Consumer complaint received 2020-11-16
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: TX
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: False statements or representation
Sub-issue: Attempted to collect wrong amount

Complaint:
I was sent notification from a debt collector know as XXXX  who was collecting on behalf of a company by the name of XXXX XXXXXXXX  indicating that they had purchased the loan that was not in a status of collection after the original creditor XXXX XXXX went into tax forfeiture for failure to pay taxes and whose status of forfeiture has been confirmed by the the Office of the Secretary of State of Texas. XXXX, was forwarded a Cease and Desist Notification upon the entity giving notice to the consumer that they were collecting on a debt that was never in default to the original creditor. The original creditor gave no notice that XXXX was assuming the loan as a collection agency where there was a brief of contract on behalf of the XXXX XXXX. The initial correspondence received from XXXX was received by the consumer via email which is a compromise of the Service of Process Rules as a cited under Rule 21 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and that notice of a change in ownership for the loan was not properly serviced upon the consumer and the loan amount attempting to be collected was far greater than what was owed. On or about XX/XX/2020, the consumer received notification from a company by the name of the Jefferson Capital Collections who sent notification that their company had purchase the loan and that the consumer was now indebt to their company where the loan about was even more inflated than it was with the previous collector, XXXX. 

On or about XX/XX/2020, the Consumer contacted Jefferson Capital Collection Agency via a recorded telephone conversation and spoke with one of the Managers for the collector who was informed by the the consumer that they were in dispute of the debt and opposed any affiliation with a third party servicing this loan because the original creditor did not have the authority to pursue any business in the State of Texas due to their failure to satisfied their Corporate Franchise Tax Obligation, essentially barring their authorization to conduct business within the state of Texas because there is records that indicate that they were in compromise of the Texas Tax Code Rule 171. 

The Manager who identified herself by the name of XXXX, was explained the circumstances of the changes of ownership and the consumers opposition with the amount being collected as well as provided the information confirming the forfeited existence of the original creditor and was asked to cease and desist their collection attempts. The Manager by the name of XXXX assure the consumer that the account would be removed from his consumer credit report on or about Sunday XX/XX/2020, and that any further actions regarding the referenced account would have to be addressed directly with XXXX. The Manager stated and asked that the consumer permitted here to notify the credit bureaus that their company would not be pursuing any collection attempts on this account and would cease and desist all collection attempts as the consumer had requested as authorized under Public Law 104-208. 

However, on Sunday,XX/XX/2020, Consumer accessed his credit profile to notice that Jefferson Capitol reneged on their promise to remove the collection from the consumers credit report and even added the account to other reports which resulted in the consumer losing more than 60 points on his consumer credit score as a result.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation