Consumer complaint received 2019-07-09
Company: PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES INC
State: CT
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt
Sub-issue: Didn't receive enough information to verify debt

Complaint:
I have been engaged in a series of complaints to the CFPB regarding Portfolio Recovery Associates and their continued, willing refusal to stop furnishing derogatory data to the credit bureaus without verifiable proof, despite the hearsay documentation they continue to submit as having established validity and their continued attempts and false or misleading representations. 
This company, Portfolio Recovery Associates, as has been well-documented, particularly in the XXXX consent order from the CFPB, has a long history of flaunting the law and engaging in deceptive behavior. Ive seen this directly since I started disputing with them several months back and I had to turn to the CFPB as they kept sending the same two or three hearsay, unverified documents and passing them as verifiable proof to continue to furnish their derogatory data on my credit report, which by the way they have never shown evidence of having followed 15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) ( A ) ( i ) in notifying me in the first place that they were furnishing this derogatory data, a fact I did not know until I initially decided to view my credit reports back in XXXX. 
As I have said, I have had to complain to the CFPB multiple times and other than Portfolio actively ceasing collections, XXXX-XXXX  from XX/XX/XXXX, where Portfolio stayed they were ceasing collection activity, XXXX-XXXX  from XX/XX/XXXX, where no further action was deemed necessary And XXXX-XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX, which Portfolio was allowed to deem as a duplicate complaint and this was dismissed with no action, wrongly, as it was not a duplicate and involved different information such the removal of one of Portfolios alleged accounts from one of my credit reports and then its replacement several days later. This was an extremely wrong dismissal. First, Portfolio should not be allowed to dismiss complaints as duplicates and second, that they even did so is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the UDAAP as part of the Dodd-Frank bill. To hopefully prevent a recurrence of those tactics by PRA, I am forwarding this to other government entities to ensure this complaint is not dismissed. If these consumer protect laws dont work to protect the consumer, what purpose do they serve? Especially when dealing with a company like Portfolio Recovery, and their business practices, that are detailed in the CFPBs own XXXX consent order against them, XXXX, and enough case law to fill multiple binders. 
Aside from the already sent complaints, Portfolio removed one of the alleged accounts they created from my XXXX  file around XX/XX/XXXX and was reinserted without notice to me approximately a little more than a week after and was listed as closed and is now listed again as open, again without notice to me. Both of these Portfolio accounts are listed as having been updated as of XX/XX/XXXX. Also, Portfolio continues to mail me letters telling me that I have to provide information proving or disproving the accounts THEY have created in my name and continue to furnish derogatory information on, and if such information is not provided THEY will not respect any dispute. This is unconscionable in the least and goes beyond the pale in violating the FDCPA and FCRA. They have refused to provide evidence of a contract, they have refused to produce a chain of assignment or prove account-level detail regarding either alleged account. They have not proven where I even gave them permission to open either of these alleged accounts using my name and personal information. This alone violates 15 USC 6801 regarding the Protection of Nonpublic Personal Information. 
I really hope some sort of enforcement action is taken regarding this company. Their hearsay documentation validated nothing and they knew their case was weak regarding these alleged accounts that they dropped collection activities. The XXXX District Court case, XXXX v XXXX XXXX has stated that reporting to credit bureaus IS collection activity. Therefore the reporting should cease. I have never given them permission to access my personal information and be allowed to access my files and they have failed to prove otherwise.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation