Notice of Demand For Possession from XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Main Office : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX , Phone ( XXXX ) XXXX. \n\nSummary : Legal Basis & Procedure basis are questioned by Appellant XXXX XXXX on this Notice of Demand For Possession ( Attached ). \nThis notice was taped on my TH residence Front Door. This notice was delivered by this means, ar around XXXX XXXX, Wednesday, XX/XX/2021. Please note that Civil Action Case # XXXX ( XXXX ) still Open & Not Dismissed. Suitable legal counsel not yet identified but continued effort is being made since last brief, Appellant Update 03 -- Brief XX/XX/2021 was filed approximately 2 months ago. A complaint against this party will Be filed with CFPB.GOV, under Debt Collection. Issue category : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action. \nThis notice is dated XXXX XX/XX/2021 From XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Main Office : XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX. \n\nXXXX Legal 3rd Party Debt Collector since XX/XX/XXXX have tried to foreclose twice requiring me to seek XXXX XXXX Protection, as filed at the XXXX XXXX XXXX Court House, currently pending Civil Action Case NO : Civil Action Case # : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ( please see related XXXX previously filed complaint ID : COMPLAINT ID XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/2021 PRODUCT Debt collection ISSUE Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","date_sent_to_company":"2021-12-22T21:14:39.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"221XX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4991421","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2021-12-09T13:12:57.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX <em>Legal</em> 3rd Party <em>Debt</em> Collector since XX/XX/XXXX have tried to foreclose twice requiring me to seek XXXX XXXX Protection, as filed at the XXXX XXXX XXXX Court House, currently pending Civil <em>Action</em> Case NO : Civil <em>Action</em> Case # : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ( please see related XXXX previously filed complaint ID : COMPLAINT ID XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/2021 PRODUCT <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> ISSUE <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Mortgage <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[26.711992,"4991421"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17851405","_score":26.41445,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint against JPMorgan Chase & Co. because the company took, or threatened to take, negative and legal action against me regarding an account that I do not owe, did not authorize, and did not create. The companys actions have caused significant stress, financial harm, reputational damage, and ongoing confusion. Furthermore, Chase failed to provide proper verification, failed to investigate the matter reasonably, and continued to communicate in ways that constituted threats of legal escalation and negative consequences despite being notified that the account was disputed. These actions go directly against the consumer protections outlined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ).\n\nThis complaint is being submitted because I believe Chases conduct is unfair, inaccurate, and unlawful. I am requesting assistance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because Chase has failed to resolve the matter despite repeated attempts on my part to dispute, clarify, and correct what clearly appears to be a case of identity theft, unauthorized account activity, or misapplied information.\n\n1. I Do Not Owe This Account It Is Unauthorized or Fraudulent The most important fact in this complaint is that I do not owe this account. I did not open it, authorize it, or agree to its terms, and I did not benefit from any credit, services, or funds associated with it. I have no connection to the account Chase is attempting to associate with me.\n\nDespite this, Chase took actions and threatened to take actions that falsely implied that I was legally responsible for repayment. Chase treated the account as though it were valid, even though no documentation exists tying me to it. At no point did Chase provide a valid, original contract bearing my signature or authenticated identification verifying that I opened the account. Their failure to produce such documentation indicates either identity theft, internal error, or misreporting.\n\n2. Chase Took or Threatened to Take Negative / Legal Action Against Me Chases communications contained statements implying or directly expressing consequences such as : Potential legal escalation Negative credit reporting Additional fees, penalties, or charges associated with nonpayment Transfer of the account to collections Pursuit of all available remedies Warnings that nonpayment may result in further action These statements especially when directed toward a consumer disputing an unauthorized account are considered threats under the FDCPA and are strictly regulated. Chase continued using language suggesting legal consequences after being notified the account was not mine and was actively being disputed. This is intimidating, misleading, and unlawful.\n\nUnder FDCPA 807 ( 5 ), a creditor or collector may not threaten actions they can not legally take or do not intend to take. Under FDCPA 807 ( 10 ), they may not use any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect a debt. Under FDCPA 808, they may not engage in conduct intended to harass, oppress, or abuse a consumer.\n\nBecause the debt was unauthorized, Chase had no legal right to threaten litigation, negative credit reporting, or additional consequences. Yet they did repeatedly.\n\n3. Chase Continued to Pursue the Account Despite My Disputes I disputed the account. I explained that I did not open it, I did not authorize it, and I did not recognize any of the information tied to it. Despite this, Chase continued to : Send communications about the alleged debt Imply negative consequences Suggest potential escalation Fail to halt communication as required under law Provide no lawful documentation validating ownership Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), when a consumer disputes a debt, collection must cease until verification is provided. Under FCRA 623 ( b ), furnishers ( such as Chase ) must conduct a reasonable investigation and remove or correct any information that can not be verified.\n\nChase did neither. Their actions show a disregard for consumer dispute rights.\n\n4. Chase Failed to Validate or Provide Documentation Supporting the Debt Chase has provided no documentation proving that I opened the account. A lawful validation requires : A signed contract Documentation showing my identity was verified at account opening Statements confirming transactions linked to me Evidence that I personally benefited from the funds or services Chase provided none of the above. They provided generic statements instead of evidence, and they continued to threaten negative actions despite the absence of validation.\n\nThis violates : FDCPA 809 ( b ) FCRA 609 ( a ) FCRA 611 ( a ) A creditor can not pursue a debt let alone threaten legal action if they can not verify it belongs to the consumer.\n\n5. Chase Failed to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation After I disputed the account, Chase was legally required to : Investigate the dispute Review original documentation Compare signatures Evaluate identity theft indicators Determine accuracy Report corrected findings Instead, Chase appears to have relied on automated responses, generic verification codes, or superficial internal checks. That is not a lawful reinvestigation under FCRA 623 ( b ).\n\nA reasonable reinvestigation requires actual examination of the underlying records not clicking a button.\n\n6. Chase Misreported or Attempted to Report False Information to Credit Bureaus Chase threatened to report the account to the credit bureaus as delinquent. Reporting an unauthorized account is a violation of : FCRA 602 ( a ) promoting accuracy FCRA 607 ( b ) maximum possible accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) can not furnish information known to be inaccurate FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) must flag disputed accounts Because the account was not mine and was actively disputed, Chase had no right to : Threaten credit reporting Furnish negative information Fail to flag the account as disputed Treat the account as valid while lacking documentation Chases behavior put me at risk of severe financial damage, including a drop in credit score, denial of credit, and increased interest rates.\n\n7. Chase Caused Real Harm and Emotional Distress Chases threatening communications, combined with their refusal to validate the debt or investigate properly, caused : Severe anxiety Fear of legal consequences Fear of wage garnishment or lawsuit Stress regarding potential credit damage Confusion and emotional burden Time lost contacting credit bureaus, Chase, and regulatory agencies The harm is not hypothetical it has been real and ongoing.\n\n8. Chase Should Have Recognized This as Potential Identity Theft There were several indicators that this account was fraudulent : I immediately disputed it No documentation matched my signature No address or identifying data aligned with my personal information No transactions matched my behavior Chase could not produce identity-verification evidence Instead of recognizing this as identity theft, Chase continued to pursue and threaten.\n\nCreditors are supposed to apply heightened scrutiny when a consumer denies ownership. Under Red Flags Rules, banks must detect and respond to signs of identity theft. Chase did not.\n\n9. Chase Violated Multiple Federal Consumer Protection Laws FDCPA Violations 807 : False or misleading representations 807 ( 5 ) : Threatening actions not intended or permitted 807 ( 10 ) : Use of deceptive means to collect 808 : Harassment or abuse 809 ( b ) : Failure to validate FCRA Violations 602 : Right to accurate reporting 607 ( b ) : Maximum accuracy requirement 609 ( a ) : Right to information 611 ( a ) : Duty to reinvestigate 623 ( a ) : Furnishers must not report inaccurate info 623 ( b ) : Duty to investigate disputes Chase repeatedly ignored these standards.\n\n10. Threatening Legal Action Is Especially Unacceptable When the Consumer Denies Ownership Threatening legal consequences against a person who does not owe the debt is one of the most serious FDCPA violations. A threat of legal action is legally considered : A form of intimidation A coercive tactic A deceptive representation of authority A violation of debt collection standards Chases wording was constructed to create fear and urgency, pressuring me to pay or respond quickly despite the account being fraudulent.\n\nThis behavior is prohibited across multiple legal frameworks because it is abusive and predatory.\n\n11. Chase Failed to Communicate Properly After the Dispute Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), if a consumer disputes a debt, the furnisher must report the account as disputed. Chase failed to do so.\n\nUnder FDCPA 809 ( b ), all collection activity must cease during validation. Chase failed to do so.\n\nUnder FCRA 611 ( a ), incomplete or unverifiable information must be deleted. Chase failed to do so.\n\nChase had multiple opportunities to correct their behavior and did not.\n\n12. What I Am Requesting as a Fair Resolution A fair and lawful resolution requires Johnson Morgan Chase & Co. to : Stop all negative or legal threats immediately Fully cease all collection activity Not contact me again about this account Not sell, transfer, or assign the debt Provide written confirmation that the account is not mine Provide written verification of all steps taken Stop reporting or attempting to report the account Delete any reporting already made Update internal records to reflect identity theft / unauthorized activity Provide the CFPB with documentation supporting their prior actions These steps align with federal law and ensure no further harm occurs.\n\n13. Summary To summarize : I do not owe this account.\n\nI did not authorize it.\n\nChase failed to validate it.\n\nChase took or threatened negative/legal action.\n\nChase mishandled my dispute.\n\nChase violated consumer protection laws.\n\nChase failed to investigate properly. \n\nChase continued harmful behavior despite my dispute. \n\nA fair resolution requires deletion of the account, cessation of all collection activity, written confirmation, and appropriate corrective action.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-08T23:15:41.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"33169","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17851405","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-12-08T23:09:46.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this complaint against JPMorgan Chase & Co. because the company <em>took</em>, or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em>, <em>negative</em> and <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me regarding an account that I do not owe, did not authorize, and did not create. The companys <em>actions</em> have caused significant stress, financial harm, reputational damage, and ongoing confusion."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed"],"sub_issue":["<em>Debt</em> is not yours"]},"sort":[26.41445,"17851405"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4439350","_score":26.301805,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Attempts to collect a debt not owed Written notification about a debt The company took or threatened to take negative or legal action The company filed incorrect information on the consumers credit report Regarding a fraud on my credit score for a debt collection and them harassing me requiring I go to court to pay them. Then a year later receiving the same bill from a different collection agency for the same XXXX card. After this had been taken to court. They said this is impossible. \nThis would had to have been a fruad to keep re occurring on my report after they already sent legal into court, referring to the collection agency that harassed me for a year. While I was in the hospital. Sick for over a year. \n\nIs this even legal? They have really harassed me and my legal privacy. \n\nThe collection agency that did this to me. Sending me to court. Didnt even have the right to do it. I called and she acted very suspicious on the phone stating its impossible that another collection agency reported on my credit report. \n\nThere number is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX His name is XXXX XXXX. \nThis is continued please read all.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-06-07T21:58:06.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"383XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4439350","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAVALRY INVESTMENTS, LLC","date_received":"2021-06-07T21:47:51.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Attempts to collect a <em>debt</em> not owed Written notification about a <em>debt</em> The company <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> The company filed incorrect information on the consumers credit report Regarding a fraud on my credit score for a <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> and them harassing me requiring I go to court to pay them. Then a year later receiving the same bill from a different <em>collection</em> agency for the same XXXX card. After this had been taken to court. They said this is impossible."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Debt</em> was result of identity theft"]},"sort":[26.301805,"4439350"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7157601","_score":25.141651,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I have fallen under the FDCPA, FCRA, and Regulation V obligations that Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC has criminally failed to adhere to. \nThey took or threatened to take negative or legal action against me. \nPortfolio Recovery Associates Continues to make monthly negative reporting on my 3 Bureau reports thus poisoning my credit scores for a few years now. They have made false or misleading representations concerning the debt, and continue to attempt to collect on debt that was outside the statute of limitations and was time-barred debt without making required disclosures during their process. \nThey have Violated : I. New Mexico Debt Collections Laws a. Statute of Limitations NMSA 1978 37-1-1 et seq. governs New Mexicos statute of limitations for the collection of open accounts, written contracts, and judgments entered by the Court. In New Mexico, the statute of limitations for open accounts is four years, while the statute of limitations for written contracts is six years. In New Mexico, if a creditor can provide a signed credit card agreement, the SIX YEAR statute of limitations applies. The cause of action accrues on the last item therein, which can either be the last payment made on the account or the last statement sent to the debtor. Once entered, a judgment is enforceable in New Mexico for fourteen years and can not be renewed.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-06-24T01:10:50.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"874XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7157601","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2023-06-24T00:43:10.000Z","state":"NM","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me. \nPortfolio Recovery Associates Continues to make monthly <em>negative</em> reporting on my 3 Bureau reports thus poisoning my credit scores for a few years now. They have made false or misleading representations concerning the <em>debt</em>, and continue to attempt to collect on <em>debt</em> that was outside the statute of limitations and was time-barred <em>debt</em> without making required disclosures during their process. \nThey have Violated : I."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> or suggested your credit would be damaged"]},"sort":[25.141651,"7157601"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2838841","_score":24.787537,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This was the subject of a prior complaint which was responded to and for which company did not do what it said it would do in effectively removing collection from credit report. I called the CFPB with feedback about the company 's non-compliance and the representative said to go ahead and file yet another complaint against MBB. \nRather then recount facts, see below and please consider as a resubmission for same : XXXX CLOSED Submitted STATUS Submitted to the CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT Debt collection ISSUE Took or threatened to take negative or legal action YOUR COMPLAINT Medical Business Bureau, XXXX, a third-party debt collector purchased an erroneous balance from XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX of {$360.00}. The health care provider was paid in full by insurance for a diagnostic test ordered same-day STAT by my treating physician. Any overage claimed as out of network but should not have been charged at all. The debt collector refused to settle the claim for less than {$290.00} and has continued to report a delinquent account to credit bureaus, causing negative impact to my overall score. They have also refused to divulge the registered agent for service of process for legal action regarding violation of 809 et seq. of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. \nSTATUS Sent to company on XX/XX/XXXX STATUS Company responded on XX/XX/XXXX RESPONSE TYPE Closed with explanation Company 's Response We have requested that the account be deleted from the consumer 's credit file and are checking with XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding the payment. Medical Business Bureau has not purchased the account.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-03-09T22:16:51.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"328XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2838841","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Medical Business Bureau","date_received":"2018-03-09T22:02:11.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Rather then recount facts, see below and please consider as a resubmission for same : XXXX CLOSED Submitted STATUS Submitted to the CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> ISSUE <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> YOUR COMPLAINT Medical Business Bureau, XXXX, a third-party <em>debt</em> collector purchased an erroneous balance from XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX of {$360.00}."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Medical <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> or suggested your credit would be damaged"]},"sort":[24.787537,"2838841"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14195982","_score":24.310759,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Fair Collections & Outsourcing ( FCO ) Issue Type : Debt Collection XXXX Took or threatened to take negative or legal action Account # : XXXX I attempted to resolve a collection account ( FCO account # XXXX ) by negotiating a fair settlement in exchange for deletion from my credit report. I offered to pay a substantial portion of the balance ( {$1300.00} ), and even considered paying the full {$2200.00} they proposed, but requested a standard pay-for-delete arrangement in return. FCO refused, stating they do not delete items for payment. \n\nThis collection is harming my ability to obtain credit, despite my efforts to settle the matter. Other agencies regularly agree to removal upon payment, but FCO declined to negotiate any deletion, leaving me in a lose-lose situation. I feel this is an unreasonable collection tactic and I am seeking assistance resolving this account without long-term damage to my credit history. \n\nIm requesting that this account be deleted from all credit reporting agencies upon settlement.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-20T18:07:03.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Rental debt","zip_code":"20002","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14195982","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FAIR COLLECTIONS & OUTSOURCING, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-20T17:56:58.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Company : Fair <em>Collections</em> & Outsourcing ( FCO ) Issue Type : <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> XXXX <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> Account # : XXXX I attempted to resolve a <em>collection</em> account ( FCO account # XXXX ) by negotiating a fair settlement in exchange for deletion from my credit report. I offered to pay a substantial portion of the balance ( {$1300.00} ), and even considered paying the full {$2200.00} they proposed, but requested a standard pay-for-delete arrangement in return."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"company":["FAIR <em>COLLECTIONS</em> & OUTSOURCING, INC."],"sub_product":["Rental <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> or suggested your credit would be damaged"]},"sort":[24.310759,"14195982"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6043030","_score":23.6098,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I have been a victim of identity theft, and the parties that assumed my data, fraudulently used my property, fraudulently used my deed, and falsified all documents was granted over {$300000.00} dollars and used my same property as collateral to fraudulently file for another loan for property for {$200000.00} the fraudulent XXXX home loan. \n\nThe parties also fraudulently have been stealing mail and also falsified the same schemes to file for bankruptcy protection. The parties did not have any authority to do such and one party fled to XXXX using XXXX Banks for no less than three loans without my knowledge. \n\nXXXX Banks never contacted me, XXXX XXXX, and they are refusing to comply with the guidelines that CFPB filed for injunctions to protect any victims of data breaches and identity theft. \n\nThe attorneys XXXX and XXXX denied and obstructed orders, when I never filed, never completed any loans or ever authorized any loans. \n\nThis is a direct contempt of orders CFPB filed XX/XX/2022 and attorney lied in response repeatedly and has denied any CFPB orders exist to protect victims of fraud, identity theft and property fraud loans. \n\nIn fact CFPB closed all cases, disregarding my proof and documents that have been forwarded. \n\nIntimidation and harassment is prohibited. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX consumer report Incorrect information on your report XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Open Sent to Company XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting Incorrect information on your report experian consumer fraud division XX/XX/2022 Open Sent to company XXXX XXXX XXXX Credit reporting Incorrect information on your report XXXX XXXX  XXXX FLORIDA XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Other personal consumer report Incorrect information on your report XXXX BANK XX/XX/2022 Closed Marked as a duplicate complaint on XX/XX/2022 XXXX XXXX XXXX Other debt Took or threatened to take negative or legal action premier properties XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know Took or threatened to take negative or legal action XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Closed Feedback provided XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know Took or threatened to take negative or legal action RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC XX/XX/2022 Closed Company responded XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know Took or threatened to take negative or legal action XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Closed Feedback provided XXXX XXXX XXXX Other personal consumer report Improper use of your report XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Closed Feedback provided XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services XXXX XXXX XXXX AND ALL OTHERS XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Credit reporting Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services XXXX XXXX  AND RUSHMORE COLLECTIONS AND THEY WILL NOT GIVE ME ANY INFORMATION OR ACCOUNT NUMBER OF FRAUDULENT ACCOUNT XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted XXXX the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Other personal consumer report Problem with a company 's investigation into an existing issue XXXX  AND XXXX XXXX FIRM XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes RUSHMORE COLLECTIONS AGENCY XXXX BEHALF OF XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Credit reporting Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting Problem with fraud alerts XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Other type of mortgage Trouble during payment process XXXX BANK XX/XX/2022 Open Sent to XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-10-03T04:37:08.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"32708","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6043030","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC","date_received":"2022-10-03T04:14:35.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> premier properties XX/XX/2022 Open Submitted to the CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2022 Closed Feedback provided XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC XX/XX/2022 Closed Company responded XXXX XXXX XXXX I do not know <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"]},"sort":[23.6098,"6043030"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2701958","_score":23.297821,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"the orginal complaint was not investigated correctly. Please find out who called me and why they said they were a mediatator prior to getting lawsuit papers the next few days and to be home to receive them. you only contacted XXXX which sold the complaint. you had the number i called with number to find out about the account and you did not follow up. XXXX said they sold to// : :If you have any additional questions regarding your account, please contact PORTFOLIO RECOVERY at XXXX. \nPlease investigate this further as not a collectable debt and used forbidden tactics to try and get me to pay or reage a debt. Since then I get 2-3 calls a day from these people selling my phone number. Do not close an account before you speak and investigate. \nthanks XXXX XXXX XXXX '' '' '' : : : Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX Date sent to company : XX/XX/XXXX Product : Debt collection Issue : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","date_sent_to_company":"2017-10-29T00:59:54.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"36535","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2701958","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2017-10-14T19:22:00.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["thanks XXXX XXXX XXXX '' '' '' : : : Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX Date sent to company : XX/XX/XXXX Product : <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> Issue : <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[23.297821,"2701958"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21251906","_score":22.620802,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Asset Recovery Solutions , LLC, who is attempting to collect an {$14000.00} debt that was originated through fraudulent and deceptive practices by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nIn XXXX, I took out a private student loan through XXXX XXXX to attend the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX deceived me by misrepresenting that they had vetted the program for quality and graduate outcomes, and failed to properly disclose the full cost of my loan including origination fees. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, a federal court entered a stipulated final judgment against XXXX XXXX, finding that they violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act, the Truth in Lending Act, and Regulation Z. Climb Credit was ordered to pay {>= $1,000,000} in redress to harmed borrowers and a {$950000.00} civil penalty. I am a directly harmed borrower under this ruling. \nDespite this federal court ruling, XXXX XXXX sold my debt to Asset Recovery Solutions , LLC, who is now threatening legal action against me to collect a debt that was originated through federally adjudicated fraud. Asset Recovery Solutions has continued aggressive collection activity including threatening to take me to court, without providing proper debt validation or disclosing the legal history of this debt.\n\nI am formally requesting the following relief : 1. That the appropriate authorities investigate this matter and order Asset Recovery Solutions to immediately cease all collection activity on this fraudulently originated debt. \n2. That this debt be fully cleared, XXXX, and removed from my account entirely, as it was originated through practices that a federal court has already found to be deceptive and unlawful. \n3. That all negative credit reporting related to this account including any entries made by XXXX XXXX, its loan servicer UAS, and Asset Recovery Solutions be permanently deleted from my credit report at XXXX XXXX, and XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-15T03:57:24.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Private student loan debt","zip_code":"17036","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21251906","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC","date_received":"2026-04-15T03:41:43.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite this federal court ruling, XXXX XXXX sold my <em>debt</em> to Asset Recovery Solutions , LLC, who is now <em>threatening</em> <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me to collect a <em>debt</em> that was originated through federally adjudicated fraud. Asset Recovery Solutions has continued aggressive <em>collection</em> activity including <em>threatening</em> to <em>take</em> me to court, without providing proper <em>debt</em> validation or disclosing the <em>legal</em> history of this <em>debt</em>.\n\nI am formally requesting the following relief : 1."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student loan <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[22.620802,"21251906"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17854596","_score":22.071117,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this rebuttal in response to the companys explanation and the documents they provided in XXXX, XXXX .. pdf, which include disbursement details, payment histories, deferment records, and forbearance logs tied to Account XXXX. After reviewing every page of the file, I must assert again that I do not own this account, I did not authorize these loans, I did not receive or benefit from these funds, and none of the records provided demonstrate that I was the one who initiated or controlled this debt. Because of this, I filed an official FTC Identity Theft Report, and under federal law, the company was required to block or remove the information unless they could prove with verifiable, original documentation that the loans belong to me. They have not met this burden. \n\nAdditionally, by continuing to report derogatory information connected to these disputed loans, the company took or threatened to take negative or legal action against me, because they furnished information that negatively affects my creditworthiness without valid proof that I am responsible for the debt. \n\nXXXX. The PDF Provided Does Not Establish That I Own the Loans The documents contained in XXXX, XXXX .. pdf include : Detailed disbursement sheets for multiple loans allegedly made between XXXX and XXXX Payment histories showing small payments, interest capitalizations, deferments, and forbearances An Account Summary dated XX/XX/XXXX, showing minimum payment amounts and outstanding balances However, none of the following are included : A signed loan application A promissory note bearing verified identity credentials Identity-matching documentation from origination IP logs, completion timestamps, or device authentication Any evidence showing that I personally received or used the loan funds Instead, the PDF contains general servicing records, which only prove that someone interacted with the account over the yearsnot that it was me. Identity thieves often create accounts using stolen personal information, and servicing documents do not prove borrower identity. \n\nTherefore, the documents fail to prove ownership. \n\nXXXX. The Disbursement Records Do Not Prove That I Received or Accepted Any Funds The files show loan disbursements to XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX dating from XXXX to XXXX. \n\nThese records demonstrate only that : Someone received educational funds under the name tied to the account Funds were disbursed directly to schools Loan amounts increased over time None of this demonstrates that : I enrolled in these institutions I approved or authorized any loan I received a refund from the schools I knew of or participated in the financial transactions Disbursement logs do not establish borrower identity. They only show activity on an account, not who created it.\n\n3. The Forbearance, Deferment, and Hardship Entries in the PDF Suggest Fraudulent or Unauthorized Activity Throughout the PDF, there are dozens of transactions showing : Forbearance periods Deferments IBR recertifications REPAYE exits and entries Hardship filings I did not initiate any of these actions.\n\nThese patterns are consistent with identity misuse, where : Payments are not made Accounts repeatedly go into deferment or forbearance Fraudulent users attempt to avoid repayment Activity occurs without the knowledge of the identity theft victim Not a single servicing entry indicates contact from me, communication logs, or borrower verification.\n\nThis supports my position that I do not own the loans.\n\n4. None of the Payment Histories Show Any Payment Connected to Me The PDF includes numerous tiny payments ( e.g., {$0.00}, {$1.00}, {$6.00} ) that were applied to different loans.\n\nThese payments : Do not come from any account belonging to me Do not match my payment patterns, history, or financial behavior Could have been made by schools, fraudulent users, automatic system corrections, or financial aid offices Small automatic or administrative payments are extremely common in fraud cases and do not demonstrate borrower ownership.\n\nThese payment histories do not verify the identity of the borrower.\n\n5. The Consolidation Records Raise Serious Red Flags The PDF contains a Direct Consolidation Loan application under the name XXXX XXXX with an address and reference contacts. \n\nHowever : Fraudulent consolidation applications are one of the most common forms of student aid identity theft.\n\nIdentity thieves frequently consolidate existing fraudulent loans to delay repayment or restructure accounts. \n\nThe presence of an application does not prove that I personally completed or submitted it. \nThere is no verification record showing authenticationonly a data printout.\n\nThis is not proof of ownership.\n\n6. The Account Summary Does Not Prove Borrower Identity The Account Summary section in the PDF lists : Minimum monthly payment : {$300.00} Outstanding balance : over {$40000.00} Account Number : XXXX This is a snapshot of a loan balance, not evidence of who owns the account. \n\nServicing summaries can be generated for any account in the system and do not prove that I authorized or benefited from the debt.\n\n7. I Filed an FTC Identity Theft Report Because I Do Not Own These Loans Because these records do not reflect any financial activity attributable to me, I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report to document that : These loans do not belong to me I did not authorize them I did not know about the servicing or repayment history The activity in the PDF appears fraudulent Under FCRA 605B, the company was legally required to : Block the information Stop furnishing negative information Validate ownership with original documentation They failed to comply.\n\n8. The Company Took or Threatened to Take Negative or Legal Action Against Me By continuing to report : Delinquencies Negative payment histories High outstanding balances Consolidations Forbearances despite the identity theft report and lack of verification, the company took or threatened to take negative or legal action against me.\n\nFalse reporting of default or delinquency implies : Legal responsibility for a federal debt Potential collections Treasury offsets Wage garnishment risk Loss of federal benefits This is harmful, coercive, and unlawful when the account is not verified.\n\n9. Requested Action Given that : The PDF doe\ns not prove ownership I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report The reporting is inaccurate The company threatened negative or legal action through false reporting I request : 1. Full deletion of all accounts associated with XXXX XXXX. XXXX removal of all negative, derogatory, or delinquent reporting 3. Written confirmation that the company will not reinsert the disputed information 4. Cessation of all collection or enforcement activity 5. Full compliance with identity theft protections under the FCRA","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-09T00:47:17.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"63033","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17854596","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-09T00:39:11.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The Company <em>Took</em> or <em>Threatened</em> to <em>Take</em> <em>Negative</em> or <em>Legal</em> <em>Action</em> Against Me By continuing to report : Delinquencies <em>Negative</em> payment histories High outstanding balances Consolidations Forbearances despite the identity theft report and lack of verification, the company <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed"],"sub_issue":["<em>Debt</em> is not yours"]},"sort":[22.071117,"17854596"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2760133","_score":21.046953,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"ORIGINAL COMPLIANT Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX Action taken : SUBMITTED TO FTC SENTINEL NETWORK Product : Debt collection Issue : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Va. XXXX through their attorney, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX file suit against me on XX/XX/XXXX in State Court of XXXX County, Georgia Civil Case # XXXX. \n1. This action was time-barred since it was taken on a debt/default which occurred XXXX XXXX- ( 9 years after the fact ) 2. I was never notified of r XXXX XXXX XXXX 's request for a judgement/or the judgement dated XXXX XXXX. \n3. I was never notified that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a result of the judgement obtained a lien on my home dated XX/XX/XXXX. \n4. I only discovered the Judgement & Lien as a result of a routine home mortgage refinance- which is now in limbo.\n\n5. Portfolio Recovery Associates, attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has failed to respond to 2 request to resolve this matter.\n\n6. A request was made today directly to Portfolio Recovery Associates to have the suit /lien vacated immediately.\n\n7. I advised after the suit/lien has been vacated I am more than willing to work with Portfolio Recovery Associates toward a mutually satisfactory resolution of this matter.\n\n8. I notified Portfolio Recovery Associates that their actions are a violation of their XX/XX/XXXX signed Consent Agreement, which specifically prohibited them from suing past the statue of limitations.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-12-19T23:21:35.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"30087","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2760133","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2017-12-19T22:49:07.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["ORIGINAL COMPLIANT Summary of your complaint Complaint number : XXXX Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX <em>Action</em> taken : SUBMITTED TO FTC SENTINEL NETWORK Product : <em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em> Issue : <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Va. XXXX through their attorney, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX file suit against me on XX/XX/XXXX in State Court of XXXX County, Georgia Civil Case # XXXX. \n1."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Other <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.046953,"2760133"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3381662","_score":20.991894,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/19 I received two letters from the State of Michigan Treasury department, in separate envelopes : A Notice of Income Tax Used for Debts and a Garnisment Disclosure. \n\nThe Garnishment Disclosure was against a person named : XXXX XXXX and references case # XXXX in the XXXX District Court. \n\nUpon reviewing the court case documents that are available online, it seems that the law firm Roosen, Varchetti , & Olivier falsely reported XXXX XXXX 's social security number to the court to garnish his State Tax Refund when XXXX has no interest, knowledge, association, or relation to XXXX XXXX. The Court granted the garnishment and the State of Michigan then froze the income tax return of XXXX and XXXX XXXX, which then created an injured spouse. \n\nUpon reviewing the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act, the law firm of Roosen, Varchetti, & Olivier broke the law in the following ways : 1. Took Negative Legal Action The law : Collectors cant threaten wage garnishment unless they have the legal authority to do so and intend to do so. These threats are often illegal. Collectors must usually take you to court first and win before they can take these kinds of actions if they are legal in the first place.\n\n2. False Statements or Representations The law : Collectors cant threaten wage garnishment, to ruin your credit rating  unless they have the legal authority to do so and intend to do so. These threats are often illegal. Collectors must usually take you to court first and win before they can take these kinds of actions if they are legal in the first place. \n\nI called the State of Michigan Treasury Department upon receiving this notice at XXXX and spoke to a representative who was able to verify the error in reporting the wrong Social Security Number but could not insure that this would not happen again next year because this law firm continues to report erroneous Social Security Numbers each year to be garnished. \n\nThe State of Michigan asked me to contact the law firm to have XXXX social security number removed from their case file. I contacted the law firm and spoke to the person who answered the phone. She was able to pull up the case and when she found that the State unfroze the tax return and released the payment, she remarked : \" You got your money back, what more do you want? '' When I explained to her that I wanted XXXX social security number removed from the case file, she wanted me to provide Social Security Numbers, which I refused to do, since I suspect that this is a tactic that they do quite frequently based on the statements from the State of Michigan and from reading their XXXX reviews : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ,, Once I realized that this person was not going to help me with this situation, I ended the phone call. \n\nI would like to have this law firm investigated for Identity Theft and unlawful collection practices and I want XXXX and XXXX XXXX 's Social Security Numbers removed from the case file of XXXX XXXX. \n\nThank you for your time.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-09-24T19:16:47.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"48375","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3381662","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC","date_received":"2019-09-21T13:01:44.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon reviewing the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practice Act, the law firm of Roosen, Varchetti, & Olivier broke the law in the following ways : 1. <em>Took</em> <em>Negative</em> <em>Legal</em> <em>Action</em> The law : Collectors cant <em>threaten</em> wage garnishment unless they have the <em>legal</em> authority to do so and intend to do so. These threats are often illegal. Collectors must usually <em>take</em> you to court first and win before they can <em>take</em> these kinds of <em>actions</em> if they are <em>legal</em> in the first place.\n\n2."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"]},"sort":[20.991894,"3381662"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3109030","_score":19.349115,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Few months ago I had to report several fraud claims because some transactions were still pending, some I missed on my phone and some I had to investigate further. Still, NFCU has no way for consumers to modify or add to an existing fraud claim. Next thing I know, without calling me or anything they cancel my VISA DEBIT ATM Card to my ONLY account. Said I had too many fraud claims, then denied the last claim that they used to freeze my ability to access my funds. \nSo, jump forward to now, I still have a checking and savings account with NFCU and the ONLY way to deposit funds, or access my funds is to go into a branch. Im been out on XXXX and FMLA so when my job messed up my last 3 direct deposits and mailed checks I had no way to deposit my checks and they bounced stuff and gave me more fees. Then with the holidays they closed early. So, I try depositing a check with the mobile app and its denied. Still NFCU is racking up more fees on my accounts. \nAlso, have a NFCU Visa Rewards and I tried to deposit a XXXX check on that card and was told basically if NFCU liked me I could but as of XX/XX/XXXX they will not be reinstating my Visa card on that account either. The account they kept letting charges go through when there was no limit to cover it. Then sent those same charges over to my Checking account. \nSo, without even a phone call from this place they have completely closed and restricted anyway for me to access my own accounts. Ive even asked for just anATM Card to make deposits and they said they dont have savings acct ATM cards. \nNevertheless, you fined NFCU over {$23.00} million dollars in XXXX for doing similar actions to consumers. Also NFCU was advised to come up with rules guidelines and they still havent. \nRead below : WASHINGTON, D.C. Today the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) took action against Navy Federal Credit Union for making false threats about debt collection to its members, which include active-duty military, retired servicemembers, and their families. The credit union also unfairly restricted account access when members had a delinquent loan. Navy Federal Credit Union is correcting its debt collection practices and will pay roughly {$23.00} million in redress to victims along with a civil money penalty of {$5.00} million. \n\nNavy Federal Credit Union misled its members about its debt collection practices and froze consumers out from their own accounts, said CFPB Director XXXX XXXX. Financial institutions have a right to collect money that is due to them, but they must comply with federal laws as they do so. \n\nNavy Federal Credit Union is a federal credit union based in XXXX, Va. As a credit union, it offers a wide range of consumer financial products and services, including deposit accounts and loans. Membership in the credit union is limited to consumers who are, or have been, U.S. military servicemembers, Department of Defense civilian employees or contractors, government employees assigned to Department of Defense installations, and their immediate family members. It is the largest credit union in the country, with more than {$73.00} billion in assets as of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThe CFPB investigation found that Navy Federal Credit Union deceived consumers to get them to pay delinquent accounts. The credit union falsely threatened severe actions when, in fact, it seldom took such actions or did not have authorization to take them. The credit union also cut off members electronic access to their accounts and bank cards if they did not pay overdue loans. Hundreds of thousands of consumers were affected by these practices, which occurred between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. The practices violated the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, the CFPB found that Navy Federal Credit Union : Falsely threatened legal action and wage garnishment : The credit union sent letters to members threatening to take legal action unless they made a payment. But in reality, it seldom took any such actions. The CFPB found that the credit unions message to consumers of pay or be sued was inaccurate about 97 percent of the time, even among consumers who did not make a payment in response to the letters. The credit unions representatives also called members with similar verbal threats of legal action. And the credit union threatened to garnish wages when it had no intention or authority to do so. \nFalsely threatened to contact commanding officers to pressure servicemembers to repay : The credit union sent letters to dozens of servicemembers threatening that the credit union would contact their commanding officers if they did not promptly make a payment. The credit unions representatives also communicated these threats by telephone. For members of the military, consumer credit problems can result in disciplinary proceedings or lead to revocation of a security clearance. The credit union was not authorized and did not intend to contact the servicemembers chains of command about the debts it was attempting to collect. \nMisrepresented credit consequences of falling behind on a loan : The credit union sent about 68,000 letters to members misrepresenting the credit consequences of falling behind on a Navy Federal Credit Union loan. Many of the letters said that consumers would find it difficult, if not impossible to obtain additional credit because they were behind on their loan. But the credit union had no basis for that claim, as it did not review consumer credit files before sending the letters. The credit union also misrepresented its influence on a consumers credit rating, implying that it could raise or lower the rating or affect a consumers access to credit. As a furnisher, the credit union could supply information to the credit reporting companies but it could not determine a consumers credit score.\n\nIllegally froze members access to their accounts : The credit union froze electronic account access and disabled electronic services for about 700,000 accounts after consumers became delinquent on a Navy Federal Credit Union credit product. This meant delinquency on a loan could shut down a consumers debit card, ATM, and online access to the consumers checking account. The only account actions consumers could take online would be to make payments on delinquent or overdrawn accounts. \nEnforcement Action Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB has the authority to take action against institutions or individuals engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws. Under the terms of the order, Navy Federal Credit Union is required to : Pay victims {$23.00} million : The credit union is required to pay roughly {$23.00} million in compensation to consumers who received threatening letters. Most will be eligible for redress if they received one of the deceptive debt collection letters and they made a payment to the credit union within 60 days of that letter. In addition, all consumers who received the letter threatening to contact their commanding officer will receive at least {$1000.00} in compensation. The credit union will contact consumer So how is it XXXX, almost XX/XX/XXXX and they are still cutting off members electronic access to their accounts and bank cards if they report fraud too much or if they think you are being reckless or if they did not pay overdue loans etc. So, Ive had plenty of money for days but no way to even make a deposit into my own accounts. I appealed and got nowhere. This messes with my job, my insurance bounced from bill pay because I couldnt deposit money. I need help! I told the NFCU credit card department about my checks being messed up and mailed and they just seemed to not care and basically told me I was getting fees for not telling them 48 hrs sooner. I didnt know 48 hrs ago. So, they are closing my account when my card expires in XX/XX/XXXX. I should be able to make deposits and withdrawals from my own accounts. I need help because they are still doing this to others too. Please help me. Im hundreds negative now when I should be plus if I would of been able to deposit my check Friday after hrs and on Saturday after hrs. Two checks for thousands and they are steady bouncing items. Please call XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2018-12-26T08:53:59.000Z","issue":"Problem caused by your funds being low","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"19709","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3109030","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2018-12-26T03:16:59.000Z","state":"DE","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Bounced checks or returned payments"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Specifically, the CFPB found that Navy Federal Credit Union : Falsely <em>threatened</em> <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> and wage garnishment : The credit union sent letters to members <em>threatening</em> to <em>take</em> <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> unless they made a payment. But in reality, it seldom <em>took</em> any such <em>actions</em>. The CFPB found that the credit unions message to consumers of pay or be sued was inaccurate about 97 percent of the time, even among consumers who did not make a payment in response to the letters."]},"sort":[19.349115,"3109030"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18434566","_score":18.435326,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this feedback to formally respond to the companys explanation and to clarify that I am creating a new CFPB case because my prior case, number XXXX, was closed without resolving the underlying dispute. The closure of that case did not correct the inaccurate reporting, did not validate ownership of the account, and did not address the identity theft I reported. As a result, the harm continues, and this matter remains unresolved. \n\nI do not own the account being reported. I did not open it, authorize it, apply for it, or benefit from it. Because this account is not mine, I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report to formally document that my personal information was used without my permission. The companys response does not meaningfully address this identity theft claim and instead relies on internal records and generalized explanations that do not establish borrower identity. \n\nFailure to Address Identity Theft The company did not properly address the fact that I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report. Filing this report triggers specific legal obligations under federal law, including the requirement to block or remove disputed information unless the company can provide verified proof that I am the rightful owner of the account. The response does not explain how identity was verified, what steps were taken to investigate the identity theft claim, or why the disputed information was not blocked or removed. \n\nMerely stating that records exist or that prior billing statements were sent does not establish ownership when identity theft has been reported. Identity theft often involves the creation and use of records that appear legitimate but are unauthorized. The companys response does not rebut this possibility. \n\nI Do Not Own This Account I continue to dispute ownership of this account. I did not knowingly enter into any agreement for the account being reported, and I did not knowingly receive funds or benefits from it. The company has not provided documentation that proves I personally opened the account, authenticated my identity, or knowingly agreed to the terms. Without this proof, the reporting remains unverified and inaccurate. \n\nNegative and Legal Action Taken or Threatened By continuing to report this account as delinquent or valid despite my dispute and FTC Identity Theft Report, the company took or threatened to take negative or legal action against me. Negative credit reporting is not neutral. It damages my credit profile, limits my access to credit and housing, and creates the appearance that I am legally responsible for a debt I do not owe. The companys continued reporting exposes me to potential collection activity and other adverse consequences. \n\nThis harm persists because the reporting has not been corrected.\n\nInadequate Investigation and Verification The companys response does not describe a reasonable investigation. It does not disclose whether the review was manual or automated, what documents were reviewed, or how borrower identity was confirmed. Without a clear method of verification, the conclusion that the reporting is accurate can not be accepted.\n\nThe response also fails to address discrepancies, the impact of identity theft protections, or why the account remains associated with my credit profile despite the dispute. \n\nImproper Closure of the Prior Case The prior CFPB case ( XXXX ) was closed without resolving these issues. Closure does not equal resolution. The underlying dispute remains active because the reporting has not been corrected and ownership has not been validated. For this reason, I am creating this new CFPB case and requesting renewed review and oversight. \n\nWhat I Am Requesting I respectfully request that the CFPB require the company to : Fully address the FTC Identity Theft Report Provide verified proof that I am the rightful owner of the account or remove the account entirely Cease all negative reporting related to the disputed account Prevent reinsertion of the disputed information Correct all inaccurate reporting across consumer reporting agencies Until these steps are taken, this matter can not be considered resolved. \n\nConclusion I am creating this new CFPB case because the previous case, XXXX, was closed without resolving the dispute. I do not own the account at issue. I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report because I am a victim of identity theft. The company failed to validate ownership and continued reporting information that harmed me, thereby taking or threatening negative or legal action. \n\nThe companys response does not resolve these issues. I respectfully request continued CFPB oversight until the disputed information is either properly validated with verified proof of ownership or removed in accordance with federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-03T00:30:02.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"63033","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18434566","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SLM CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-01-03T00:24:12.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Negative</em> and <em>Legal</em> <em>Action</em> Taken or <em>Threatened</em> By continuing to report this account as delinquent or valid despite my dispute and FTC Identity Theft Report, the company <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> against me. <em>Negative</em> credit reporting is not neutral. It damages my credit profile, limits my access to credit and housing, and creates the appearance that I am <em>legally</em> responsible for a <em>debt</em> I do not owe."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[18.435326,"18434566"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9473572","_score":17.488657,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX Re : Cease and Desist Letter - XXXX XXXX XXXX Account XXXX ( N/A- a loan was taken out in my name ) Dear XXXX XXXX XXXX, This letter is to formally demand that you immediately cease and desist all further communication with me regarding the alleged debt identified as account number ( n/a ). \nI am writing to you under my rights protected by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n\nI do not owe the debt to this company. I do not know this debt and believe it is not mine. I have never had an account with this company or related to this account number. Please provide me with verification of the alleged debt, the date of the account, and the amount owed. \n\nFurthermore, if this account is alleged to be related to the account that has BEEN SOLD, then you are admitting to pooling and servicing agreement also known as securitization. I, XXXX XXXX, DID NOT DISCLOSE, NOR AGREE verbally, electronically, or through written consent with a wet ink signature, that I wanted this course of action with XXXX XXXX XXXX  OR ANY RELATED THIRD PARTIES. XXXX XXXX XXXX contracted with an additional party without my consent, making me VOID to pay ANY ALLEGED DEBT. \n\nTo add upon this, I wanted to provide VALIDATION OF THIS ALLEGED DEBT, with the production of this account and the general ledger statement! \nXXXX XXXX XXXX has broken the LAW and illegally violated my CONSUMER Rights listed below under the FCRA. XXXX XXXX XXXX SEEKED OUT AND USED my personal information, private information, or any experiences nor any negative/adverse transactions through an additional THIRD PARTY. Under 15 U.S. Code 6801, an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers ( myself ) and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers ' nonpublic personal information. XXXX XXXX XXXX and any other third party that illegally contracted with violated this right! \nHarassment and unfair practices from this company. You have engaged in harassing and unfair debt collection practices, such as calling me repeatedly at unreasonable hours and using threatening language in mail and email. \nFurthermore to add upon this conflict, this company took out a loan in my name illegally and unlawfully. Not only is this information stated in which I am able to dispute, but by law I am able to dispute. I feel extremely XXXX  and unsafe, financially and economically. Under USC 15 1692g ( b ), this debt is NOW OFFICIALLY IN DISPUTE! These practices violate the FDCPA and I demand that you cease and desist immediately. BY LAW, all collection activities must cease until this matter is resolved. You are hereby given notice. Any disregard for this law is subject to fines by the FTC. \n\nPlease be advised that if you do not comply with this cease and desist request, I will take the following actions : I will file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ). \nI will file a lawsuit against you for violations of the FDCPA. \nI will report your actions to my state Attorney General 's office. \nIn the event that this debt is not validated, as required by the FDCPA, XXXX XXXX XXXX you have the legal responsibility to terminate the claim and correct any negative reporting with this alleged debt. I expect a written confirmation from you that you have received this letter and will comply with my request. Please send your confirmation to the address below. \n\nThank You in Advance, Regards XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ] Without Prejudice, All Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-10T18:03:24.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30080","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9473572","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-07-10T17:58:18.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["You have engaged in harassing and unfair <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> practices, such as calling me repeatedly at unreasonable hours and using <em>threatening</em> language in mail and email. \nFurthermore to add upon this conflict, this company <em>took</em> out a loan in my name illegally and unlawfully. Not only is this information stated in which I am able to dispute, but by law I am able to dispute. I feel extremely XXXX  and unsafe, financially and economically."]},"sort":[17.488657,"9473572"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9473556","_score":17.463955,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX First Credit Services XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, NJ XXXX Re : Cease and Desist Letter - XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number- ( N/A- a loan was taken out in my name ) Dear First Credit Services., This letter is to formally demand that you immediately cease and desist all further communication with me regarding the alleged debt identified as account number ( n/a ). \nI am writing to you under my rights protected by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n\nI do not owe the debt to this company. I do not know this debt and believe it is not mine. I have never had an account with this company or related to this account number. Please provide me with verification of the alleged debt, the date of the account, and the amount owed. \n\nFurthermore, if this account is alleged to be related to the account that has BEEN SOLD, then you are admitting to pooling and servicing agreement also known as securitization. I, XXXX XXXX, DID NOT DISCLOSE, NOR AGREE verbally, electronically, or through written consent with a wet ink signature, that I wanted this course of action with First Credit Services OR ANY RELATED XXXX  PARTIES. First Credit Services contracted with an additional party without my consent, making me VOID to pay ANY ALLEGED DEBT. \n\nTo add upon this, I wanted to provide VALIDATION OF THIS ALLEGED DEBT, with the production of this account and the general ledger statement! \nFirst Credit Services has broken the LAW and illegally violated my CONSUMER Rights listed below under the FCRA. First Credit Services SEEKED OUT AND USED my personal information, private information, or any experiences nor any negative/adverse transactions through an additional XXXX  PARTY. Under 15 U.S. Code 6801, an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers ( myself ) and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers ' nonpublic personal information. First Credit Services and any other XXXX  party that illegally contracted with violated this right! \nHarassment and unfair practices from this company. You have engaged in harassing and unfair debt collection practices, such as calling me repeatedly at unreasonable hours and using threatening language in mail and email. \nFurthermore to add upon this conflict, this company took out a loan in my name illegally and unlawfully. Not only is this information stated in which I am able to dispute, but by law I am able to dispute. I feel extremely bullied and unsafe, financially and economically. Under USC 15 1692g ( b ), this debt is NOW OFFICIALLY IN DISPUTE! These practices violate the FDCPA and I demand that you cease and desist immediately. BY LAW, all collection activities must cease until this matter is resolved. You are hereby given notice. Any disregard for this law is subject to fines by the FTC. \n\nPlease be advised that if you do not comply with this cease and desist request, I will take the following actions : I will file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ). \nI will file a lawsuit against you for violations of the FDCPA. \nI will report your actions to my state Attorney General 's office. \nIn the event that this debt is not validated, as required by the FDCPA, First Credit Services you have the legal responsibility to terminate the claim and correct any negative reporting with this alleged debt. I expect a written confirmation from you that you have received this letter and will comply with my request. Please send your confirmation to the address below. \n\nThank You in Advance, Regards XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX agent/ Beneficiary ] Without Prejudice, All Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-10T18:03:37.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30080","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9473556","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"First Credit Services Inc.","date_received":"2024-07-10T18:03:35.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["You have engaged in harassing and unfair <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> practices, such as calling me repeatedly at unreasonable hours and using <em>threatening</em> language in mail and email. \nFurthermore to add upon this conflict, this company <em>took</em> out a loan in my name illegally and unlawfully. Not only is this information stated in which I am able to dispute, but by law I am able to dispute. I feel extremely bullied and unsafe, financially and economically."]},"sort":[17.463955,"9473556"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2498530","_score":17.450705,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"IQ Data International,  INC  XXXX   XXXX   XXXX   XXXX , WA  XXXX  (  XXXX  )  XXXX  Reported to my credit negatively last on  XX/XX/2017 .I had no knowledge of this debt until I reviewed my credit report. I never received a move out statement or notice of this balance from the original creditor  XXXX   XXXX . The alleged debt was originally for  XXXX  and now the debt is  XXXX . This debt is reporting to the same credit bureaus with  XXXX  different balances, which is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) \" by misrepresenting the character, AMOUNT, and legal status of a debt. '' I do not own this debt. This debt belongs to my ex spouse that was in the military and discharged and labeled unable to deploy due to scoliosis. I had to sign the lease because I was over the age of  XXXX  and they needed to run a background check, per the lease agreement, which I have attached, all occupants over the age of  XXXX  and not marked a legal adult dependent due to  XXXX  must sign the lease or they can not occupy the apartment for more than  XXXX  consecutive days, etc.. I had NO income which was clearly marked on the application.      XXXX   XXXX   XXXX  I applaud you for assuring all your employees are trained and accredited. In addition, I applaud you for such designation, that is awesome, but we all know even the most highly trained and accredited personnel fail to abide by all laws and regulations. A s IQ Data Internatio  nal  has actually been sued a few times for illegal actions, where you guys decided to settle, so invalid point. However ; I do not have some divorce decree or private agreement between my ex-husband that is removing me from this debt. I have the contract side between my ex-husband, myself, and  XXXX   XXXX , which if you had reviewed you would see certain remarks I made on the contract. If it is to my understanding, all apartments have certain criteria to even be a resident, one is running a BACKGROUND check on ALL RESIDENTS over the age of  XXXX , which at the time I was. I CLEARLY marked on the application that I do not have any INCOME, which would disqualify me from being able to be responsible for a lease, as obviously I could not afford it. In reference to my complaint \" took or threatened to take legal action and threats made against my credit, '' again, here is a flaw in your company that you do not have any documentation of these acti on ( s ), one o bvious action would be threats against my credit which have became actions, you are falsely placing a debt, multiple debts, I DO NOT OWN NOR HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR on my credit reports, negatively affecting my credit worthiness, reputation, and ability to provide housing for my  XXXX  kids and I. Correct, my account has been marked as disputed but do we honestly have to go over the  XXXX  tactics of the bureaus marking everything as disputed and verified by FCRA requirements? We both know better. Your client is very aware of their actions when it came to selling this debt to you. I have attached a copy of the lease for your review. Maybe you can contact your client for a list of their requirements when it comes to adult occupants and being able to obtain an apartment within their community ; honestly, if you are properly looking into all of these debts you would have their requirements on hand, which I am requesting a copy of as well. Now I am asking you to have this debt removed from all three of my credit bureaus, because I do not have a contract with you all, and the lease that I did sign, for purposes of running a background check to prove I was not a felon, did not bind me to a collection agency for failure to make payments. This debt belongs to my ex-husband,  XXXX   XXXX , who at the time held an income and was stationed in  XXXX   XXXX , Colorado. I appreciate your sincere care towards validity of debts.     I have requested the debt be removed from all three credit bureaus permanently and null and void. I do NOT own this debt. They have not removed this debt nor acknowledge the true ownership of this debt. I do not own a valid contract wi th IQ Data International, as a  co-signer on this application or debt. Please review the attached documents.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-06-01T17:43:22.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"30058","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2498530","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"I.Q. DATA INTERNATIONAL, INC.","date_received":"2017-05-31T23:41:55.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In reference to my complaint \" <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> and threats made against my credit, '' again, here is a flaw in your company that you do not have any documentation of these acti on ( s ), one o bvious <em>action</em> would be threats against my credit which have became <em>actions</em>, you are falsely placing a <em>debt</em>, multiple <em>debts</em>, I DO NOT OWN NOR HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR on my credit reports, <em>negatively</em> affecting my credit worthiness, reputation, and ability to provide housing for my  XXXX"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Other <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> or suggested your credit would be damaged"]},"sort":[17.450705,"2498530"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9212471","_score":16.113607,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Formal Complaint Against National Enterprise Systems for Violation of Consumer Protection Laws Dear Sir/Madam , National Enterprise Systems accused me of owing an alleged debt that they state that I owe. I was unaware of this alleged debt, and I didnt have an opportunity to dispute this information, as National Enterprise Systems never provided me the proper notification of the alleged debt. If in fact they believe that they gave me the properly notification then please have them send me the certified return green card receipt with my name, address, and date on it. \nSo then I wrote National Enterprise Systems and requested debt validation pursuant to 15 USC 1692g including : *An Official Affidavit of Debt *The original contract on their company letter head with my wit ink signature on it *Proof of ownership AKA change of Custody collection *The full accounting records both Public and Private in accordance with General Accepted Accounting Principles ( GAAP ) and in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 44 Documentary evidence includes all documents, papers, correspondence, books of account, and financial and corporate records. \n\nThey failed to provide me with proof of validation of the debt. So then I wrote them an affidavit of truth for Violation of Consumer Protection Laws and they failed to respond to the affidavit within 30 days. I am writing to file a formal complaint against National Enterprise Systems for multiple violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 USC 1692, et seq. I have attached exhibits documenting the violations as follows : Exhibit A : Violation of 15 USC 1692 ( c ) ( a ) - Communication with Consumer I have proof that National Enterprise Systems communicated with me in connection with the collection of a debt, which is a violation of 15 USC 1692 ( c ) ( a ). Exhibit B : Violation of 15 USC 1692 ( b ) ( 2 ) - Commun\nication with Third Parties I have evidence that National Enterprise Systems communicated with third parties for the purpose of acquiring location information about me and stated that I owe a debt, which is a violation of 15 USC 1692 ( b ) ( 2 ).\n\nExhibit C : Violation of 15 USC 1692 ( b ) ( 5 ) - Use of Language or Symbol I have documentation showing that National Enterprise Systems used language or symbols on envelopes or in communications that indicate they are in the debt collection business, which is a violation of 15 USC 1692 ( b ) ( 5 ).\n\nExhibit D : Violation of 15 USC 1692 ( d ) ( 2 ) - Use of Obscene or Profane Language I have proof that National Enterprise Systems used obscene or profane language in communications with me or language that abused or harassed me, which is a violation of 15 USC 1692 ( d ) ( 2 ).\n\nExhibit E : Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692f ( 8 ) - Use of Language or Symbol I have documentation showing that National Enterprise Systems used language or symbols on envelopes or in communications that indicate they are in the debt collection business, which is a violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692f ( 8 ). \n\nAnother federally protected consumer have also file complaints against National Enterprise Systems for multiple violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Listed below are just a few. \n\nXX/XX/year> CFPB XXXX Took or threatened to take negative or legal action With that being said, National Enterprise Systems are in clear violation of the FDCPA and my rights as a federal protected consumer. I request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate these violations and take appropriate action against National Enterprise Systems I also request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau impose a remedy of {$1000.00} per violation, as provided for under 15 USC 1692k, on National Enterprise Systems to compensate me for the harm caused by these violations. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response. \n\nSincerely XXXX XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-06-09T20:39:32.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77338","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9212471","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"National Enterprise Systems, Inc.","date_received":"2024-06-09T20:27:29.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/year> CFPB XXXX <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> With that being said, National Enterprise Systems are in clear violation of the FDCPA and my rights as a federal protected consumer."]},"sort":[16.113607,"9212471"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17174536","_score":15.224115,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX  Report : XXXX Self-Identification as a Debt Collector Finding XXXX  LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing identifies itself in correspondence and call disclosures as a debt collector. This acknowledgment subjects its conduct not only to mortgage-servicing rules under RESPA and TILA, but also to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. When viewed alongside the five contradictory ledgers and fourteen recorded calls, the companys statements to regulators and consumers constitute multiple violations of XXXXXXXX XXXX  and XXXX. \n\n\n\nEvidence XXXX. Written and Verbal Disclosures Customer letters and voicemail greetings include : This is NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, a debt collector. This is an attempt to collect a debt. \nEach of the XXXX recordings contains that disclaimer or its equivalent, confirming statutory self-designation. \nXXXX. Contradictory Account Statements Five ledgers show alternating balances and unapplied-fund totals. \nExample : the XX/XX/XXXX payment of {$750.00} was acknowledged on that date, removed by XX/XX/XXXX, and missing by XX/XX/XXXX. \nXXXX. Post-Dispute Collection Activity After formal Notices of Error ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, collection communications continued : payment reminders, delinquency notices, and payoff calls. \nEach communication occurred after NewRez had actual notice of dispute. \nXXXX. Regulatory Notice XXXX XXXX XXXX confirmed receipt of the complaint and attachments. \nOCC referral and CFPB filings establish that NewRez knew or should have known the debt was disputed and under review.\n\nInterpretation A. Statutory Framework Statute Requirement Violation Evident 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) Prohibits false representation of the character or amount of a debt.\n\nConflicting balances across ledgers and call statements.\n\n1692f ( 1 ) Forbids collection of any amount not expressly authorized by the agreement or law.\n\nLate fees assessed while funds held unapplied.\n\n1692g ( b ) Collection must cease until verification provided when a debt is disputed in writing.\n\nCalls and notices continued after XXXX receipt. \nXXXX ( XXXX ) Bars oppressive or harassing conduct in connection with debt collection. \nRepeated contradictory calls causing borrower distress. \nXXXX Case-Law XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) : misstated balance constitutes FDCPA violation even if later corrected. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) : form responses after notice show systemic disregard. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ) : failure to apply payments and continued collection = willful violation. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) : mortgage servicers that regularly collect debts are debt collectors under FDCPA. \n\nXXXX Overlap with RESPA and TILA Because NewRez functions simultaneously as servicer and debt collector, each inaccurate ledger entry and collection notice doubles as a violation of 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( failure to correct errors ) and 12 C.F.R. 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( failure to credit payments ). Courts treat concurrent violations as aggravating factors supporting enhanced statutory damages.\n\nRisk Impact XXXX. Statutory Damages Up to {$1000.00} per consumer under FDCPA ( 1692k ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ), plus actual damages and attorney fees. \nEach discrete communication that misstates a balance can be counted separately for pattern evidence. \nXXXX. Class-Action Exposure Uniform disclosures ( This is a debt collector ) plus uniform misconduct ( unapplied payments, contradictory balances ) meet Rule 23 commonality requirements. \nPotential class size : all borrowers serviced by NewRez during the same software period. \nXXXX. Regulatory Penalties CFPB can impose civil money penalties under XXXX XXXX 12 U.S.C. 5565 ( XXXX XXXX Debt Collector Admission ( NewRez Website Disclosure ) Finding NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing publicly declares on its corporate website that it is a debt collector. This admission establishes standing under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692 ) for all servicing communications and ledger activity, converting every false, misleading, or harassing act into a statutory violation. \n\n\n\nEvidence Source : NewRez official website ( www.newrez.com ) Servicing Legal Disclosure.\n\nText Extract : NewRez LLC dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing is a debt collector. This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose.\n\nMetadata : Screenshot captured XX/XX/XXXX showing official XXXX  and XXXX XXXX  XXXX. \n\n\n\nInterpretation XXXX. FDCPA Jurisdiction Confirmed. \nBecause NewRez explicitly identifies itself as a debt collector, it is subject to FDCPA provisions regardless of whether it also claims servicer status. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) entities that regularly collect debts, even on behalf of another, are debt collectors within the Acts scope. \nXXXX. Corroboration of Pattern. \nThis statement validates every recorded call beginning with a debt collector disclosure. \nThe XXXX recordings and XXXX contradictory ledgers now represent direct violations of 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) ( false representation of amount due ), 1692f ( 1 ) ( unlawful fee or balance ), and 1692g ( b ) ( continuing collection after written dispute ). \nXXXX. Intersection with RESPA/TILA.\n\nSince the same conduct ( misapplied payments and false balances ) violates RESPA 1024.35 and TILA 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ), the FDCPA status adds treble exposurecivil liability under three separate statutory schemes. \nXXXX. Governance Implications for XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX executives file consolidated financials certifying the accuracy of subsidiary operations under XXXX XXXX and XXXX. \nContinued false accounting or collection by a self-declared debt collector constitutes reckless board-level oversight failure under XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) standards. \n\n\n\nRisk Impact Individual Liability : Each  misleading ledger, fee, or communication can yield up to {$1000.00} per violation plus actual damages and attorney fees ( 15 U.S.C. 1692k ).\n\nClass Exposure : The uniform debt collector disclaimer ensures class commonality ; thousands of borrowers experience identical communications.\n\nRegulatory Consequences : The CFPB can now frame this as a hybrid FDCPA/RESPA systemic case a rare and high-penalty designation.\n\nAddendum Federal Confirmation of Debt Collection Classification Finding The CFPBs complaint taxonomy for mortgage debt explicitly includes categories such as false statements or representation, attempts to collect debt not owed, and took or threatened to take negative or legal action.\n\nBy routing your complaint through this form, the CFPB recognizes NewRezs conduct as debt-collection activitynot simply mortgage servicing. \n\n\n\nEvidence Source : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, portal.consumerfinance.gov ( Mortgage Debt Complaint Form ). \nObserved Categories : False statements or representation ( trying to collect wrong amount ) Attempts to collect debt not owed Written notification about debt Took or threatened to take negative or legal action ( damage credit ) Each of these complaint tracks is derived from 15 U.S.C. 1692ef, confirming CFPB treats misapplied-payment servicing as a collection matter, not a servicing matter. \n\n\n\nInterpretation XXXX. Regulatory Acknowledgment : Submitting via this channel triggers CFPBs Debt Collection oversight branch, not its Mortgage Servicing division, meaning the Bureau itself recognizes NewRezs legal identity as a debt collector under FDCPA. \nXXXX. Scope of Violations : False Statements ( 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) ) Contradictory ledgers and payoff figures.\n\nCollection of Debt Not Owed ( 1692f ( 1 ) ) Holding unapplied payments while asserting delinquency. \nThreatened Negative Action ( 1692e ( 5 ) ) Credit reporting or foreclosure threats despite active disputes. \nFailure to Cease Collection ( 1692g ( b ) ) Continued calls after formaXXXX XXXX \nXXXX. Procedural Significance : Once logged in this category, your complaint becomes part of CFPBs annual FDCPA enforcement data set, which can later substantiate a pattern or practice claim for class litigation. \n\n\n\nRisk Impact Administrative : CFPB now has the statutory authority to impose civil money penalties under 12 U.S.C. 5565 ( c ). \nLitigation : Class-action attorneys can cite CFPBs own classification as proof of industry-recognized debt-collection conduct. \nGovernance : XXXX XXXX can not argue servicing exemption because their subsidiarys federal regulator formally tagged the behavior as debt collection. \n\nGovernance and Securities Liability Integration : Rithm Capitals Oversight Failure XXXX. Framework : Parent-Subsidiary Accountability XXXX XXXX XXXX wholly owns and controls NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, consolidating all subsidiary performance into its SEC filings and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX certifications. \nThis control structure establishes agency and governance liabilityRithms board and C-suite have a non-delegable duty to monitor and remediate subsidiary legal risk. \n\nAuthority : In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Boards must implement and actively oversee compliance systems that identify and address mission-critical risks. Mortgage-servicing compliance and consumer-protection law are XXXX core business risks. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Finding : Systemic Compliance Collapse at Subsidiary Level Evidence shows that NewRez/Shellpoint : Admitted being a debt collector under the FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 ).\n\nEngaged in false balance reporting, misapplication of payments, and pre-dispute foreclosure threats.\n\nProduced contradictory ledgers and call transcripts acknowledging unapplied funds.\n\nIssued automated responses instead of substantive RESPA 1024.35 error-resolution letters.\n\nThese acts constitute willful noncompliance with : FDCPA 1692e, 1692f, 1692g ( b ) ( false, unfair, and continued collection ).\n\nRESPA 12 C.F.R. 1024.3536 ( failure to investigate borrower errors ). \nTILA 12 C.F.R. 1026.36 ( c ) ( improper application of payments ). \n\n\n\nXXXX. XXXX Oversight Breach under XXXX XXXX executivesresponsible for certifying NewRezs operations and compliance controlsfailed to : XXXX. Implement an adequate information-reporting system. \nXXXX. Respond to red-flag complaints, CFPB filings, and TDFI inquiries. \nXXXX. Escalate systemic misapplication of borrower funds. \n\nThis constitutes a XXXX mission-critical oversight failure : knowing inaction after red-flag warnings in the core line of business ( mortgage servicing ). \n\nUnder XXXX, such failure rises to bad-faith breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, actionable under XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\n\n\nXXXX. XXXX and XXXX  XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX-certified Form XXXX  and XXXX filings attest to : The accuracy of financial data derived from NewRezs operations.\n\nThe effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting and compliance.\n\nGiven the known misconduct and pending complaints, those certifications may constitute false or misleading statements under : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX false XXXX certification XXXX criminal exposure ( 18 U.S.C. 1350 ).\n\nExchange Act Rule 10b-5 ( 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5 ) prohibits material misrepresentation or omission in connection with the purchase or sale of securities.\n\nMaterial Omission : Failure to disclose ongoing CFPB/state investigations, RESPA violations XXXX or wrongful-foreclosure conduct that directly affects XXXX servicing income and liability reserves. \n\nPrecedent : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX executives liable for false XXXX  certifications. \nIn XXXX XXXX  XXXX failure to disclose known safety/systemic control risks = material misrepresentation. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Governance and Risk Impact Domain Violation/Failure Liability Path Compliance Oversight Ignored systemic RESPA/FDCPA violations Caremark / XXXX fiduciary XXXX SEC Filings False XXXX certifications XXXX omission of investigations Rule XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX Consumer Protection Debt collection without right to possession FDCPA 1692f ( 6 ) Federal Banking Law Pre-dispute foreclosure 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( i ) Governance Integrity Reckless failure to monitor core risk XXXX v. XXXX XXXX ( loyalty breach ) XXXX. Conclusion NewRezs misconduct is not an isolated servicing failureit is a governance and disclosure failure at the parent-company level. \nBy certifying financial statements containing revenue and compliance assertions from an unremediated, noncompliant subsidiary, XXXX XXXX executives and board expose themselves to : Derivative liability under Delaware law ( XXXX ) XXXX \nCivil and criminal liability undeXXXX XXXX XXXX. \nSecurities-fraud exposure under XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\n\nI have additional manipulation of my ledger as well","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-11T14:44:04.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"37066","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17174536","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","date_received":"2025-11-11T14:25:28.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Addendum Federal Confirmation of <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Classification Finding The CFPBs complaint taxonomy for mortgage <em>debt</em> explicitly includes categories such as false statements or representation, attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed, and <em>took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>.\n\nBy routing your complaint through this form, the CFPB recognizes NewRezs conduct as <em>debt</em>-<em>collection</em> activitynot simply mortgage servicing."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Mortgage <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[15.224115,"17174536"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6575381","_score":15.132658,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I write to request ( CFPB ) Consumer Finance Protection Bureau take enforcement action against the eight companies and persons ( FL Bar attorneys ) I report violating the laws related to Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FBCPA ), Bankruptcy Stay and Bankruptcy Discharged Debts Collections to remedy the harm to myself. \n\n\n\n\nI have unsuccessfully tried to fix the issue with each Creditor/ Servicer. Thus, on XX/XX/XXXX, I filed Eight ( 8 ) complaints individually with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). The complaints are filed separately, but they are all linked and dependent on each. In other words, it is a complaint to report collusion, corruption, abuse, ill-will related to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Homeowners Assistance Fund Program application I submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, the creditors, and their attorneys. \n\nI am reporting ( 8 ) Eight NON-DUPLICATE SEPARATE COMPLAINTS of unfair, deceptive, abusive, and law-breaking practices of eight companies involved in the process of my application submitted on XX/XX/XXXX to The Homeowner Assistance Fund ( HAF ) operated by The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity ( FL DEO ). toThe Homeowner Assistance Fund ( HAF ) operated by The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity ( FL DEO ). \n\n\" The Homeowner Assistance Fund ( HAF ) was established under Section 3206 of the American Rescue Plan Act ( the ARP ) of XXXX '' to provide \" financial assistance to Florida through the United States Department of the Treasury ( Treasury ). The purpose of the HAF is to mitigate financial hardships associated with the COVID-19 pandemic by preventing homeowners ' mortgage delinquencies, defaults, foreclosures, loss of utilities or home energy services, and displacement. The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity ( DEO or the Department ) has been designated to manage and operate the HAF on behalf of the state of Florida. '' The eight companies involved are breaking laws related to Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FBCPA ), Florida State Bankruptcy Stay, and Bankruptcy Discharged Debts Collections. The consequence of their collective unfair, deceptive, abusive practices from XX/XX/XXXX through today, XX/XX/XXXX, will result in homelessness and displacement due to homeowners ' mortgage delinquencies, defaults, and foreclosure, with unnecessary high legal fees. Confirmation eligibility and approval o\n\nf FL DEO HAF plan financial assistance was to mitigate loss. The eight companies involved I am submitting complaints for are : self vs. FL DEO Homeowner Assistance Fund  Plan selfvs. PNC BANK selfvs. LOGS Legal Group selfvs. Miami Management , Inc.\n\nselfvs. Becker & Poliakoff selfvs. K.W. Property Management & Consulting ( KWPMC ) selfvs. Association Law Group ( ALG ) selfvs. North Highland The Reason for the Complaints : Debt Collection The Type of Debt : Mortgage and Other debt related to homeownership ( Mortgage Payments, Homeowners Insurance, Homeowners Taxes, Homeowners Association Maintenance Fees, and Legal Fees ) The problems I am having : Attempts to collect debt not owed ( legal fees debt was discharged in bankruptcy ) Unresponsive Disputes in Writing to correct the amount owedafter debts were discharged in bankruptcy. \nFalse statements or representation ( trying to collect the wrong amount since including debts discharged in bankruptcy ). Also, charging legal fees during bankruptcy automatic stay period from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. \nTook or threatened to take negative or legal action ( threatened to sue, seize property, collect exempt funds, damage your life- make me homeless ). \n\nFL DEO, in writing and verbally, informed late XX/XX/XXXX I met the Prioritization Requirements of Eligible Homeowner : '' Qualified Financial Hardship '', \" Socially Disadvantage '', \" Tier 1 '', and \" FHA Loan '' and was approved to receive the maximum per household {$50000.00} financial assistance structured as a non-recoursegrant. \n\nI personally communicated in writing to all companies involved about notice of eligibility for the FL DEO HAF Program in late XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy filed XX/XX/XXXX by Attorney in United States Bankruptcy Court - XXXX XXXX of Florida. \n\nI complied, and continue to comply, with the requirement \" The homeowner must provide all necessary documentation to satisfy program guidelines within timeframes established by DEO, including self-certification or attestation of income and Socially Disadvantaged Individual status, as applicable. \n\nMoreover, in XXXX, a FL DEO Case Manager Supervisor asked me to grant authorization to speak directly with the creditors/servicers. In addition to being actively involved, I delivered on the request in writing and informed all parties involved of the approval in hopes of expediting the payment disbursements. \n\nKey dates I submitted complete sets of ( a ) Mortgage Reinstatement Letter, ( b ) MASTER Homeowner Association Payoff Letter, and ( c ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Payoff Letter, as requested by FL DEO HAF : ( 1st set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures ( 2nd set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures ( 3rd set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures ( 4th set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures ( 5th set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures ( 6th set ) XX/XX/XXXX - valid thru the end of XXXX figures amount is below {$50000.00} The 6th set of Mortgage Reinstatement and Payoff Letters TOTAL AMOUNT for FL DEO is {$47000.00} FL DEO HAF Please pay as follows : {$39000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$5600.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n{$47000.00} XXXX  XXXX FL DEO, as of today, XX/XX/XXXX, has yet to disburse Mortgage Assistance Program payments for mortgage loans, property taxes, insurance, HOA 's ( Homeowner Association ) maintenance fees, including applicable late charges, directly to lenders, loan servicers, or HOA 's. \n\nThe delay since XX/XX/XXXX resulted in the attorney 's representing each Creditor billing excessively despite being protected by the BANKRUPTCY AUTOMATIC STAY period knowing the property was exempt. I filed requests to dispute the legal fees and was not receiving responses to grievance and legal fees disputes. Thus, legal fees were included and discharged in the Bankruptcy. \n\nAfter XX/XX/XXXX, Bankruptcy Discharge, I asked the three attorneys to provide separate letters : Mortgage Reinstatement Letter and SEPARATE Detailed Legal Charges Invoice. Likewise, I asked for each Condo Homeowner Association Payoffs Letters and SEPARATE Detailed Legal Charges Invoices. That is, I requested SEPARATE Mortgage Reinstatement Letter, Condo HOA 's Payoffs Letters, and Detailed Legal Fees separate XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX  XXXX. All three Legal firms declined. They stated they will not separate the legal fees charges, nor provide Detailed Legal Invoices with Date, Description, Amount, etc. despite having Bankruptcy Court Discharge Document. \n\nAlthough XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX, and ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX acknowledge receiving from me the Court 's Bankruptcy Discharge file, all attorneys have declined to provide separate detailed invoices. The attorneys representing the creditors are attempting to collect the wrong amount. Legal Fees debts were discharged and are no longer owed. \n\nBy denying the request for separate Letters and Invoices, the amount exceeds {$50000.00}. \n\nMoreover, FL DEO HAF Case Manager Supervisor for Foreclosure Properties are not cooperating to move application to completion after, as per their request, I authorized in XX/XX/XXXX to communicate with the creditors and their attorney directly. I continue to be actively involved in writing, but I am unsuccessful in speaking with the Case Managers Supervisors. Despite my timely and complete submission of the documentation requested, I am at risk of homelessness.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-07-17T15:00:10.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"331XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6575381","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NORTH HIGHLAND HOLDING COMPANY LLC, THE","date_received":"2023-02-15T21:16:34.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint","sub_issue":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["False statements or representation ( trying to collect the wrong amount since including <em>debts</em> discharged in bankruptcy ). Also, charging <em>legal</em> fees during bankruptcy automatic stay period from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. \n<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> ( <em>threatened</em> to sue, seize property, collect exempt funds, damage your life- make me homeless )."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed"],"sub_product":["Mortgage <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Debt</em> was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed"]},"sort":[15.132658,"6575381"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13918689","_score":14.912328,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is submitted against Gurstel Law Firm and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), XXXX. for unlawful debt collection practices in violation of Nebraska statutes and federal consumer protection laws. The debt in question is time-barred under Nebraska law as listed below and found in attachments, and the service of summons was never legally completed, rendering the default judgment and subsequent garnishment improper and unlawful. \n\nKey Allegations 1. Improper substitute service in violation of XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX. XXXX. \n2. Entry of default judgment without proper service, violating due process rights. \n3. Violation of Nebraska 's 5-year statute of limitations in ( XXXX ). \n4. Gurstel is again unlawfully seeking garnishment despite previous accepting a hardship through the court and court determination of Head of Household in XXXX. \n5. Gurstel is committing Estoppel due to prior acceptance of hardship agreements and the court released garnishment in XXXX. \n6. Repeated violations of FDCPA and prior CFPB complaints against Gurstel Law. \n\nRequested Resolution 1. Vacate the default judgment in XXXX XXXX Court Case ID : XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n2. Prohibit further collection efforts on the disputed debt. \n3. Impose penalties or sanctions against Gurstel Law for improper service and filings. \n4. Require confirmation of compliance with Nebraska debt collection and service statutes. \n\n\n\nDetails of Complaint : Fraudulent Default Judgment Based on Improper Service : Gurstel Law Firm, on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), XXXX, initiated legal action against XXXX Case ID : XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX, Nebraska. Despite repeated failed attempts at personal service ( documented on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX ), a motion for substitute service was later granted, citing constructive service. I never received anything and was never properly served. \n\nIn the affidavit of alias summons, the Plaintiff attests that all service summons including certified mail were attempted ; however, there is zero proof of certified mail or proof of certified mail or registered mail. Gurstel does not deny this fact now. The court was improper on issuing a default judgment due to the plaintiffs lack of proof of proper service according to Neb. Rev. XXXX. XXXX ( c ) Certified mail service which shall be made by ( i ) within ten days of issuance, sending the summons to the defendant by certified mail with a return receipt requested showing to whom and where delivered and the date of delivery, and ( ii ) filing with the court proof of service with the signed receipt attached ; ( d ) Designated delivery service which shall be made by ( i ) within ten days of issuance, sending the summons by a designated delivery service to the defendant, ( ii ) obtaining a signed delivery receipt showing to whom and where delivered and the date of delivery, and ( iii ) filing with the court proof of service with a copy of the signed delivery receipt attached. As used in this subdivision, a designated delivery service means a delivery service designated as such pursuant to XXXX U.S.C.XXXX ( f ) and a signed delivery receipt included. \n\nThis refusal to act on statute by Gurstel Law should move the court to vacate its judgment of the subsequent action which unlawfully resulted in a default judgment entered on XX/XX/XXXX without lawful service, violating Neb. Rev. XXXX. XXXX and my constitutional right to due process. \n\nConstructive service should only be allowed when all due diligence requirements are met, and proof is shown. Here, service was never legally completed, and the defendant never received actual notice. Furthermore, the constructive service was not verified as received, in violation of Neb. Rev. XXXX. XXXX and procedural due process rights affirmed in XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ). Furthermore, if the court upholds that attorneys are the brightest and smartest of the population, a simple XXXX  search and linked in search would have sufficed at locating the defendant, me, for servicing at my place of employment. This lack of plaintiff accountability is demonstrative of the intentional unscrupulous misrepresentation of service, filed untrue statements with the court, and should be held to the highest sanctions and accountability allowed by law. \n\nImproper Default Judgment : Gurstel Law Firm filed a Motion for Default Judgment based on the above service irregularities, and the court improperly granted it. The resulting judgment ( {$7800.00} plus costs ) was procedurally and constitutionally improper. Furthermore, the Plaintiff states in the original complaint stated that no costs, attorney fees or interest would be requested from the court ; however, Gurstel is attempting to collect both fees and interest. I did not receive legal notice nor was I provided a fair opportunity to defend myself in court as guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment. \n\nStatute of Limitations Violation : Per Nebraska Revised XXXX XXXX, civil actions must be commenced within the prescribed statute of limitations. The underlying debt was incurred more than five years prior, and any action to collect is now time-barred under Nebraskas five-year statute of limitations for written contracts and open accounts. There is no indication of tolling applicable here. \n\nFurthermore, under Neb. Rev. XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ), the statute of limitations is which applied to my financial hardship status during the time in question. I only became knowledgeable of the judgment when my employer received the order of garnishment. At that time, when I appeared in court, the garnishment order was rescinded and Gurstel accepted to write off the debt as hardship. \n\nMost recently on XX/XX/XXXX, a letter for collection was mailed to defendant. Upon calling the Gurstel Firm, I recorded call on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX, a formal request for the validation of the debt was requested. However, the receipt of that request received XX/XX/XXXX failed to satisfy our lawful and reasonable request of which only included a copy of the credit card statement now of which is time-barred and over 5 years per Nebraska Revised XXXX XXXX Nothing was provided on the assignment or sale of the card to the collection agency, nor were any of the required court documents showing proof of service or the hardship acceptance write off. This is another example of Gurstel suppressing discovery in order to commit illegal collections.\n\nEstoppel and Prior Hardship/Garnishment : Following a garnishment attempt in XXXX ( issued XX/XX/XXXX ), I appeared in court and was deemed Head of Household, rendering wages partially exempt. Garnishment was released by court order on XX/XX/XXXX. The creditor accepted the hardship as evidenced by the lack of collection for over 3 years to current, and failed to provide any terms of or evidence of a written-off hardship agreement prior to this date, constituting an estoppel by silence, as acknowledged in consumer protection doctrines. Therefore, Gurstels attempt to now collect and threaten garnishment is in violation of Nebraska state statutes and consumer protection doctrines. A written off hardship is no longer collectible. \n\nThe continued pursuit of the debt in XXXX violates Nebraska garnishment statute XXXX, which requires specific procedures, notices, and a hearing opportunitynone of which were adequately provided. \n\nThe same law firm, Gurstel Law Firm, has a well documented history of abusive, unscrupulous, and illegal collection tactics similar CFPB complaints involving : Use of improper service and default judgments. \n\nViolations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), including misleading representations and failure to verify debts.Continued Harassment and CFPB Precedent Complaints : Took or threatened to take negative or legal action 68 complaints Attempts to collect debt not owed 56 False statements or representation 27 The renewed substitution of counsel and attempted collection activities in XXXX are improper and directly contradict the prior garnishment release and hardship protections. \n\n\n\n\nSupporting Documents Submitted : Nebraska Revised Statutes ( Sections XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) Certified court documents showing improper service attempts, motions, and garnishment filings including false statement of service by certified mail with no evidentiary signatures, a motion for alias summons based on the fraudulent prior service claims CFPB history of complaints against Gurstel Law Evidence of garnishment release and court appearance ruling Head of Household with Plaintiff Counsel failing to appear. Further evidence can be sent to support harassment, and admittance that the case was written to hardship.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T17:11:05.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"68105","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13918689","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.","date_received":"2025-06-05T16:50:21.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Violations of the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act ( FDCPA ), including misleading representations and failure to verify <em>debts</em>.Continued Harassment and CFPB Precedent Complaints : <em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em> 68 complaints Attempts to collect <em>debt</em> not owed 56 False statements or representation 27 The renewed substitution of counsel and attempted <em>collection</em> activities in XXXX are improper and directly contradict the prior garnishment release and hardship protections."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[14.912328,"13918689"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9557035","_score":14.034857,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX - agreed with XXXX XXXX XXXX field sales rep at my front door to quarterly services, at the rate of {$39.00} each, cancel anytime, no loop holes or extra fees. I agreed to quarterly services at the rate of {$39.00}. No documents were signed. No documents or paperwork was received by me by hand or electronically. \n\nNo communication by email or mail was ever received from XXXX XXXX XXXX identifying a contract between XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I only received treatment services from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I only received treatment three times and my card was charged seven times. No monthly statements, invoices, or communication was sent to me.\n\nAfter review of these transactions and after further research into the company, it is evident they are predatory and take advantage of consumers. They lie and are deceptive of the services, fees and terms and conditions they actually offer. I was never told about any contract or any cancellation fees. The company 's representatives lie to your face and laugh at you on the phone when you call. They falsely create contracts. \n\nTherefore, on XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX  and requested they cancel services for my account. \n\nOn, XX/XX/XXXX, I heard back from XXXX XXXX XXXX representative, and was advised that \" you have a 1-year agreement and not yet completed '', \" and an early termination fee ''. \n\nI responded to XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and stated, \" What 1-year service agreement? I was not told this was a contract or that it has a required service term. That was never expressed or communicated to me. Please cancel. If you are adamant about a cancellation fee, I would like to speak to a supervisor and the representative that signed me up for services at my door. The one year requirement with a cancellation fee was never advised to me.. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX  responded by text message, We have sent your account over to the retention/cancellation department. He will reach out to you to come to a resolution with you. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call from XXXX XXXX, from XXXX. The male stated he was calling about my request to cancel and stated that I was unable to cancel without avoiding a cancellation fee because I had \" signed '' a one year contract. I repeated to him that I never signed a contract and that I was never advised of that information by his representative. I also advised him that I had done further research on their company and it appears this is how they treat consumers and they way of doing business, by lying. The male representative emailed me while on the call a copy of an agreement which clearly and evidently shows is not my signature. I expressed that to him on the call. This is the first time I ever say anything close to that document. At the time of the conversation with the sales representative, there was no distribution of documents, contract or anything. The male representative stated he could not speak to my experience of when I first discussed services with his field sales rep. and he did not want to discuss anything other than, was I going to pay him the cancellation fee over the phone or not. I asked the male representative that I was unsatisfied with his response and desired resolution and that I now requested to speak with the owner of the small business so that I may voice my concerns. The male representative stated to me, twice, \" trust me, you do not want to do that '', I am way nicer than him, \" trust me you do not want to do that ''. I told the representative that I took his response to me as a threat, that I demanded to speak to the owner of the business and ended the call with him. \n\nNo invoice and no further communicaiton was ever received from XXXX XXXX XXXX  after the call on XX/XX/XXXX. Nothing at all. \n\nOn Friday XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, McKenzie, Paul and Associates contacted my brother who is XXXX military on his personal cell phone, and who resides in North Carolina . I live in Oklahoma. The call was very concerning to my brother, and he was extremely concerned and worried for me. He stated that he believed the call was from an attorney or for a very serious matter. During this time, I was under care the care at the XXXX XXXX  and was unable to return their call.\n\nNo correspondence or debt verification letter was ever received from XXXX XXXX XXXX nor McKenzie, Paul and Associates between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn Wednesday, XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted McKenzie, Paul and Associates by phone, at XXXX, and for the first time, I identified that the alarming reason for the call to my brother in XXXX XXXX military was in regard to a \" debt from XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$280.00} and some change, wherein McKenzie, Paul and Associates during the call threated to report negatively to the credit bureaus if I did not settle the debt on the date I called them, XX/XX/XXXX. The female representative who took my call and McKenzie, Paul and Associates, mentioned the owner of the company was willing to not report me to the credit bureaus if a payment was provided to them on the date of my call. My phone call to McKenzie, Paul and Associates was not verified. I was not verified at all, I was simply asked for my first and last name and the entire details of my account with them were disclosed. The female inappropaitely disregarded my communication with her during the call and spoke over me just to state that they would be pursuing payment for XXXX XXXX XXXX. I ended the call. I have received zero notices stating that I am in collections, or that they are attempting to collect a debt from me. McKenzie, Paul and Associates are inappropriately acting and conducting business against many FDCPA guidelines. Below are several, but not all, of my concerns with their practices : Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 804. Acquisition of location information Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall -- ( XXXX ) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer ; 805. Communication in connection with debt collection ( b ) Communication with third parties Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, A DEBT COLLECTOR MAY NOT COMMUNICATION, IN CONNECTION WITH THE COLLECTION OF ANY DEBT, WITH ANY PERSON OTHER THAN THE CONSUMER, HIS ATTORNEY, 806. Harassment or abuse A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt.\n\n807. False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.\n\nWithout limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 1 ) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof.\n\n( 2 ) The false representation of -- ( A ) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or ( B ) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt.\n\n( 3 ) The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.\n\n( 4 ) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. \n\n( XXXX ) The threat to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that a sale, referral, or other transfer of any interest in a debt shall cause the consumer to -- ( A ) lose any claim or defense to payment of the debt; or ( B ) become subject to any practice prohibited by this subchapter. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that the consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer. \n\n( XXXX ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. \n\n( XXXX ) The use or distribution of any written communication which simulates or is falsely represented to be a document authorized, issued, or approved by any court, official, or agency of the United States or any State, or which creates a false impression as to its source, authorization, or approval. \n\n( XXXX ) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. \n\n( XXXX ) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that documents are legal process. \n\n( XXXX ) The use of any business, company, or organization name other than the true name of the debt collector 's business, company, or organization. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that documents are not legal process forms or do not require action by the consumer. \n\n( XXXX ) The false representation or implication that a debt collector operates or is employed by a consumer reporting agency as defined by section 1681a ( f ) of this title.\n\n808. Unfair practices A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.\n\n( 8 ) Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector 's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business.\n\n( 8 ) Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector 's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business.\n\n813. Civil liability ( a ) Amount of damages Except as otherwise provided by this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this subchapter with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of -- ( 1 ) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure ; ( 2 ) ( A ) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding {$1000.00} ; or McKenzie, Paul and Associates has been rated extremely poorly by the XXXX and has earned a one star rating. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is their location. Other consumers have almost identical concerns about their practices as me. None of their XXXX  complaints have been resolved or responded to by McKenzie, Paul and Associates. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX has been rated with an F by the XXXX. They have over 100 complaints, identical to my experience and concerns with them between Texas and Oklahoma. They continue to take advantage of consumers daily. Most of their complaints are unanswered.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-19T05:06:15.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"73127","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9557035","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"McKenzie Paul & Associates","date_received":"2024-07-19T03:05:52.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["with a <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["<em>Took</em> or <em>threatened</em> to <em>take</em> <em>negative</em> or <em>legal</em> <em>action</em>"],"sub_product":["Other <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Threatened</em> or suggested your credit would be damaged"]},"sort":[14.034857,"9557035"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":50,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":50}]}},"product":{"doc_count":50,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":26,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":7},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":5},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":4},{"key":"Auto debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"Medical debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Private student loan debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rental debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":9,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":9}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Personal line of credit","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":50,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":17,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged","doc_count":5},{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":4},{"key":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit","doc_count":4},{"key":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Collected or attempted to collect exempt funds","doc_count":1},{"key":"Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":3},{"key":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed","doc_count":1},{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Communication tactics","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Used obscene, profane, or other abusive language","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Confusing or missing disclosures","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem caused by your funds being low","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Bounced checks or returned payments","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem when making payments","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble using your card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't use card to make purchases","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":50,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":50}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":50,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":47},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":50,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":50}]}},"company":{"doc_count":50,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","doc_count":3},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":2},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION, THE","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAVALRY INVESTMENTS, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Early Warning Services, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Eastern Account Systems of Connecticut, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FAIR COLLECTIONS & OUTSOURCING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"First Credit Services Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Gurstel Law Firm, P.C.","doc_count":1},{"key":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"I.Q. DATA INTERNATIONAL, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"McKenzie Paul & Associates","doc_count":1},{"key":"Medical Business Bureau","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mr. Cooper Group Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NORTH HIGHLAND HOLDING COMPANY LLC, THE","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Enterprise Systems, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Paramount GR Holdings, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"RentDebt Automated Collections, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Roosen, Varchetti & Olivier, PLLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SLM CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Self Financial Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Southern Oregon Credit Service, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TrueAccord Corp.","doc_count":1},{"key":"United PanAm Financial Corp.","doc_count":1},{"key":"VANDERBILT MORTGAGE & FINANCE, INC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":50,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"GA","doc_count":13},{"key":"FL","doc_count":8},{"key":"AL","doc_count":3},{"key":"MO","doc_count":3},{"key":"NV","doc_count":3},{"key":"DC","doc_count":2},{"key":"TN","doc_count":2},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"DE","doc_count":1},{"key":"LA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NM","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":50,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":13},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":6},{"key":"Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint","doc_count":2}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":50,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":5},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":2},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[14.033987,"9557035"]}}}