Consumer complaint received 2021-12-15
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: NY
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation
Sub-issue: Attempted to collect wrong amount

Complaint:
deducted from my paycheck statement in the amount of {$260.00} the garnishment deductions do not correspond with the account information that has been provided via mail and listed on the website of Midland Credit Management Please let it be noted I have attached the payment statements send to me from Midland Credit Management do not correspond with the following payroll garnishments as documented on my pay sub statements issued for the following dates : XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} ( please note the first garnishment went into effect as deductions documented on my pay sub statement ) XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$260.00} Total Amount deducted under garnishments {$2.00}, XXXX I have attached all of the corresponding documentation that has been provided via postal mail and Midland Credit Management website account documentation listed under the account that Midland Credit Management Notice of Garnishment dated XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX that reflected as per Midland Credit Management response dated XX/XX/XXXX, states that the documentation that I attached to my compliant which I was very confused about listed on their website account that reference the Judgement against XXXX XXXX : A payment that were listed on Midland Credit Management XX/XX/XXXX - {$140.00} XXXX {$30.00} XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX - {$35.00} XX/XX/XXXX - {$36.00} XX/XX/XXXX - {$35.00} As documented on Midland Credit Managements response letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, that the listed deductions of the printout that I attached and retrieved from Midland Funding Management XXXX were payments that Midland Credit Management paid to cover legal fees ( as per the account number documented on Midland Credit Management website under selected account : XXXX. ) But, as per the XXXX XXXX Civil Court, Civil Judgment attached the legal fees issued on XX/XX/XXXX are not reflected on the payments Midland Credit Management references as legal fees. This brings me to a previous complaint that I have filed stating that Midland Credit Management continues to have on file inconsistent posting of payment records with an explanation. How I became first aware of the Judgement Midland Funding LLC filed against me was when I received the Notice of Garnishment letter on XX/XX/XXXX. It was not until I was advised to file an Order to Show Cause that I did on XX/XX/XXXX, at the XXXX XXXX Civil Court that I became aware of Midland Funding LLC had been granted a judgment against me. The inconsistent records of my case previously and currently remains to be practiced by Midland Funding LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, but as per the documentation covering XXXX & XXXX, XXXX & XXXX were the original legal firm handling Midland Funding LLC legal documentation that pertains to the Judgment and all required legal action that was supposedly taken from XXXX to the present. 
I have received responses from my previous complaints filed with CFPB that clearly shows a pattern of being inconsistent given the recorded and filed documentation that Midland Funding LLC has provided and in responding to my complaints and consistent documentation of record recording that is listed on Midland Funding web site and documentation that they have provided to me via postal mail to date. Throughout the complaints that I have filed Midland, Credit Management responds to my complaints they continue to state that they are unable to answer my questions in regards to statements that I have represented and refer me to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( the prior legal firm that is documented on records dated XXXX to XXXX were presented by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) This is an inconsistent response considering that Midland Funding LLC/Midland Credit Management is documented on the notice of garnishment as the judgment creditor, Affirmation In Opposition to Order To Show Cause dated XX/XX/XXXX, Midland Funding LLC is the plaintiff, and all of the documents that I was provided when I filed an Order to Show Cause that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX provided me after XX/XX/XXXX, as are the people that are providing me with the inconsistent information that does not correspond with the garnishment documented on biweekly pay substatements that went into effect as of XX/XX/XXXX to the present. 
This is a question for CFPB what are the requirements required when a garnishment is occurring that the person being garnished is to receive from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who is garnishing my paychecks.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation