{"took":184,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":163,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16374274","_score":28.771755,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The plaintiff has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). The agency was obligated to provide proper debt validation upon request, yet no such validation was provided prior to filing the lawsuit. Proceeding with litigation without first validating the alleged debt constitutes a direct violation of the FDCPA, for which the agency should be held accountable","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-17T21:02:03.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"070XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16374274","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Tenaglia & Hunt, PA","date_received":"2025-10-05T23:19:45.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The plaintiff has violated the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act ( FDCPA ). The agency was obligated to provide proper <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> upon request, yet no such <em>validation</em> was provided prior to filing the <em>lawsuit</em>. Proceeding with litigation <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the alleged <em>debt</em> <em>constitutes</em> a direct violation of the FDCPA, for which the agency should be held accountable"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[28.771755,"16374274"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19036203","_score":26.958399,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am submitting this complaint against a debt collection company that has initiated a lawsuit against me in Texas without providing proper debt validation, including the purchase agreement or any documentation proving their legal right to collect or sue on the alleged debt. \n\n\n\nOn or about XX/XX/year>, I submitted a written request for debt validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). In my request, I specifically asked for documentation showing : A copy of the purchase agreement or assignment demonstrating lawful transfer of the debt to them To date, the collection company has failed to provide the requested validation. They have not produced a purchase agreement, bill of sale, assignment, or any other admissible proof showing that they legally purchased or own the alleged debt or have standing to bring a lawsuit. \n\n\n\nDespite failing to validate the debt, the company has continued collection activity by pursuing a lawsuit against me. Filing or continuing a lawsuit without first validating the debt constitutes collection activity and appears to violate the FDCPA. As a Texas consumer, I am also concerned that this conduct violates Texas debt collection laws, which prohibit deceptive, unfair, or misleading practices. \n\n\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB : Investigate this debt collection companys conduct Require the company to provide proper debt validation, including the purchase agreement or chain of title Take appropriate action to stop or address the lawsuit until lawful proof and verification are provided I have acted in good faith to assert my consumer rights, yet the collection company has ignored my lawful request and proceeded with legal action without evidence of ownership or accuracy of the alleged debt. \n\n\n\nThank you for your assistance in this matter. I am prepared to provide copies of my validation request and any related correspondence upon request. \n\n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-27T15:00:40.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"77449","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19036203","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2026-01-27T14:50:13.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite failing to <em>validate</em> the <em>debt</em>, the company has continued <em>collection</em> activity by pursuing a <em>lawsuit</em> against me. Filing or continuing a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em> <em>constitutes</em> <em>collection</em> activity and appears to violate the FDCPA. As a Texas consumer, I am also concerned that this conduct violates Texas <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> laws, which prohibit deceptive, unfair, or misleading practices."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Medical <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Threatened to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[26.958399,"19036203"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19035809","_score":26.911808,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am submitting this complaint against a debt collection company that has initiated a lawsuit against me in Texas without providing proper debt validation, including the purchase agreement or any documentation proving their legal right to collect or sue on the alleged debt. \n\n\n\nOn or about XX/XX/year>, I submitted a written request for debt validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). In my request, I specifically asked for documentation showing : A copy of the purchase agreement or assignment demonstrating lawful transfer of the debt to them To date, the collection company has failed to provide the requested validation. They have not produced a purchase agreement, bill of sale, assignment, or any other admissible proof showing that they legally purchased or own the alleged debt or have standing to bring a lawsuit. \n\n\n\nDespite failing to validate the debt, the company has continued collection activity by pursuing a lawsuit against me. Filing or continuing a lawsuit without first validating the debt constitutes collection activity and appears to violate the FDCPA. As a Texas consumer, I am also concerned that this conduct violates Texas debt collection laws, which prohibit deceptive, unfair, or misleading practices. \n\n\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB : Investigate this debt collection companys conduct Require the company to provide proper debt validation, including the purchase agreement or chain of title Take appropriate action to stop or address the lawsuit until lawful proof and verification are provided I have acted in good faith to assert my consumer rights, yet the collection company has ignored my lawful request and proceeded with legal action without evidence of ownership or accuracy of the alleged debt. \n\n\n\nThank you for your assistance in this matter. I am prepared to provide copies of my validation request and any related correspondence upon request. \n\n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-27T14:48:04.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"77449","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19035809","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2026-01-27T14:33:37.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite failing to <em>validate</em> the <em>debt</em>, the company has continued <em>collection</em> activity by pursuing a <em>lawsuit</em> against me. Filing or continuing a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em> <em>constitutes</em> <em>collection</em> activity and appears to violate the FDCPA. As a Texas consumer, I am also concerned that this conduct violates Texas <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> laws, which prohibit deceptive, unfair, or misleading practices."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Threatened to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[26.911808,"19035809"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14480807","_score":25.882854,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"In XX/XX/XXXX, a law firm representing me sent a debt validation request to Capital One, disputing the debt and requesting full validation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g. Neither Capital One nor their representatives responded or provided any validation as required by federal law.\n\nDespite their failure to validate the debt, on XX/XX/XXXX, I was served with a lawsuit filed by XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX on behalf of Capital One.\n\nFurthermore, the service of process was improper : The documents were sent by certified mail but signed for by someone else.\n\nThe documents were left in my mailbox, not personally served or accepted by me.\n\nThis deprived me of adequate legal notice and the opportunity to respond in a timely and fair manner.\n\nThe filing of a lawsuit without first validating the debt, combined with improper service, constitutes a violation of the FDCPA. This situation has caused unnecessary stress and legal burden.\n\nI am not requesting debt validation now because ample opportunity was already provided. My request is that : The CFPB investigate these violations, The lawsuit be dismissed based on failure to validate the debt and improper service, All collection efforts cease immediately.\n\nI request the CFPB take appropriate action to hold both Capital One and XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accountable for these violations.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-05T12:19:56.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"156XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14480807","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-07-05T12:19:21.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The filing of a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em>, combined with improper service, <em>constitutes</em> a violation of the FDCPA. This situation has caused unnecessary stress and legal burden.\n\nI am not requesting <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> now because ample opportunity was already provided. My request is that : The CFPB investigate these violations, The <em>lawsuit</em> be dismissed based on failure to <em>validate</em> the <em>debt</em> and improper service, All <em>collection</em> efforts cease immediately."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[25.882854,"14480807"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14481268","_score":25.84953,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"In XX/XX/XXXX, a law firm representing me sent a debt validation request to XXXX  XXXX, disputing the debt and requesting full validation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g. Neither XXXX XXXX nor their representatives responded or provided any validation as required by federal law.\n\nDespite their failure to validate the debt, on XX/XX/XXXX, I was served with a lawsuit filed by Hayt, Hayt & Landau, LLC on behalf of XXXX  XXXX. \n\nFurthermore, the service of process was improper : The documents were sent by certified mail but signed for by someone else.\n\nThe documents were left in my mailbox, not personally served or accepted by me.\n\nThis deprived me of adequate legal notice and the opportunity to respond in a timely and fair manner.\n\nThe filing of a lawsuit without first validating the debt, combined with improper service, constitutes a violation of the FDCPA. This situation has caused unnecessary stress and legal burden.\n\nI am not requesting debt validation now because ample opportunity was already provided. My request is that : The CFPB investigate these violations, The lawsuit be dismissed based on failure to validate the debt and improper service, All collection efforts cease immediately.\n\nI request the CFPB take appropriate action to hold both XXXX XXXX and Hayt, Hayt & Landau , LLC accountable for these violations.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-05T12:19:56.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"156XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14481268","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Law Offices of Hayt, Hayt & Landau, LLC","date_received":"2025-07-05T11:22:11.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The filing of a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em>, combined with improper service, <em>constitutes</em> a violation of the FDCPA. This situation has caused unnecessary stress and legal burden.\n\nI am not requesting <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> now because ample opportunity was already provided. My request is that : The CFPB investigate these violations, The <em>lawsuit</em> be dismissed based on failure to <em>validate</em> the <em>debt</em> and improper service, All <em>collection</em> efforts cease immediately."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[25.84953,"14481268"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13426070","_score":24.594599,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It XXXX Concern : I, XXXX XXXX, am submitting this formal complaint regarding serious violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) and ( b ), by your agency, Crown Asset Management, and your legal representatives at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nYou initiated a lawsuit against me to collect an alleged debt without ever sending the required debt validation notice within five ( XXXX ) days of your initial communication with me, as required by federal law. Only after I was served and appeared for my first court date did your attorney provide a so-called validation letter. However, that document was insufficient and did not include : The original signed contract, A full breakdown of the debt, including account history, payments, interest fees, and any other charges, A bill of sale including my name and account number, A clear chain of assignments showing the transfer of ownership of the alleged debt. \nFiling a lawsuit without first fulfilling the mandatory validation requirements under 1692g ( a ), and subsequently providing an incomplete or improper validation letter, constitutes a clear and ongoing violation of my consumer rights. \n\nThis improper and deceptive practice has caused me significant stress and confusion and interfered with my ability to meaningfully address or resolve the alleged.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-10T01:00:34.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"33179","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13426070","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Crown Asset Management, LLC, Duluth, GA Branch","date_received":"2025-05-10T01:00:10.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["You initiated a <em>lawsuit</em> against me to collect an alleged <em>debt</em> <em>without</em> ever sending the required <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> notice within five ( XXXX ) days of your initial communication with me, as required by federal law. Only after I was served and appeared for my <em>first</em> court date did your attorney provide a so-called <em>validation</em> letter."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[24.594599,"13426070"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13426928","_score":24.580181,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern : I, XXXX XXXX, am submitting this formal complaint regarding serious violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) and ( b ), by your agency, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and your legal representatives at Andreu Palma Lavin & Solis.\n\nYou initiated a lawsuit against me to collect an alleged debt without ever sending the required debt validation notice within XXXX ( XXXX ) days of your initial communication with me, as required by federal law. Only after I was served and appeared for my first court date did your attorney provide a so-called validation letter. However, that document was insufficient and did not include : The original signed contract, A full breakdown of the debt, including account history, payments, interest fees, and any other charges, A bill of sale including my name and account number, A clear chain of assignments showing the transfer of ownership of the alleged debt.\n\nFiling a lawsuit without first fulfilling the mandatory validation requirements under 1692g ( a ), and subsequently providing an incomplete or improper validation letter, constitutes a clear and ongoing violation of my consumer rights. \n\nThis improper and deceptive practice has caused me significant stress and confusion and interfered with my ability to meaningfully address or resolve the alleged.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-10T01:00:34.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"33179","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13426928","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Andreu, Palma & Andreu, PL","date_received":"2025-05-10T00:31:33.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Filing a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> fulfilling the mandatory <em>validation</em> requirements under 1692g ( a ), and subsequently providing an incomplete or improper <em>validation</em> letter, <em>constitutes</em> a clear and ongoing violation of my consumer rights. \n\nThis improper and deceptive practice has caused me significant stress and confusion and interfered with my ability to meaningfully address or resolve the alleged."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[24.580181,"13426928"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11823228","_score":24.426104,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"1 ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, filed a lawsuit against me without first verifying or validating the alleged debt as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n2 ) I received no prior written notice of the debt, nor was I provided with information about the creditor or the amount owed within five days of initial contact, as required by law. \n3 ) XXXX has not provided sufficient documentation to establish ownership of the alleged debt or its validity. \n4 ) The original creditor, XXXX XXXX XXXX, failed to offer financial assistance, despite my eligibility under federal and state laws due to my XXXX and XXXX status. \n5 ) ARLs failure to validate the debt, misrepresentation of its ownership, and initiation of legal action without proper documentation constitute deceptive and unfair practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-28T23:39:19.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"686XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11823228","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ARL Credit Services, Inc.","date_received":"2025-01-28T23:18:45.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["1 ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, filed a <em>lawsuit</em> against me <em>without</em> <em>first</em> verifying or <em>validating</em> the alleged <em>debt</em> as required by the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n2 ) I received no prior written notice of the <em>debt</em>, nor was I provided with information about the creditor or the amount owed within five days of initial contact, as required by law. \n3 ) XXXX has not provided sufficient documentation to establish ownership of the alleged <em>debt</em> or its validity. \n4 ) The original creditor,"],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Medical <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[24.426104,"11823228"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14358693","_score":24.37846,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"FDCPA Complaint Silverman Theologou , LLP Subject : Formal Complaint Against Silverman Theologou , LLP for FDCPA Violations ( Debt Collection Abuse ) Date : XX/XX/2025 Dear CFPB/FTC, I am filing this complaint against the law firm Silverman Theologou , LLP, who claim to be representing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in a debt collection lawsuit currently pending in Magisterial District Court in Pennsylvania. \n\nThe amount they are attempting to collect is approximately {$8600.00}, but I have serious concerns about the legality and fairness of their collection practices, specifically their violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \n\nViolations I Am Reporting : 1. Failure to Provide Debt Validation Notice ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) ) Silverman Theologou , LLP never sent me any written notice after their first contact. Instead, the first time I became aware of their involvement was when I received a civil complaint in the mail. They did not notify me in writing of : - The amount of the debt - The name of the original creditor ( XXXX XXXX ) - My right to dispute the debt within 30 days - My right to request verification of the debt This deprives me of the basic right to challenge or validate the debt before being sued. \n\nXXXX. Misrepresentation of Legal Rights Silverman Theologou misrepresented the legitimacy and enforceability of the debt. As far as I am aware, XXXX XXXX charged off the debt, as I accurately disputed the accuracy of owning this debt and I have not received any proof that they lawfully retained collection rights. This omission constitutes misleading representation of the debt 's enforceability. \n\nXXXX. Filing a Lawsuit Without Lawful Standing They initiated a lawsuit without : - Providing debt validation to me- Presenting any evidence of a signed loan agreement - Demonstrating legal standing ( proof of ownership or assignment of debt ) This creates the appearance of abuse of process and bad-faith litigation to intimidate me into paying a debt I may not owe.\n\nDesired Outcome : I respectfully request the CFPB and/or FTC to : - Investigate Silverman Theologou , LLP for the above FDCPA violations- Enforce accountability for abusive legal tactics and consumer deception - Require withdrawal of the lawsuit until proper validation is provided - Help ensure this alleged debt is not reported or collected without compliance with the law Thank you for your time and assistance in helping protect consumers like myself from predatory debt collection practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-29T18:09:17.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"173XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14358693","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Silverman Theologou, LLP","date_received":"2025-06-29T18:00:53.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Filing a <em>Lawsuit</em> <em>Without</em> Lawful Standing They initiated a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> : - Providing <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> to me- Presenting any evidence of a signed loan agreement - Demonstrating legal standing ( proof of ownership or assignment of <em>debt</em> ) This creates the appearance of abuse of process and bad-faith litigation to intimidate me into paying a <em>debt</em> I may not owe."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[24.37846,"14358693"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17455615","_score":22.851442,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a formal complaint against Blitt & Gaines, P.C., a debt collection law firm that has repeatedly attempted to collect on two fraudulent, identity-theft accounts, refused to provide lawful debt validation, and continued to pursue multiple lawsuits against me in bad faith.\n\nBlitt & Gaines first initiated legal action against me in XX/XX/XXXX regarding alleged XXXX XXXX accounts. Prior to receiving this summons, I had never heard from this company. Immediately after being served, I sent them both a Debt Validation Request and a Cease and Desist Notice, instructing them to stop all collection activity until they validated the debt as required under federal law. They ignored this demand and continued their collection efforts without providing the required documentation. \n\nI also notified them that these accounts were listed in my XXXX identity theft police report and are documented in my FTC Identity Theft Report, both of which I submitted to Blitt & Gaines and to the court. Despite having this information, they continued to sue me and even filed a second lawsuit on another identity-theft account without ever validating the first in Missouri. \n\nFurthermore, Blitt & Gaines has misrepresented themselves as attorneys for XX/XX/XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXX, even though neither company confirmed that Blitt & Gaines is their legal counsel. Instead, they are a third-party debt collection company operating under an attorneys name. Their false claim of being the attorney for the creditor was clearly intended to mislead, intimidate, and pressure me into paying accounts that are fraudulent. This constitutes a serious FDCPA violation for deceptive representation. \n\nI raised this issue before the judge, yet it was overruled, despite the clear misrepresentation. I also filed a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that Blitt & Gaines failed to validate the debt and failed to appear in court. Instead of dismissing the case with prejudice, the judge stated that I had been given the wrong court datebut still refused to grant the dismissal. Had I failed to appear, the court would have easily issued a default judgment against me, yet Blitt & Gaines faced no consequences for not appearing and for violating federal law. \n\nAt this point, I have been required to appear in court XXXX times, with another hearing set for XX/XX/XXXX, despite providing every required document, including : Identity theft police report ( XXXX ) FTC Identity Theft Report Debt validation requests Cease and desist notices Proof the accounts are fraudulent Evidence of misrepresentation by Blitt & Gaines Their ongoing actions constitute harassment, intimidation, and unlawful collection tactics.\n\nBlitt & Gaines has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) in the following ways : Attempting to collect and sue on identity-theft accounts with no validation ; Failing to cease collection after receiving written cease and desist ; Filing multiple lawsuits on fraudulent, unverified accounts ; Ignoring police reports and FTC identity-theft documentation ; Misrepresenting themselves as attorneys for XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XXXX ; Using deceptive , misleading, and intimidating tactics to force payment ; Continuing collection activity after written disputes ; Attempting to enforce debts without proof of contract, ownership, or chain of title ; Engaging in frivolous, harassing litigation meant to pressure a consumer. \n\nI respectfully request that the CFPB thoroughly investigate the actions of Blitt & Gaines, P.C., and take appropriate enforcement action to stop their unlawful and abusive practices. I am prepared to provide all evidence, including court filings, correspondence, videos, and written documentation supporting these violations. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-23T17:44:27.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"64119","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17455615","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Blitt and Gaines, P.C.","date_received":"2025-11-23T17:25:56.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Immediately after being served, I sent them both a <em>Debt</em> <em>Validation</em> Request and a Cease and Desist Notice, instructing them to stop all <em>collection</em> activity until they <em>validated</em> the <em>debt</em> as required under federal law. They ignored this demand and continued their <em>collection</em> efforts <em>without</em> providing the required documentation."],"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":[22.851442,"17455615"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3172189","_score":22.660437,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, I received notification through the XXXX XXXX Sheriffs Department concerning a lawsuit by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. After reading over the summons, the only information supplied by this company to the court is an affidavit. Until XX/XX/XXXX, I never heard of this company not to mention had any contact with this company by telephone, mail nor email. I contacted this company the same day to find out what this lawsuit is pertaining to and the female refused to give me any information and I advised her that this court summons do not advise me of anything. She advised me very coldly that they sent me a letter back in XXXX. I asked her could she send me a copy of this letter she advised me that she can put in a request but doubt if it will be approved. I never had any business with this company what so ever. XXXX Associates never notified me in writing or by telephone or email concerning an debt. An Affidavit submitted to the court alone does not constitute that XXXX XXXX own this debt. XXXX XXXX failed to prove the following : 1 ) that it owns this debt ; 2 ) an itemize ledger of what I owe ; and XXXX ) the terms of my account. XXXX XXXX failed to send an Validation Notice to me and allow me the thirty days of the date of the validation notice to dispute the debt. \nThis company went straight to filing a lawsuit without first validating the debt, which violates the following : Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 808. Unfair practices 809. Validation of debts I am asking that this company be investigated because clearly they're not following the FDCPA.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-07T13:39:47.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"36695","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3172189","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Continental Finance Company, LLC","date_received":"2019-03-07T13:39:44.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":"Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This company went straight to filing a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em>, which violates the following : Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act 808. Unfair practices 809. <em>Validation</em> of <em>debts</em> I am asking that this company be investigated because clearly they're not following the FDCPA."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[22.660437,"3172189"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3172188","_score":22.660437,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, I received notification through the XXXX XXXX Sheriffs Department concerning a lawsuit by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. After reading over the summons, the only information supplied by this company to the court is an affidavit. Until XX/XX/XXXX, I never heard of this company not to mention had any contact with this company by telephone, mail nor email. I contacted this company the same day to find out what this lawsuit is pertaining to and the female refused to give me any information and I advised her that this court summons do not advise me of anything. She advised me very coldly that they sent me a letter back in XX/XX/XXXX. I asked her could she send me a copy of this letter she advised me that she can put in a request but doubt if it will be approved. I never had any business with this company what so ever. XXXX XXXX never notified me in writing or by telephone or email concerning an debt. An Affidavit submitted to the court alone does not constitute that XXXX XXXX own this debt. XXXX XXXX failed to prove the following : 1 ) that it owns this debt ; 2 ) an itemize ledger of what I owe ; and 3 ) the terms of my account. XXXX XXXX failed to send an Validation Notice to me and allow me the thirty days of the date of the validation notice to dispute the debt. \nThis company went straight to filing a lawsuit without first validating the debt, which violates the following : Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 808. Unfair practices 809. Validation of debts I am asking that this company be investigated because clearly they're not following the FDCPA.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-07T13:39:41.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"36695","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3172188","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Diverse Funding Associates LLC","date_received":"2019-03-07T13:14:27.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This company went straight to filing a <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> <em>first</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em>, which violates the following : Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act 808. Unfair practices 809. <em>Validation</em> of <em>debts</em> I am asking that this company be investigated because clearly they're not following the FDCPA."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[22.660437,"3172188"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18937685","_score":22.353693,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint against LVNV Funding LLC regarding a collection account that is being illegally reported twice under the same account number ( # XXXX ) for {$1200.00}, with the alleged original creditor listed as XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX tradeline is reported as LVNV FUNDING LLC and the other as LVNV FUNDING ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), both reflecting the exact same balance and account number. This constitutes duplicate reporting, which is inherently inaccurate, misleading, and prohibited under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and XXXX XXXX reporting standards. A single alleged debt may not be furnished multiple times in a manner that inflates or distorts a consumers credit profile. \nIn addition to the duplicate reporting, I never received the required written notice of this debt prior to it being placed on my credit report. This is the first and most serious violation. LVNV failed to provide the mandatory initial notice required under FDCPA 1692g ( a ), depriving me of my right to timely dispute the debt before adverse credit reporting occurred. That violation alone carries statutory damages of up to {$1000.00}, which nearly equals the amount LVNV is attempting to collect. After discovering the account, I formally requested debt validation well over 60 days ago. Despite this, LVNV has continued to report and attempt to collect without providing lawful validation. To date, LVNV has failed to produce a single document demonstrating that this debt is accurate, legally owed, or that LVNV has authority to collect or report it. Proper validation requires, at minimum, the original XXXX XXXX agreement bearing my signature, a complete itemized accounting of the balance, the date of first delinquency, a full chain of title or assignment from XXXX XXXX to LVNV, proof of LVNVs legal authority to collect, and evidence that the required written notice was properly sent and delivered. None of this has been provided.\n\nLVNV Funding is a well-documented junk debt buyer with a long history of consumer lawsuits, regulatory actions, and enforcement proceedings for improper collection practices, including filing lawsuits without proof, mass litigation based on incomplete data, failure to provide validation, and inaccurate credit reporting. The conduct at issue hereduplicate tradeline reporting, failure to send required notice, and continued reporting without validationmirrors the exact unlawful tactics LVNV has repeatedly been cited and sued for nationwide. Continuing to furnish this account in its current form constitutes inaccurate reporting under FCRA 1681e ( b ), failure to conduct a reasonable investigation under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), violations of FDCPA 1692g, and noncompliance with XXXX XXXX accuracy and completeness requirements.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-22T22:15:33.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"070XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18937685","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2026-01-22T22:12:23.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["LVNV Funding is a well-documented junk <em>debt</em> buyer with a long history of consumer <em>lawsuits</em>, regulatory actions, and enforcement proceedings for improper <em>collection</em> practices, including filing <em>lawsuits</em> <em>without</em> proof, mass litigation based on incomplete data, failure to provide <em>validation</em>, and inaccurate credit reporting."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Didn't receive enough information to verify <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[22.353693,"18937685"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7627209","_score":22.121923,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to file a formal complaint against Cavalry SPV I , LLC a debt collector that has been engaged in troubling and unlawful practices in their attempts to collect an alleged debt in the sum of {$2100.00} from me. I have experienced multiple violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and I believe it is crucial to bring these issues to your attention. \n\n1. Lack of Validation : I have sent them several validation of debt letters requesting them to validate the debt but Cavalry SPV I , LLC has failed to provide me with proper validation of the debt as required by the FDCPA. Despite my numerous requests, they have not provided any documentation or evidence that validates the existence and legitimacy of the alleged debt. Instead, they have repeatedly sent account statements without supporting documentation. The balance of the debt is incorrect.\n\n2. Absence of Original Documentation : I have specifically requested that Cavalry SPV I , LLC provide me with the original contract or agreement containing my signature, which is essential for me to assess the accuracy and validity of the debt. They have refused to furnish this documentation.\n\n3. Threats of Legal Action : Cavalry SPV I , LLC has also made threats of legal action against me, including the threat of filing a lawsuit, without first providing the necessary validation of the debt or the required documentation.\n\nThese actions by Cavalry SPV I , LLC not only constitute violations of the FDCPA but also create undue stress and XXXX  for me as a consumer.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-30T05:46:00.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"58104","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7627209","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAVALRY INVESTMENTS, LLC","date_received":"2023-09-30T05:11:46.000Z","state":"ND","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Threats of Legal Action : Cavalry SPV I , LLC has also made threats of legal action against me, including the threat of filing a <em>lawsuit</em>, <em>without</em> <em>first</em> providing the necessary <em>validation</em> of the <em>debt</em> or the required documentation.\n\nThese actions by Cavalry SPV I , LLC not only <em>constitute</em> violations of the FDCPA but also create undue stress and XXXX  for me as a consumer."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[22.121923,"7627209"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14960375","_score":22.091011,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Company Complaining About : Cavalry SPV I , LLC Narrative : I am writing to report what I believe is a widespread pattern of unlawful and abusive debt collection activity by the debt buyer Cavalry SPV I , LLC. \nAs a primary example, Cavalry SPV I , LLC filed a lawsuit against me in XXXX  Superior Court ( Docket # XXXX ) an alleged debt of approximately {$9200.00}. To the best of my knowledge, Cavalry has not provided legally sufficient validation of this debt or clear proof of their legal right to collect on this specific account. \nMy situation appears to be part of a much larger, systemic issue. A review of public records suggests that Cavalry SPV I , LLC has filed thousands of similar lawsuits against consumers in Connecticut and across the country. Their business model seems to rely on suing consumers en masse, often without possessing the proper documentation required to prove their claim in court. \nThis practice of \" sue first, validate later ( or never ) '' appears to be a direct violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and constitutes an Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Act or Practice ( UDAAP ) under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. This tactic harms consumers by clogging the courts with unsubstantiated cases, damaging credit reports, and coercing payments from individuals who are either unable to afford legal representation or are intimidated into default judgments. \nI urge the CFPB to open an investigation into the systemic litigation and validation practices of Cavalry SPV I , LLC to protect countless other consumers from these predatory and potentially unlawful tactics. I am seeking non-monetary relief in the form of a federal investigation and enforcement action against this company.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-13T17:57:20.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"06108","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14960375","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAVALRY INVESTMENTS, LLC","date_received":"2025-07-29T06:01:09.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Their business model seems to rely on suing consumers en masse, often <em>without</em> possessing the proper documentation required to prove their claim in court. \nThis practice of \" sue <em>first</em>, <em>validate</em> later ( or never ) '' appears to be a direct violation of the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and <em>constitutes</em> an Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Act or Practice ( UDAAP ) under the Consumer Financial Protection Act."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Threatened to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[22.091011,"14960375"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18937872","_score":21.599514,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint against Midland Credit Management XXXX Inc. regarding a collection account reported as MIDLAND CRED, with the alleged original creditor listed as XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, account reference # XXXX. This account appeared on my credit report without any prior written notice being sent to me. I was never notified of this alleged debt before it was reported, which is a direct violation of FDCPA 1692g ( a ). I was denied my right to receive notice and dispute the account before it caused damage to my credit.\n\nAfter discovering the account on my credit report, I requested validation well over 60 days ago. Despite that request, Midland has continued to report this collection without providing any real proof that the debt is accurate, that I owe it, or that Midland has the legal right to collect or report it. To date, I have not received a copy of the original XXXX XXXXXXXX agreement, a full itemized breakdown of the balance, the date of first delinquency, proof of assignment or sale of the account from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX to Midland, or proof that any required notice was ever mailed to me. Simply stating that a debt exists or labeling it as verified is not lawful validation. \nMidland Credit Management is a known debt buyer with a documented history of consumer complaints and lawsuits related to improper collection practices, including reporting debts without sufficient documentation and relying on incomplete or inaccurate data. Continuing to report this account without producing verification constitutes inaccurate furnishing under FCRA 1681e ( b ), failure to conduct a reasonable investigation under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), and noncompliance with Metro 2 reporting standards, which require data to be complete, accurate, and verifiable.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-22T22:20:20.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"070XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18937872","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2026-01-22T22:18:03.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Midland Credit Management is a known <em>debt</em> buyer with a documented history of consumer complaints and <em>lawsuits</em> related to improper <em>collection</em> practices, including reporting <em>debts</em> <em>without</em> sufficient documentation and relying on incomplete or inaccurate data."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.599514,"18937872"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19014205","_score":21.598398,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns a systematic \" financial ambush '' and the collection of an illegal, usurious debt by Independence Capital Recovery , LLC ( XXXX  ). In XX/XX/year>, I was served with a lawsuit for a balance of {$16000.00}. This was the first time I was ever contacted by XXXX or notified that my account had been assigned to them. Prior to this lawsuit, I received no dunning letter, no validation notice, and no opportunity to verify the debt as required by 15 U.S.C. 1692g and Regulation F.\n\nThe debt in question is based on a 33 % annual interest rate, which constitutes criminal usury under N.J.S.A. 2C:21-19, which caps interest at 30 % for individuals. Furthermore, because the loan was medical in nature, it is subject to the Louisa Carman Medical Debt Act, which caps interest at 3 %. XXXX is attempting to collect an interest rate that is over ten times the legal limit for medical debt and exceeds the state 's criminal thresholds.\n\nI had been making consistent monthly payments of {$510.00} to the XXXX, XXXX XXXX. These payments were withdrawn automatically from my bank account. At an unknown date, XXXX unilaterally stopped taking these payments without notifying me. I was never given a new address or instructions on where to send payments until I was sued in XX/XX/year>. This \" manufactured default '' and the subsequent surprise lawsuit are unfair and deceptive practices under UDAAP.\n\nI request that the CFPB investigate Independence Capital Recovery for its failure to provide validation notices, its use of \" rent-a-bank '' schemes to evade New Jerseys 3 % and 30 % interest caps, and its practice of suing consumers without providing the notice of assignment required by UCC 12A:9-406 .","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-26T20:03:20.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"077XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19014205","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Independence Capital Recovery, LLC","date_received":"2026-01-26T18:53:03.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This complaint concerns a systematic \" financial ambush '' and the <em>collection</em> of an illegal, usurious <em>debt</em> by Independence Capital Recovery , LLC ( XXXX  ). In XX/XX/year>, I was served with a <em>lawsuit</em> for a balance of {$16000.00}. This was the <em>first</em> time I was ever contacted by XXXX or notified that my account had been assigned to them."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_product":["Medical <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.598398,"19014205"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19557888","_score":21.42961,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Credence Resource Management , LLC, a third-party debt collection agency located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, TX XXXX XXXX for multiple violations of federal consumer protection law. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, Credence placed a collection tradeline on my credit report in the amount of {$3300.00}, allegedly on behalf of XXXX XXXX under account number XXXX. The account is currently reporting as a collection account with a past due balance as of XX/XX/XXXX. Prior to discovering this collection on my credit report, I never received any communication whatsoever from Credence Resource Management no letter, no phone call, no email, no text message, no validation notice, nothing. The first time I became aware of this alleged debt was when I checked my credit report and found the collection already reporting. Credence never sent me the required written validation notice within five days of its initial communication as required by 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In fact, Credence never sent me any notice at all. Despite this, Credence reported the alleged debt to the credit bureaus, which constitutes collection activity without providing validation in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ). By reporting an unvalidated debt as though it were valid and undisputed, Credence also made false and misleading representations in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692e and used unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692f. Additionally, as a furnisher of information, Credence violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by reporting inherently inaccurate information to consumer reporting agencies without first ensuring accuracy or providing the legally required notices under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ). I dispute this alleged debt in its entirety. This unauthorized tradeline has materially damaged my credit score and my ability to obtain credit. I have sent Credence a formal demand letter via certified mail to both their SOS-registered address and their credit report address, disputing the debt and demanding deletion. I have also prepared a lawsuit for filing in XXXX XXXX XXXX, Texas, under the FDCPA, FCRA, Texas Debt Collection Act, and Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-17T16:37:25.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Telecommunications debt","zip_code":"79928","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19557888","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Kriya Capital, LLC","date_received":"2026-02-17T16:34:22.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Credence never sent me the required written <em>validation</em> notice within five days of its initial communication as required by 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) of the Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act. In fact, Credence never sent me any notice at all. Despite this, Credence reported the alleged <em>debt</em> to the credit bureaus, which <em>constitutes</em> <em>collection</em> activity <em>without</em> providing <em>validation</em> in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b )."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_product":["Telecommunications <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.42961,"19557888"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18383836","_score":21.327715,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Midland Credit Management , Inc. ( Midland ) for continuing to report an unverified, duplicated, and inaccurately reported collection account in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), and Metro 2 data-furnishing standards. Midland is reporting the same alleged debt twice under two different furnisher names MIDLAND CRED and MIDLANDCRE both tied to Account # XXXX for {$1600.00}, with the alleged original creditor listed as XXXX XXXX XXXX. This duplicate reporting alone constitutes inaccurate and misleading credit reporting and violates FCRA 607 ( b ) and XXXX XXXX requirements for accuracy, completeness, and consistency. I have disputed this account and requested full validation, yet XXXX has failed to provide a single legally required document, including the original signed credit agreement with XXXX XXXX XXXX, a complete itemized account ledger, proof of ownership or assignment, chain of title, date of first delinquency, date and amount of last payment, or any documentation explaining how the {$1600.00} balance was calculated. Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), Midland is prohibited from continuing collection or credit reporting activity without providing validation, and under FCRA 611 and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), a furnisher may not continue reporting information that can not be verified as accurate. Midland is a well-known junk debt buyer with an extensive history of lawsuits, enforcement actions, and consumer complaints for improper debt collection practices, mass litigation without proof, and inaccurate credit reporting and this account reflects those exact same violations. Reporting the same alleged debt twice under different furnisher names, without validation, is not a clerical issue ; it is systemic misreporting that materially damages my credit profile. Midlands continued reporting of this account, despite disputes and without documentation, demonstrates that no reasonable investigation was ever conducted, and that Midland is knowingly furnishing unverifiable data to the credit bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-30T23:11:15.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"30060","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18383836","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2025-12-30T23:07:56.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Midland is a well-known junk <em>debt</em> buyer with an extensive history of <em>lawsuits</em>, enforcement actions, and consumer complaints for improper <em>debt</em> <em>collection</em> practices, mass litigation <em>without</em> proof, and inaccurate credit reporting and this account reflects those exact same violations. Reporting the same alleged <em>debt</em> twice under different furnisher names, <em>without</em> <em>validation</em>, is not a clerical issue ; it is systemic misreporting that materially damages my credit profile."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.327715,"18383836"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17519693","_score":21.137499,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Portfolio Recovery Associates is knowingly violating FDCPA, FCRA, and XXXX XXXX compliance with the way you are reporting and attempting to collect this alleged debt. After researching your company, I am fully aware of the numerous lawsuits and illegal practices you have been involved in. The first and most obvious violation is that you are reporting the same alleged debt twiceTHE XXXX and XXXX for the exact same balance of {$700.00}. This constitutes duplicate reporting, inaccurate reporting, and a direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ), FDCPA 807 ( 2 ), and XXXX XXXX accuracy requirements. The information is also reporting differently on XXXX and XXXX, proving that the data is inconsistent and unreliable. I also never received any written notice of this debt before it was placed on my credit report, which violates FDCPA 809 ( a ). I have requested validation multiple times, and you have not provided one legally required document. Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), you can not continue collection or furnish information to the credit bureaus without validating the debt. Under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), you are required to investigate disputes and correct or delete any unverifiable, inaccurate, or incomplete information. You have failed to do so. Your company is knowingly reporting unverified information and causing continued harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-26T22:07:25.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"77433","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17519693","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-11-26T21:59:30.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I have requested <em>validation</em> multiple times, and you have not provided one legally required document. Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), you can not continue <em>collection</em> or furnish information to the credit bureaus <em>without</em> <em>validating</em> the <em>debt</em>. Under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ), you are required to investigate disputes and correct or delete any unverifiable, inaccurate, or incomplete information. You have failed to do so. Your company is knowingly reporting unverified information and causing continued harm."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[21.137499,"17519693"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11825498","_score":20.97646,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Entities Being Reported for Violations : Primary Company : Discover Bank Discover Bank XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Debt Collection Law Firm : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Complaint Categories : 1 ) Incorrect information on credit report ( FCRA violation ) 2 ) Improper debt collection practices ( FDCPA violation ) 3 ) Lack of proper debt validation 4 ) Unlawful lawsuit without arbitration ( Violation of Discovers Arbitration Agreement ) 5 ) Failure to issue IRS 1099-C for charged-off debt Details of the Complaint : I am filing this complaint against Discover Bank & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for engaging in unlawful debt collection practices, improper credit reporting, and violating federal financial laws.\n\n1 Illegal Charge-Off Reporting While No Longer Owning the Debt ( FCRA Violation 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) : Discover charged off this debt, sold it, but still reports a balance instead of {$0.00}, misleading credit bureaus. \nUnder FCRA, a creditor can not report ownership of a debt that has been transferred to a third party.\n\n2 Unlawful Lawsuit Without Arbitration ( Breach of Discovers Own Agreement ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX sued me on behalf of Discover Bank, even though Discovers own contract states that any dispute must go through arbitration first. \nDiscover Bank violated their own arbitration clause, making the lawsuit illegally filed. \nA motion to vacate the judgment is being prepared, citing breach of contract.\n\n3 Debt Collection Without Validation ( FDCPA Violation 15 U.S.C. 809 ( b ) ) : I requested full debt validation before any lawsuit was filed. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX provided no chain of ownership, no forward flow agreement, and no proof Discover even had legal rights to sue. \nThe only response was billing statements, which do not constitute legal validation under FDCPA.\n\n4 Securitization Fraud SEC Violation ( Based on SEC 10-K Filings ) Discover securitized this debt, meaning they sold it into a trust and no longer own it. \nDespite this, Discover falsely claims ownership and still reports the balance on my credit.\n\nSEC 10-K evidence attached proving Discover Bank engaged in securitization and misrepresented its standing.\n\n5 IRS Violation Failure to Issue 1099-C for Charged-Off Debt If a creditor charges off a debt, they are required by law to issue an IRS 1099-C for the canceled amount.\n\nDiscover Bank failed to do so, meaning they have not complied with IRS rules ( 26 U.S.C. 6050P ).\n\nA Form 3949-A complaint has been filed with the IRS to report Discover Bank for non-compliance. \n\nSupporting Documents Attached : A ) Credit Report ( Showing Incorrect Charge-Off Reporting ) B ) Debt Validation Request & Response from Discover ( Lack of Proof ) C ) Discovers Arbitration Agreement ( Proving Lawsuit Shouldnt Have Been Filed ) D ) SEC 10-K Extract ( Proving Securitization ) E ) IRS Form 3949-A Reference Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX ) SEC 10-K Filing Compliant Reference Number XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-29T21:51:05.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"60653","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11825498","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2025-01-29T21:21:38.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["A motion to vacate the judgment is being prepared, citing breach of contract.\n\n3 <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> <em>Without</em> <em>Validation</em> ( FDCPA Violation 15 U.S.C. 809 ( b ) ) : I requested full <em>debt</em> <em>validation</em> before any <em>lawsuit</em> was filed. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX provided no chain of ownership, no forward flow agreement, and no proof Discover even had legal rights to sue."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"issue":["Written notification about <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Didn't receive enough information to verify <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[20.97646,"11825498"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16328489","_score":20.517212,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Formal Complaint Regarding Unlicensed, Harassing, and Deceptive Debt Collection Practices I am writing to file a formal complaint regarding a series of unlawful actions by a debt collection company. The following is a detailed chronology of events. \n\nI. Chronology of Events and Violations This complaint details a pattern of unlawful debt collection activity, including operating without a required state license, making threats of legal action it may not be authorized to take, and failing to respect formal debt validation disputes and cease-and-desist demands.\n\nA. The Debt Collector 's Initial Communications and Inherent Violation The debt collector initiated collection efforts on two separate accounts it had purchased. The initial notices, while containing some validation-of-rights language, were the first step in an unlicensed collection campaign directed at a resident of a state that requires mandatory licensure for debt collectors.\n\nThe first account, associated with an original creditor from the banking sector, was referenced in a communication dated XX/XX/year>. \n\nThe second account, associated with a different major banking original creditor, was referenced in a communication dated XX/XX/year>. \n\nCrucially, this debt collector is not licensed to collect debts in my state of residence, as verifiable through my state 's official licensing database. Engaging in collection activity without this mandatory license is a direct violation of my state 's statutes. Every communication sent to my address constitutes a separate violation of state law. \n\nB. Escalation to Threats of Litigation On or about XX/XX/year>, the collector escalated its unlawful campaign by sending a collection letter for one of the accounts, prominently titled \" ATTORNEY REVIEW PLANNED. '' This letter stated, in substance : \" If you do not reply, we plan on sending your account to an attorney in your state... We intend to have a lawsuit filed against you. '' It demanded payment by XX/XX/year>. \n\nThis threat is deceptive and abusive under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 5 ) & ( 10 ), for several reasons : An entity that is not licensed to collect debts in a state often lacks the legal standing to lawfully initiate a lawsuit through an attorney in that state 's courts for its own benefit as the current owner of the debt. \n\nThe threat implies a legal action is imminent and inevitable, which is deceptive if the collector knows it can not legally file suit due to its unlicensed status or if it has no actual intention of doing so. \n\nThis communication was an attempt to collect a debt without the legal authority to do so, an unfair practice under 15 U.S.C. 1692f.\n\nC. My Formal Response and Assertion of Rights In response to the collector 's unlawful collection campaign and threats, I took the following corrective and legally prescribed actions : Formal Debt Validation Disputes : On XX/XX/year>, I sent two comprehensive debt validation letters to the collector via certified mail, pursuant to my rights under 15 U.S.C. 1692g. \n\nThese letters formally disputed the debts and demanded specific documentation to prove the debts ' validity, the collector 's legal ownership, and its authority to collect in my state. The collector was given 30 days to provide this verification and was instructed to cease all collection activity pending fulfillment of this request. \n\nCease and Desist Demand : On XX/XX/year>, I sent a separate, firm Cease and Desist letter to the collector 's Legal Department via certified mail. \n\nThis letter explicitly cited the collector 's unlicensed status in my state as a primary violation. \n\nIt demanded that the collector provide proof of its state license or proof of engagement with a state-licensed attorney within 14 days. \n\nIt formally demanded that the collector \" cease all collection activities, '' including litigation threats and credit reporting, effective immediately. \n\nThe letter also served as a formal demand for relief under my state 's consumer protection statute regarding unfair and deceptive practices. \n\nII. Summary of Violations The collector 's actions constitute multiple, willful violations of federal and state law : Unlicensed Collection : All collection activity, from the first letter to the most recent threat, is illegal due to the collector 's unlicensed status in a state that requires it.\n\nFalse, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations ( FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692e ) : Threatening a lawsuit in a state while unlicensed is deceptive and misleading.\n\nHarassing, Oppressive, or Abusive Conduct ( FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692d ) : The threat of baseless legal action to coerce payment is abusive.\n\nUnfair or Unconscionable Means to Collect ( FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692f ) : Using the threat of the legal system as a tool without the legal standing to do so is unfair.\n\nFailure to Validate Debt Before Continuing Collection ( FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) : The \" Attorney Review Planned '' letter, dated XX/XX/year>, is a clear continuation of collection activity. My formal disputes, sent on XX/XX/year>, now legally obligate the collector to cease all collection until it provides verification. Its prior threat is a violation of this spirit, and any further action before validation would be a direct violation. \n\nIII. Request for Assistance I have taken all reasonable steps to resolve this directly with the collector by formally disputing the debts and demanding it cease its illegal activity. The collector has instead chosen to escalate its threats with a deadline for \" pre-legal '' action of XX/XX/year>. \n\nI request that the CFPB investigate this debt collector for its apparent unlicensed debt collection activities and its deceptive and abusive threats of litigation. My goal is to secure my rights as a consumer and compel this company to comply with the law. Its unlicensed status and deceptive threats have caused significant distress, and it must be compelled to cease all collection activity. \n\nI will provide any specific account numbers or personal information directly to the CFPB upon request to facilitate this investigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-02T15:18:11.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"02301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16328489","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2025-10-02T15:08:10.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Crucially, this <em>debt</em> collector is not licensed to collect <em>debts</em> in my state of residence, as verifiable through my state 's official licensing database. Engaging in <em>collection</em> activity <em>without</em> this mandatory license is a direct violation of my state 's statutes. Every communication sent to my address <em>constitutes</em> a separate violation of state law. \n\nB."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Threatened to sue you for very old <em>debt</em>"]},"sort":[20.517212,"16328489"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17317466","_score":20.453783,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX. ) Overview I am submitting this complaint against Navy Federal Credit Union and its legal counsel, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, for repeated procedural and regulatory violations arising from debt collection and litigation activity conducted in the State of Hawaii. \nAlthough Navy Federal Credit Union is a federally chartered credit union under the Federal Credit Union Act ( 12 U.S.C. 1751 et seq. ), its actions and those of its counsel appear to violate federal consumer protection laws and state-level obligations concerning transparency, identity representation, and fair business practices. \n\nXXXX. ) Background Summary XXXX. First Lawsuit Filed : XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( First XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Filed XX/XX/year> by Navy Federal Credit Unions counsel, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nPlaintiff relied on outdated contract exhibits and failed to comply with the contractual Notice of Claim clause required before initiating litigation. \nThe case was dismissed without prejudice on XX/XX/year> after Plaintiff failed to appear. \nXXXX. Refiling of Lawsuit : Navy Federal Credit Union refiled on XX/XX/year> under a new case number XXXX, abbreviated its name to NFCU , and again failed to provide the pre-litigation Notice of Claim or to disclose the related prior case in the courts docket. \nAs of XX/XX/year>, the case remains unserved. \nXXXX. Debt Validation Efforts : I sent a Debt Validation Request via certified mail on XX/XX/year> to Navy Federal Credit Unions Office of General Counsel, referencing the alleged charged-off account. \nNavy Federal Credit Union failed to validate the debt as required by 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) and 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2, instead sending an email improperly redirecting the matter as a credit bureau dispute .\n\nA Final Notice and Continuation Letter was mailed on XX/XX/year>, delivered XX/XX/year>. \nNavy Federal Credit Union later sent a letter dated XX/XX/year>, acknowledging the cease-and-desist portion but ignoring the validation demand. \n4. Credit Reporting and Adverse Action : On XX/XX/year>, my XXXX  credit file was accessed by a lender for a home equity application. \nNavy Federal Credit Unions tradeline remains unvalidated and undisputed, lacking the required account in dispute notation under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ). \nThis omission directly contributed to an adverse credit decision. \nCredit reporting continues without annotation of account being disputed as of XX/XX/year>. \n\n3. ) Legal and Regulatory Concerns A. Federal Violations 1. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) Navy Federal Credit Union continued or initiated collection and litigation without providing validation of the alleged debt. \n2. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and update reporting with disputed status after receiving formal notice.\n\n3. Federal Credit Union Act ( 12 U.S.C. 1757 ( 2 ) ) As a federally chartered credit union, Navy Federal Credit Union has the power to sue and be sued. \nHowever, misidentification of its legal name ( NFCU ) and absence of state registration transparency undermine compliance with this statutory authorization. \n4. Rule 11, Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure The law firms decision to refile without curing known defects constitutes an abuse of process and frivolous pleading subject to sanctions. \n\nB. State-Level Violations 1. XXXX  Revised Statutes ( HRS ) 480-2 Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices ( UDAP ) : Filing and refiling procedurally defective lawsuits against consumers without verifying contractual or statutory prerequisites constitutes unfair and deceptive conduct. \n2. HRS 443B-3 Collection Agency Licensing : The law firms debt collection activities on behalf of a creditor may trigger licensing requirements ; their status should be verified.\n\n3. HRS 607-14.5 & HRCP Rule 11 : Frivolous filings or abuse of process by attorneys may subject them to attorneys fees and sanctions.\n\n4. Failure to Register or Disclose Entity Identity ( DCCA ) : The XXXX  XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) database shows no registration for Navy Federal Credit Union or NFCU. \nThis lack of disclosure raises questions about its authority to bring legal action in the state under HRCP Rule 9 ( a ) and Rule 17 ( a ) ( real party in interest ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-19T06:24:10.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"96707","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17317466","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-11-19T05:54:02.000Z","state":"HI","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Credit reporting continues <em>without</em> annotation of account being disputed as of XX/XX/year>. \n\n3. ) Legal and Regulatory Concerns A. Federal Violations 1. Fair <em>Debt</em> <em>Collection</em> Practices Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) Navy Federal Credit Union continued or initiated <em>collection</em> and litigation <em>without</em> providing <em>validation</em> of the alleged <em>debt</em>. \n2."],"product":["<em>Debt</em> <em>collection</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit card <em>debt</em>"],"sub_issue":["Sued you <em>without</em> properly notifying you of <em>lawsuit</em>"]},"sort":[20.453783,"17317466"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19223931","_score":20.438519,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Oliphant USA LLC and Accelerated Inventory Management\n\nfor systematic violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. and Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.\n\nThese violations include : Collection agency reporting for 2.5+ years without ever contacting consumer Court dismissal for failure to serve proving lack of correct contact information Continued collection during validation period Filing and prosecuting lawsuit without providing requested validation Abandoning lawsuit after validation request rather than prove the debt Continuing to report dismissed debt as valid Inflating debt amount without itemization BACKGROUND : As a pro se litigant with extensive experience defending debt collection lawsuits, I have successfully obtained dismissals in three separate cases within the past seven months : XXXX XXXX - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXXXXXX Accelerated Inventory Management - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXX These dismissals demonstrate a pattern : debt buyers and their collection agencies systematically lack proper documentation to substantiate the debts they purchase and report to credit bureaus.\n\nPART 1 : OLIPHANT USA LLC - REPORTING WITHOUT CONSUMER CONTACT ACCOUNT INFORMATION : Company : Oliphant USA LLC Account Number : XXXX Amount Reported : {$24000.00} Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX  Date Assigned : XX/XX/XXXX Current Reporting Status : Collection account ( as of XX/XX/XXXX ) Consumer Contact from Oliphant : XXXX - NEVER CONTACTED TIMELINE : XX/XX/XXXX : Oliphant begins reporting collection account to credit bureaus XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX : 2 years, 8 months of continuous credit reporting Total Communications Received from Oliphant : XXXX No validation notice. No collection letter. No phone call. No email. No text message. Nothing.\n\nVIOLATION # 1 : FDCPA 809 ( a ) - FAILURE TO SEND VALIDATION NOTICE The Law : FDCPA 809 ( a ) requires debt collectors to send a written validation notice within five days of the initial communication with a consumer. The notice must contain : The amount of the debt The name of the creditor A statement that unless the consumer disputes the debt within 30 days, it will be assumed valid A statement that if the consumer disputes in writing within 30 days, the collector will obtain verification A statement that upon written request, the collector will provide the name and address of the original creditor The Violation : I have NEVER received ANY communication from Oliphant USA LLC. For 2 years and 8 months, Oliphant has been reporting a {$24000.00} collection account to credit bureaus without ever sending me the required validation notice or making any contact attempt.\n\nLegal Issue - Reporting to Credit Bureaus as \" Communication '' : Courts have recognized that furnishing information to credit reporting agencies constitutes a \" communication '' under the FDCPA. See XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). \nIf reporting to credit bureaus is Oliphant 's first communication with me, they were required to send a validation notice within 5 days of beginning to report. They never did.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) Violation : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) provides specific requirements for debt collectors who furnish information to credit reporting agencies. A debt collector may only report if they comply with all FDCPA requirements, including the validation notice requirement.\n\nBy reporting without sending the required validation notice, Oliphant violated both FDCPA 809 ( a ) and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ).\n\nVIOLATION # 2 : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - FURNISHING INACCURATE INFORMATION The Court Dismissal Proves Inaccurate Reporting : On XX/XX/XXXX, the County Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit ( XXXX XXXX , Florida ) dismissed Accelerated Inventory Management 's lawsuit against me for \" failure to effectuate service. '' Case Information : Case Number : XXXX Plaintiff : Accelerated Inventory Management , LLC Defendant : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dismissal Date : XX/XX/XXXX Reason : Failure to effectuate service ( plaintiff could not properly serve defendant ) What This Proves About Oliphant : Oliphant USA LLC operates as the collection agency for Accelerated Inventory Management. This is documented through my research and is the reason Oliphant has been reporting this debt on Accelerated 's behalf since XX/XX/XXXX. \nThe failure to serve reveals a critical problem : Oliphant has been reporting my debt for 2.5+ years, yet when their principal ( Accelerated ) needed my address to serve legal papers, they apparently could not provide adequate information for service.\n\nThis proves one of two scenarios : Scenario A : Oliphant Never Had Correct Contact Information Oliphant has been reporting a debt with incorrect or incomplete consumer identification Oliphant may be reporting about the wrong person Oliphant 's reporting violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) accuracy requirement How can information be \" accurate '' when they don't have correct contact details?\n\nScenario B : Oliphant Had Correct Information But Never Used It Oliphant possessed my contact information but never contacted me ( proving 809 ( a ) violation ) Oliphant failed to provide this information to Accelerated for service This demonstrates systemic breakdown in basic collection practices Proves Oliphant is not a functioning collection agency, merely a credit reporting entity Either scenario constitutes a violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - reporting inaccurate information - and FDCPA 809 ( a ) - failing to contact consumer before reporting.\n\nTHE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OLIPHANT AND ACCELERATED : Through research, I have confirmed that Oliphant USA LLC operates as a collection agency on behalf of debt buyers, including Accelerated Inventory Management. This means : Accelerated owns the debt ( purchased from XXXX via XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Oliphant collects on Accelerated 's behalf Oliphant is acting as a \" debt collector '' under FDCPA 803 ( 6 ) This relationship makes Oliphant 's violations even more egregious. Professional collection agencies exist specifically to locate and contact consumers. Yet Oliphant has : Reported for 2.5+ years without contact Failed to provide adequate information for legal service Destroyed my credit without ever attempting to communicate This is not legitimate debt collection - this is credit terrorism.\n\nPART 2 : ACCELERATED INVENTORY MANAGEMENT - COLLECTION DURING VALIDATION PERIOD ACCOUNT INFORMATION : Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX Original Amount : {$21000.00} ( per XXXX credit report ) Accelerated 's Claimed Amount : {$23000.00} ( per dunning letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ) Oliphant 's Reported Amount : {$24000.00} ( per credit report dated XX/XX/XXXX ) COMPLETE TIMELINE : XX/XX/XXXX : Accelerated Inventory Management purchases XXXX debt ( via XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, serviced by XXXX ). Accelerated hires Oliphant USA LLC as collection agency. \nXX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( law firm ) sends dunning letter on my behalf of Accelerated Inventory Management : States debt is owed to \" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX serviced by XXXX '' Amount claimed : {$23000.00} This is the first and only communication I have received regarding this alleged debt XX/XX/XXXX : Accelerated Inventory Management ( via XXXX XXXX  ) files collection lawsuit against me in XXXX XXXX Court ( Case No . XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX : I send debt validation letter to Accelerated Inventory Management via certified mail, specifically invoking FDCPA 809 ( b ) and requesting : Proof of ownership ( bill of sale, assignment documents ) Complete chain of custody ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Original loan agreement bearing my signature Complete account statements showing how debt was calculated Accelerated 's license to collect debts in Florida Itemization and verification of amount ( {$23000.00} ) XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX : Accelerated continues prosecuting the lawsuit without providing any validation whatsoever ( 77 days of continued collection during validation period ) XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX dismisses Accelerated 's lawsuit. Order states : \" The case is dismissed without prejudice for failing to effectuate service. '' XX/XX/XXXX- Present : Despite the dismissal, Oliphant ( on behalf of Accelerated ) continues reporting the debt to credit bureaus as valid and collectible.\n\nVIOLATION # 3 : FDCPA 809 ( b ) - COLLECTION DURING VALIDATION PERIOD The Law : FDCPA 809 ( b ) states : \" If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection ( a ) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. '' Key Requirements : Upon receiving written dispute/validation request, debt collector must CEASE collection Obtain verification of the debt Mail verification to consumer Only then may resume collection Accelerated 's Clear Violation : After receiving my validation letter on XX/XX/XXXX, Accelerated was legally required to : STOP prosecuting the lawsuit ( litigation is a collection activity per FDCPA ) Obtain verification of the debt Provide that verification to me Only resume collection after providing verification Instead, Accelerated : Continued prosecuting the lawsuit for 77 days ( XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX ) Never provided any validation Never responded to my validation letter Eventually had the case dismissed for failure to serve This is a textbook violation of FDCPA 809 ( b ).\n\nLegal Precedent : Courts have consistently held that prosecuting a lawsuit after receiving a validation request violates 809 ( b ). See XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( continuing lawsuit after validation request violates FDCPA ).\n\nThe fact that the lawsuit was ultimately dismissed for procedural reasons ( failure to serve ) does not excuse the substantive FDCPA violation of continuing collection during the validation period.\n\nVIOLATION # 4 : FDCPA 807 ( 5 ) - THREATENING/TAKING LEGAL ACTION WITHOUT PROPER STANDING The Law : FDCPA 807 ( 5 ) prohibits : \" The threat to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. '' The Violation : Accelerated filed and prosecuted a lawsuit but : Could not provide validation when requested Could not properly serve me with legal papers Eventually dismissed rather than present evidence Never re-filed despite dismissal being \" without prejudice '' The Dismissal for Failure to Serve is Highly Significant : After a case is dismissed for failure to serve, the plaintiff has the option to : Re-file the lawsuit Attempt proper service using alternative methods Hire a professional process server Continue pursuing the debt through litigation Accelerated did NONE of these things.\n\nThe most logical explanation : After receiving my validation letter on XX/XX/XXXX, Accelerated reviewed their files and discovered they lack the documentation necessary to prove the debt. Rather than : Provide the requested validation Attempt proper service and face my validation defense Risk sanctions for filing without proper documentation They chose to abandon the lawsuit entirely.\n\nThis proves the lawsuit was either : A. Filed Without Proper Documentation Accelerated filed suit hoping I wouldn't defend When challenged with validation request, they couldn't produce evidence Gave up rather than face adverse ruling B. Filed to Intimidate Without Intent to Prosecute Lawsuit was threat tactic only Never intended to actually prove the debt Violates 807 ( 5 ) ( threatening action not intended to take ) C. Filed Without Proper Standing Accelerated doesn't actually own the debt Couldn't prove ownership for service Filed frivolously All three scenarios constitute violations of FDCPA 807 ( 5 ).\n\nVIOLATION # 5 : FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) - FALSE REPRESENTATION OF DEBT VALIDITY The Law : FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) prohibits : \" The false representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt. '' Multiple False Representations : A. Continuing to Report After Dismissal After the lawsuit was dismissed on XX/XX/XXXX, Accelerated ( through Oliphant ) continues reporting the debt as valid and collectible. The dismissal demonstrates : They could not prove the debt ( couldn't even serve papers ) They lack proper documentation The debt 's validity is highly questionable Continuing to report a debt as valid after abandoning a lawsuit due to inability to substantiate it constitutes false representation.\n\nB. Amount Inflation Without Itemization Three different amounts have been claimed for this same alleged debt : XXXX original : {$21000.00} Accelerated 's claim ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : {$23000.00} ( + {$1700.00} increase = 7.9 % ) Oliphant 's report ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : {$24000.00} ( + {$2100.00} increase = 10.1 % ) No itemization has been provided explaining : Where did the extra {$2100.00} come from?\n\nIs it interest? At what rate? From what date?\n\nIs it collection fees? What fees are legally authorized?\n\nIs it attorney fees? On what basis?\n\nClaiming inflated amounts without explanation violates FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( B ) - false representation of amount owed.\n\nC. False Representation of Legal Authority By filing a lawsuit but failing to effectuate service, Accelerated falsely represented that they had : Proper documentation to prove the debt Legal standing to sue Correct consumer information for service Intent to prosecute the case to judgment The dismissal and subsequent abandonment prove these representations were false.\n\nVIOLATION # 6 : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - FURNISHING INACCURATE INFORMATION AFTER DISMISSAL The Law : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) requires furnishers to provide accurate information to credit reporting agencies.\n\nThe Violation : After the following events : Receiving my validation request ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Failing to provide any validation Having their lawsuit dismissed ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Abandoning the case rather than re-file Demonstrating inability to prove the debt Accelerated ( through Oliphant ) continues furnishing information that the debt is valid, accurate, and owed. This is inaccurate information because : The debt could not be validated The lawsuit was dismissed No verification was provided despite written request They abandoned legal action rather than prove the debt Courts have held that reporting unverified debts violates FCRA accuracy requirements. When a creditor or debt collector can not substantiate a debt, continuing to report it as valid is inaccurate per se.\n\nPART 3 : PATTERN OF SYSTEMATIC VIOLATIONS THREE DISMISSED LAWSUITS IN SEVEN MONTHS : This is not an isolated incident. I have successfully defended three debt collection lawsuits in the past seven months, all resulting in dismissals : 1. XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX  ) - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXX Amount : {$5000.00} XXXX  filed lawsuit I defended pro se XXXX  could not substantiate debt Court dismissed 2. Accelerated Inventory Management ( XXXX debt ) - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXX Amount : {$23000.00} Accelerated filed lawsuit I sent validation letter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Accelerated continued without validation Court dismissed for failure to serve Accelerated abandoned rather than re-file 3. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  debt ) - DISMISSED XX/XX/XXXX Amount : {$14000.00} XXXX  filed lawsuit I defended pro se XXXX  could not substantiate debt Court dismissed This Pattern Demonstrates : Debt buyers systematically purchase debts without proper documentation They file lawsuits hoping consumers won't defend When challenged with validation requests or defenses, they can not produce evidence They dismiss or abandon cases rather than face adverse rulings Yet they continue reporting these unvalidated debts to credit bureaus Accelerated Inventory Management and Oliphant USA LLC are part of this systemic problem of purchasing and reporting debts without proper documentation or legal standing.\n\nPART 4 : THE DOUBLE REPORTING VIOLATION XXXX XXXX CONTINUES REPORTING AFTER SALE : Adding to the violations by Oliphant and Accelerated, the original creditor ( XXXX XXXX ) continues to report this same debt, creating double reporting : Current Credit Report Shows : XXXX : {$21000.00} charge-off, notation : \" Purchased by another lender - ACCELERATED INVENTORY MGT '' Oliphant ( for Accelerated ) : {$24000.00} collection account This Is The Same Debt Reported Twice : Same original creditor ( XXXX ) XXXX admits selling to Accelerated Oliphant is Accelerated 's collection agency Timeline matches ( both from XXXX ) The Combined Impact : Instead of one negative tradeline for this alleged debt, I have TWO : XXXXXXXX XXXX charge-off : {$21000.00} Oliphant 's collection : {$24000.00} Total false debt reporting : {$45000.00} ( 107 % inflation ) This creates : Double credit score damage False appearance of multiple debts Debt-to-income ratio falsely inflated Credit denials based on inaccurate totals FCRA Violation : When a debt is sold, only ONE entity may report it : Original creditor ( with {$0.00} balance showing \" sold/transferred '' ), OR Current owner/collector Not both. \nXXXX admits they sold the debt ( \" Purchased by another lender '' ) yet continues reporting the charge-off. This violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( duty to update after sale ) and creates double reporting in violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).\n\nHARM SUFFERED 1. Credit Devastation Oliphant 's {$24000.00} collection account tradeline has destroyed my credit profile : Major negative impact on credit score Combined with double reporting from XXXX ( {$21000.00} ), appears as {$45000.00} in bad debt Two separate negative tradelines for one alleged debt Exponential damage to credit score 2. Credit Denials and Unfavorable Terms Due to these inaccurate tradelines, I have : Been denied credit applications citing \" multiple collection accounts '' Received unfavorable interest rates on approved credit Been denied housing applications Suffered higher insurance premiums Been unable to obtain favorable financing terms 3. Professional Embarrassment As someone who has successfully defended multiple debt collection lawsuits, having my credit destroyed by unvalidated debts reported by collectors who never contacted me is professionally humiliating and undermines my credibility.\n\n4. Time and Resources Expended As a pro se litigant, I have spent : Hundreds of hours researching FDCPA and FCRA law Significant time defending Accelerated 's frivolous lawsuit Resources on court filing fees, certified mail, document preparation Lost work time attending court hearings Countless hours disputing these accounts with credit bureaus 5. Emotional Distress The stress of : Defending a lawsuit on an unvalidated debt Having my credit destroyed by a collector who never contacted me Being forced to spend time and resources on frivolous collection efforts Watching my credit score plummet due to inaccurate reporting Professional damage and personal embarrassment 6. Ongoing Harm Despite the lawsuit dismissal, both Oliphant and XXXX continue reporting these accounts as valid. The harm is ongoing and will continue until these violations are corrected.\n\nREQUESTED RELIEF IMMEDIATE ACTIONS REQUIRED : 1. DELETION OF OLIPHANT TRADELINE Immediate and permanent deletion of Oliphant USA LLC 's tradeline ( Account # XXXX, {$24000.00} ) from all three credit bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX  ) Updated credit reports showing deletion within 15 days Confirmation that deletion is permanent and will not be re-inserted 2. DELETION OF XXXX XXXX TRADELINE Immediate deletion or update to {$0.00} balance with \" Sold/Transferred '' notation XXXX admits selling the debt and must stop reporting per FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) Eliminate double reporting violation 3. CEASE AND DESIST ALL COLLECTION ACTIVITIES Oliphant must cease all credit reporting activities Accelerated must cease all collection activities on this alleged debt Neither may sell, transfer, or reassign this debt to another entity Neither may re-file lawsuit or make any further collection attempts 4. INVESTIGATION BY CFPB Full investigation into : Oliphant 's systematic practice of reporting consumer debts for years without ever contacting consumers or sending validation notices Accelerated 's systematic practice of continuing collection during validation periods and filing lawsuits without proper documentation Both companies ' practices of reporting dismissed debts as valid Review of their entire portfolios for similar violations affecting other consumers MONETARY RELIEF REQUESTED : 5. STATUTORY DAMAGES UNDER FDCPA 813 ( a ) Statutory damages up to {$1000.00} per violation : Against Oliphant USA LLC : FDCPA 809 ( a ) violation ( no validation notice for 2.5+ years ) = {$1000.00} FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) violation ( reporting without FDCPA compliance ) = {$1000.00} FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) violation ( inaccurate reporting/wrong contact info ) = {$1000.00} Against Accelerated Inventory Management : FDCPA 809 ( b ) violation ( collection during validation period ) = {$1000.00} FDCPA 807 ( 5 ) violation ( lawsuit without proper standing ) = {$1000.00} FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) violation ( false representation after dismissal ) = {$1000.00} FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) violation ( continued reporting after dismissal ) = {$1000.00} Minimum Total Statutory Damages : {$7000.00} 6. ACTUAL DAMAGES Compensation for : Credit denials and lost credit opportunities Higher interest rates paid on approved credit ( quantifiable ) Higher insurance premiums due to credit-based pricing Housing denials and higher security deposits Litigation costs defending frivolous lawsuit ( filing fees, certified mail, etc. ) Lost work time ( hundreds of hours at reasonable hourly rate ) Emotional distress and mental anguish Professional harm and reputational damage 7. ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS Under FDCPA 813 ( a ) ( 3 ), even pro se litigants may recover reasonable attorney fees. I request compensation for the substantial time spent : Researching FDCPA and FCRA violations Preparing validation letters and court defenses Defending frivolous lawsuit Preparing this complaint Disputing with credit bureaus CORRECTIVE ACTIONS REQUIRED : 8. POLICY CHANGES AT OLIPHANT USA LLC Require Oliphant to implement : Mandatory consumer contact before any credit reporting Verification that validation notice was sent and received before reporting Quality control to ensure accurate consumer contact information Prohibition on \" reporting only '' collection strategies Regular audits of reported accounts for FDCPA compliance 9. POLICY CHANGES AT ACCELERATED INVENTORY MANAGEMENT Require Accelerated to implement : Immediate cessation of all collection upon receiving validation requests Prohibition on filing lawsuits during validation periods Documentation review before filing lawsuits to ensure proper standing Mandatory validation responses within 30 days Deletion of accounts from credit reports when lawsuits are dismissed 10. INDUSTRY-WIDE REVIEW CFPB review of debt buyer practices regarding validation and documentation Investigation of \" collection by credit reporting '' strategies that avoid consumer contact Review of lawsuit practices by debt buyers Enforcement actions against systematic violators 11. ACCOUNTABILITY AND DETERRENCE Public enforcement action against both companies Referral to Florida Attorney General for state consumer protection violations Referral to FTC for systematic FDCPA violations Civil penalties to deter future violations Required compliance monitoring for both companies SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION I can provide upon request : 1. Court Dismissal Order - Accelerated Inventory Management Case No. XXXX Order dated XX/XX/XXXX Judge : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reason : Failure to effectuate service THIS DOCUMENT IS ATTACHED 2. Debt Validation Letter to Accelerated Dated XX/XX/XXXX Sent via certified mail Invoking FDCPA 809 ( b ) Requesting complete verification 3. Certified Mail Receipt Proof Accelerated received validation letter Establishes timeline for 809 ( b ) violation 4. Dunning Letter from XXXX XXXX  Dated XX/XX/XXXX Shows amount claimed ( {$23000.00} ) Only communication received regarding this debt 5. Credit Reports Showing Oliphant tradeline ( Account # XXXX, {$24000.00} ) Showing XXXX  tradeline ( {$21000.00} with \" Purchased by another lender '' notation ) Proving double reporting of same debt Showing 2.5+ years of Oliphant reporting 6. Evidence of No Contact from Oliphant Phone records showing no calls from Oliphant Email records showing no emails from Oliphant Postal records showing no mail from Oliphant 2.5+ years of zero communication 7. Other Court Dismissals XXXX XXXX  dismissal ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Velocity Investments dismissal ( XX/XX/XXXX ) Demonstrating pattern of debt buyer validation failures 8. Credit Denial Letters Letters citing \" multiple collection accounts '' Letters citing \" derogatory tradelines '' Evidence of harm caused by inaccurate reporting 9. Amount Discrepancy Documentation XXXX  : {$21000.00} XXXX  XXXX letter : {$23000.00} Oliphant report : {$24000.00} No itemization explaining increases CONCLUSION This complaint presents clear, documented, and systematic violations of federal consumer protection law by both Oliphant USA LLC and Accelerated Inventory Management.\n\nOLIPHANT 'S VIOLATIONS : For 2 years and 8 months, Oliphant has been reporting a {$24000.00} collection account to credit bureaus, destroying my credit profile, without EVER contacting me once. Not a single letter, phone call, email, or validation notice. This violates the most fundamental requirement of the FDCPA - that debt collectors must send a validation notice within 5 days of initial communication.\n\nThe dismissal of Accelerated 's lawsuit for \" failure to effectuate service '' proves Oliphant either : Never had correct contact information ( making their reporting inaccurate ) Had correct information but never used it ( proving they never contacted me ) Either way, Oliphant can not accurately report a debt for 2.5+ years without having basic, verified consumer contact information.\n\nACCELERATED 'S VIOLATIONS : After receiving my debt validation letter on XX/XX/XXXX, Accelerated was required by law to cease collection and provide verification. Instead, they continued prosecuting their lawsuit for 77 days without providing any validation.\n\nWhen the court dismissed their case for failure to serve, Accelerated chose to abandon the lawsuit entirely rather than re-file with proper service. This proves they lack the documentation to validate the debt and can not prove their legal standing.\n\nYet despite this dismissal and inability to validate, they continue reporting the debt through Oliphant as if it were valid and collectible.\n\nDOUBLE REPORTING : The original creditor ( XXXX ) admits they sold the debt to Accelerated, yet continues reporting the charge-off. Combined with Oliphant 's collection tradeline, this creates {$45000.00} in false debt reporting for what is allegedly a single {$21000.00} debt.\n\nTHE PATTERN : I have successfully defended three debt collection lawsuits in seven months, all dismissed because the debt buyers could not substantiate their claims. This demonstrates a systematic industry problem : debt buyers purchase debts in bulk without proper documentation, report them to credit bureaus through collection agencies that never contact consumers, and file lawsuits without proper standing.\n\nOliphant USA LLC and Accelerated Inventory Management are poster children for everything wrong with the debt buying industry.\n\nThey have : Destroyed my credit for 2.5+ years without ever contacting me Continued collection during a validation period Filed a lawsuit they couldn't prosecute Abandoned the lawsuit rather than prove the debt Continued reporting after dismissal Created double reporting with the original creditor Inflated the debt amount without explanation These violations are clear, documented, and ongoing. They must be stopped immediately.\n\nI respectfully request : Immediate deletion of all inaccurate tradelines Full CFPB investigation into both companies Monetary damages as detailed above Corrective action to prevent future violations Enforcement action to hold these companies accountable The FDCPA and FCRA exist to protect consumers from exactly this type of abusive debt collection practice. I ask the CFPB to enforce these laws and require Oliphant USA LLC and Accelerated Inventory Management to comply with federal law.\n\nThank you for your attention to this serious matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-03T21:48:18.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"33160","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19223931","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Oliphant United, Inc.","date_received":"2026-02-03T21:01:05.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These violations include : <em>Collection</em> agency reporting for 2.5+ years <em>without</em> ever contacting consumer Court dismissal for failure to serve proving lack of correct contact information Continued <em>collection</em> during <em>validation</em> period Filing and prosecuting <em>lawsuit</em> <em>without</em> providing requested <em>validation</em> Abandoning <em>lawsuit</em> after <em>validation</em> request rather than prove the <em>debt</em> Continuing to report dismissed <em>debt</em> as valid Inflating <em>debt</em> amount <em>without</em> itemization BACKGROUND : As a pro se litigant with extensive"],"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":[20.438519,"19223931"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14094859","_score":20.38548,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint to address the lack of response from American Express National Bank regarding my Debt Validation Letter ( DVL ) sent on XX/XX/XXXX requesting a signed contract, account statements, and proof of ownership on a XXXX Delta SkyMiles Card as required by 15 U.S.C. 1692g. My first CFPB complaint was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, noting no response from AENB by XX/XX/XXXX. This ongoing failure to validate suggests the debt is not mine, violating FDCPA requirements.There is an upcoming trial date of XX/XX/XXXX, and a Motion to Dismiss is planned due to lack of standing and FDCPA violations. I believe that this debt has been securitized and is no longer collectible by AENB for the following reasons : * Securitization of Debt : This credit card debt has likely been pooled with other receivables and sold as asset-backed securities to investors by American Express FSB who was the original creditor. This process transfers ownership of the debt, meaning American Express FSB ( rebranded into AENB ) no longer holds the legal right or standing to collect on it. \n* Transfer of Collection Rights : As a result of the securitization, the right to collect on this debt has been transferred to a trust ( likely XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as this trust was primarily used for travel related cards ) or the investors who then purchased the securities from the Special Purpose Entity. ( Reference SEC filings for XXXX XXXX  from XXXX ) Therefore, AENB can not legally pursue collection efforts on this specific debt. \n* Lack of Response to DVL : Despite my request for validation of the debt on XX/XX/XXXX, AENB has failed to provide the requested documentation in the required timeframe as it has now been 78 days without any response. This further indicates that they may not have the necessary documentation to validate the debt or confirm their right to collect it. \n\n* * Requested Action * * : - Investigate AENBs failure to validate the debt, violating 15 U.S.C. 1692g.\n\n- Require AENB to immediately cease and desist all collection efforts, provide full validation ( signed contract, account statements, proof of ownership ), remove any related negative credit reporting, and drop the ongoing lawsuit related to this unvalidated debt. \n- Alternatively, as a settlement to avoid further legal action, accept a one-time payment of {$500.00} in exchange for a written agreement to dismiss the debt and the lawsuit with prejudice, without this offer constituting an admission of liability. \n- Impose sanctions and penalties for FDCPA non-compliance. \n\nI certify this information is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I consent to the CFPB publishing this description on consumerfinance.gov so others can learn from my experience. Submit via consumerfinance.gov on XX/XX/XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-16T22:02:46.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"76009","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14094859","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2025-06-16T21:21:37.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["- Require AENB to immediately cease and desist all <em>collection</em> efforts, provide full <em>validation</em> ( signed contract, account statements, proof of ownership ), remove any related negative credit reporting, and drop the ongoing <em>lawsuit</em> related to this unvalidated <em>debt</em>."],"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> is not yours"]},"sort":[20.38548,"14094859"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":163,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":163}]}},"product":{"doc_count":163,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":106,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":64},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":26},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":5},{"key":"Medical debt","doc_count":4},{"key":"Auto debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Telecommunications debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1},{"key":"Federal student loan debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":42,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":42}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":6,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":163,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":41,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":33},{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":5},{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":25,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit","doc_count":12},{"key":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged","doc_count":6},{"key":"Threatened to sue you for very old debt","doc_count":4},{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":2},{"key":"Collected or attempted to collect exempt funds","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":23,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":15},{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":8}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":22,"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":17},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":3},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":21,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":16},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":4},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":13,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":12},{"key":"Indicated you were committing crime by not paying debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":4,"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":4}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Threatened to contact someone or share information improperly","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Contacted your employer","doc_count":2},{"key":"Contacted you after you asked them to stop","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Don't agree with the fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Disclosure verification of debt","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Not given enough info to verify debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":163,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":157},{"key":"No","doc_count":6}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":163,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":115},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":44},{"key":"Untimely response","doc_count":3},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":163,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":163}]}},"company":{"doc_count":163,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":15},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":13},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":11},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":10},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":9},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":8},{"key":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","doc_count":7},{"key":"RAS LaVrar, LLC","doc_count":6},{"key":"CAVALRY INVESTMENTS, LLC","doc_count":4},{"key":"Bronstein & Weiss Arbitration","doc_count":3},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":3},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":3},{"key":"Hayt Hayt & Landau, P.L. (FL)","doc_count":3},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"Blitt and Gaines, P.C.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Crown Asset Management, LLC, Duluth, GA Branch","doc_count":2},{"key":"Glasser and Glasser, PLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":2},{"key":"Oliphant United, Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":2},{"key":"Weltman, Weinberg & Reis Co., L.P.A.","doc_count":2},{"key":"ZWICKER & ASSOCIATES","doc_count":2},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"ARL Credit Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge PIte Haan, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Andreu, Palma & Andreu, PL","doc_count":1},{"key":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","doc_count":1},{"key":"BWW Law Group, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"COLLECTIONS USA, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CONGRESS COLLECTION CORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Continental Finance Company, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Corp Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Diverse Funding Associates LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"ECMC GROUP, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"ERC","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST HAWAIIAN, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Franklin Collection Service, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"HW Holding, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Harvard Collections, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"I.C. System, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Independence Capital Recovery, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"InvestiNet LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Kriya Capital, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Law Offices of Hayt, Hayt & Landau, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"LoanCare, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Lockhart, Morris & Montgomery Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Midwest Fidelity Services, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Monarch Recovery Holdings, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NCB Management Services Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelson and Kennard, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"ONLINE Information Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PATRICK A. CAREY, P.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Pollack & Rosen, P.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Radius Global Solutions LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rausch Sturm LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Receivables Management Partners, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Sequium Asset Solutions, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Silverman Theologou, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Tenaglia & Hunt, PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"The McHughes Law Firm, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Veros Credit, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Zarzaur and Schwartz, PC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":163,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":34},{"key":"TX","doc_count":27},{"key":"GA","doc_count":16},{"key":"MI","doc_count":15},{"key":"PA","doc_count":10},{"key":"CA","doc_count":7},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":7},{"key":"NC","doc_count":6},{"key":"OH","doc_count":6},{"key":"IL","doc_count":5},{"key":"LA","doc_count":5},{"key":"AL","doc_count":4},{"key":"NV","doc_count":3},{"key":"AR","doc_count":2},{"key":"HI","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA","doc_count":2},{"key":"CO","doc_count":1},{"key":"CT","doc_count":1},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"ND","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TN","doc_count":1},{"key":"WI","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":163,"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":43},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":10},{"key":"Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":163,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":22},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":8}]}}},"_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":[20.389168,"14094859"],"3":[16.203167,"20317436"],"4":[14.164206,"16588243"],"5":[12.568343,"8411131"],"6":[10.878849,"9709179"],"7":[9.049299,"7598442"]}}}