Consumer complaint received 2022-09-02
Company: National Credit Systems,Inc.
State: NY
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not yours

Complaint:
This complaint is related to CFPB Complaint XXXX, which CFPB closed prematurely. The Collection Agency, NCS National Credit Systems , Inc. ( NCS ), is collecting an alleged debt on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). XXXX was the landlord on a rental property to which I was a lessee. 

XXXX claims that I owe {$420.00}. This amount consists of a {$730.00} Early Move Out fee and {$370.00} in maintenance/cleaning charges, less the amount from my security deposit of {$680.00}, which XXXX has kept. 

I established by the terms of the Lease Agreement and documentation of the actual move-out date that the fee was not owed to XXXX. 

NCS did not investigate my dispute in good faith. In their response to my earlier complaint to CFPB, NCS admitted that all they did was speak with their client, XXXX, who stated that the debt was due and provided NCS with a billing statement and a copy of the lease. 

THE BILL AND LEASE ARE NOT PROOF THAT A DEBT IS OWED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE LEASE. 

NCS has clearly not actually investigated this dispute because they have failed to acknowledge ANY of the information I have provided. NCS has ignored the documentation already in its possession from XXXX ( which I have referenced ) and other documentation which I supplied to NCS. NCS is simply agreeing with their client, XXXX, without doing anything to evaluate the facts contained in my dispute. 

XXXX has only provided NCS with bills stating that I owe money, but not any proof that the Early Move-Out Fee was actually due or that the cleaning and maintenance charges were necessary. NCS is simply taking the word of XXXX while ignoring my proof that no Early Move Out Fee was due under the lease terms.

NCS has never once stated it has proof that the tenants moved out early and did not provide a required notice under the lease terms. NCS is acting in bad faith by not actually considering the information before it. 

The documentation and information supporting my dispute of the {$730.00} Improper Notice to Vacate Fee is : 1 ) the Apartment Lease dated XX/XX/XXXX, which XXXX sent NCS, and which you sent me twice ; and 2 ) a Notice to Vacate, properly executed by all lessees and sent to XXXX XXXX before expiration of the Lease, stating that the tenants would be vacating at the end of the lease, on XX/XX/XXXX. 

The contractual basis for XXXX {$730.00} Improper Notice to Vacate Fee is contained in two paragraphs of the Apartment Lease, excerpted in relevant part below : 11. EARLY MOVE-OUT. Youll be liable to us for a reletting charge of {$730.00} ( not to exceed 100 % of the highest monthly rent during the lease term ) if you : ( 1 ) fail to give written move-out notice as required in paragraphs 23 ( Military Personnel Clause ) or 37 ( Move-Out Notice ); or ( 2 ) move out without paying rent in full for the entire lease term or renewal period ; or ( 3 ) move out at our demand because of your default; or ( 4 ) are judicially evicted.

37. MOVE-OUT NOTICE. Unless you are moving out on the Lease term ending date, you must give our representative at least 60 days advance written notice of your intention to vacate. All notices to vacate must be in writing and must provide the date by which you intend to vacate. 

Under paragraph 11, the Early Move-Out fee ( what XXXX calls the Improper Notice to Vacate Fee ) is only owed to XXXX if XXXX of the four listed conditions apply. None of the four listed conditions applied when the tenants moved out. 

Most importantly, under the first listed condition, the lessees did not fail to give written move out notice, as required under the Apartment Lease. Paragraph 23 is not applicable because the lessees are not Military Personnel.

The relevant paragraph controlling Move-Out Notice is therefore Lease Agreement Paragraph 37, which requires 60-days advance written notice of intent to vacate [ u ] nless you are moving out on the Lease term ending date. The lessees were not required to provide 60-days advance notice of intent to vacate since they moved out on the Lease term ending date of XX/XX/XXXX. 

In fact, as a courtesy, the lessees provided XXXX with a written Notice to Vacate stating that they would be vacating at the end of the lease, on XX/XX/XXXX. A copy of the relevant sections from the Apartment Lease and the Notice to Vacate were sent to XXXX twice. 

Because the lessees moved out at the end of the lease term, no 60-day notice to XXXX was required, and the lessees therefore did not fail to give written notice as required in paragraph [ s ] 37 under the Early Move-Out provision in paragraph 11. 

The three remaining conditions listed in paragraph 11 of the Apartment Lease obviously do not apply. The lessees did not move out without paying rent in full for the entire lease term ; they did not move out because of a demand by XXXX or the lessees default ; and they were not judicially evicted. XXXX has not asserted, much less documented, any of these conditions. 

Therefore, because none of the four conditions which would trigger the Early Move-Out fee ever occurred, the {$730.00} fee is not owed to XXXX. 

XXXX has not provided any proof that this fee is owed. All they have supplied is a Move Out Statement that lists an Improper Notice to Vacate Fee. But a bill is not proof that the fee is owed. A bill without backup is just an unsubstantiated claim. By contrast, since I have provided documentation and information to NCS substantiating why the fee is not owed, the burden is on XXXX to support their claim. 

NCS continued to just accept the bill as proof that the debt is owed in the face of the specific, factual evidence to the contrary which I have presented to NCS. 

Even assuming for the sake of argument that all {$370.00} of the cleaning and maintenance charges were necessary and actually incurred ( which we can not concede absent proof ), XXXX XXXX owes me a refund of {$300.00} from my security deposit. 

That is, since the {$730.00} Improper Notice to Vacate Fee was improperly taken from my security deposit, even if the {$370.00} in cleaning and maintenance fees were properly charged, XXXX would still owe me a refund of {$300.00}, which is the amount of the security deposit less these alleged cleaning charges ( i.e., {$680.00} - {$370.00} = {$300.00} ). 

We have repeatedly provided NCS with all of the documentation and information necessary to prove that XXXX is not owed the {$730.00} Notice to Vacate Fee. We have also made clear that XXXX has provided no information or documentation that substantiates its claim for {$370.00} in cleaning and maintenance charges, and that even if it could, there is no debt owed to XXXX since XXXX kept our security deposit, which more than covers the amount of such fees.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation