Consumer complaint received 2017-06-15
Company: Stellar Recovery, Inc.
State: KS
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other debt
Issue: Communication tactics
Sub-issue: You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying

Complaint:
On both XX/XX/XXXX & XX/XX/XXXX I was contacted by your office, which appeared on my called ID as XXXX, KS on XX/XX/XXXX, when I answered there was no body there. The call was placed on my cell-phone and a number of XXXX appeared. When I called, no one answered. I was again contacted on XX/XX/XXXX with the caller id showing XXXX, KS again I answered and no response. This time it showed a number of XXXX, which I called back and spoke with XXXX XXXX who identified himself as a collector for Stellar Recovery in an attempt to make a demand on a debt to XXXX XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX. When I advised XXXX XXXX this account was past the statute of limitations he said No it certainly is not. Before I progress with the rest of the facts, let me state under Kansas States Annotated 60-511 A creditor must bring an action-based on a contract that is expressed or implied but not in writing, an oral contract within three years. As there was never any written contract for service this was in-fact a time bared account. This act of collecting on a time barred account in its own is in violation of 15 USC 1692e subsections 807 ( 2 ) ( A ), as the legal status of the account is time barred to which XXXX XXXX disagreed with, keep in mind, his answer must be truthful under the FDCPA. I was then transferred to a supervisor XXXX XXXX and asked why my caller ID just shows XXXX, KS to which she stated We use an auto-dialer ). This is in violation of two laws. First, the TCPA that The FCC has determined that debt collection calls are not telemarketing calls. Therefore, under the rule the FCC has stated that with respect to autodialed or prerecorded debt collection calls, to the extent that they do not contain telemarketing messages, would not require any consent when made to residential wire line consumers, but require either prior written or oral consent if made to a consumers wireless number referring to 47 C.F.R. 64.1200 ( a ) ( 1 ). At no point, did I ever consent to my personal cell-phone number to be called. Additionally, the way your caller ID shows is XXXX, KS, but it is not just the name that I argue is a violation of law, it is the fact that the phone number that appears is a XXXX, KS number, when your office is clearly in Florida. Such action constitutes a violation of the 15 U.S. Code Section 1692f ( 5 ) Causing charges to be made to any person for communication by concealment of the true purpose of the communication. Obviously I have the right to determine what calls to accept and what ones not to answer. By concealing the true caller on the caller ID, your office has engaged in deceptive practices and as XXXX XXXX admits this is an auto-dialer, I am wiling to bet I am not the only consumer for whom your office has done this to. Additionally, I was never given the opportunity to dispute the bill.

Company public response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation