Consumer complaint received 2017-05-09
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: CA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Sub-issue: Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit

Complaint:
In  2011   ,  XXXX   XXXX , a division of  XXXX  , w on a court judgement (  XXXX  ) against me,  XXXX   XXXX , by default on a credit card account with  GE Money. I did  not find out about the case, nor did I have an opportunity to defend myself. The judgement did follow months of disputing the account and balances - a right afforded me under FCRA.     During months of harassment and threats which even included the threat of imprisonment, I disputed the validity of the account, the age of the account, the balances, including computed interest, penalties, late fees and the rate of interest - on numerous occasions with the lender prior to the sale of the account and during pre-judgement collections after the credit card account was purchased by  XXXX .     In spite of my declarations, and the disregard of my prior requests for proof of the account and documentary support as to the collection account balances,  XXXX   XXXX  told me by phone that under FDCPA, I alone had the burden of proving that I did not owe the debt and the balances, while threatening legal action. They asked me to settle {$8000.00} or risk a lawsuit or imprisonment.     Notwithstanding,  XXXX  never produced me a full account validation or a copy of my signed card agreement. Instead they went ahead and filed a legal claim to the Court of  XXXX   XXXX , CA.  XXXX  and then proceeded to submit to the  Court  several documents containing false statements, including but not limited to an affidavit falsely stating that they were not aware of any disputes and that I essentially agreed to the account balances simply because I had accepted billing statements and provided no to those statements previously to the lender during the course of having the card. All of which I believe violates my rights and unjustly diminished my rights of defense.     Unfortunately, I had defaulted on the court judgement because I did not personally receive the summons and was aware of the date of the hearings. I was also unfamiliar with the rules of the court and had limited due process. Had I been able to attend the court hearings I would have made it clear that  XXXX  never met its obligation to me under FCRA. It is my conclusion as the relevant court documents, that  XXXX  secured a default judgement against me solely by only using an affidavit ( as is the case of thousands of other cases by which  XXXX  secured liens through default judgements ) without any original-level account statements, and that the affidavit submitted had false statements.     In effect   XXXX  , as with tens of thousands of other judgments against consumers, submitted a sworn affidavit representing that I did not file a timely written dispute and that my account and the stated amounts was therefore " valid. '' Further,  XXXX  's own counsel submitted an affidavit in which he misrepresented that he had personal knowledge of facts contained in affidavits, including that he knew for a fact that I owed the claimed debt and that he himself could appear as a witness to attest to those facts - all when neither the lawyer nor  XXXX  could answer my dispute, provide account documentation, attest to my signing the credit agreement or truthfully claim that I had agreed ( non-disputed ) to the validity of the debt, amount, rate, etc..     It is my belief that my case falls squarely in the category of the many other cases that were misappropriated and mishandled by  XXXX   XXXX , in the same unjust manner highlighted in the CFPB 's damning findings and its consent decree. I have called  XXXX   XXXX  and its legal office in  XXXX   XXXX  numerous times, left messages, and have not had any calls from any representative or paralegal from its legal department to address this matter.     Earlier today I called the CFPB to see how I can have my case reviewed, and I was told that  XXXX  was in effect self-policing itself and should have contacted me once my case review showed any violation covered by the consent decree. I have a feeling that my case is not a single discrepancy a nd may end up being part of a pattern of   XXXX   not fully   complying with the terms of the settlement with CFPB on the consent decree.     My request which has not been dealt with to date, is that my rights under FCRA be defended and that I have a full and thorough of my account, as to a determination of whether or not the account is invalid and/or has been misrepresented as well as the overall legal basis for  XXXX  's claim, the legitimacy of the affidavits be examined by the  CSFB  and by  XXXX   XXXX  - prior to my assuming the expense of an attorney.     As of date,  XXXX   XXXX  continues to call and has sent over since the default judgement was secured, numerous legal threats related to this account.     I have attached a copy of the summons retrieved from the  XXXX   County Court system.          Amount : {$11.00},  XXXX  Debtor :  XXXX   XXXX  Creditor :  XXXX   XXXX   XXXX  Date entered :  XXXX   XXXX , 2011  XXXX  :  XXXX   XXXX  :  XXXX   XXXX  of California Case No. :  XXXX  Recording Date :  XXXX   XXXX ,  2011  Recording No :  XXXX , of Official Records Sincerely,  XXXX   XXXX   XXXX   XXXX   XXXX   XXXX , CA  XXXX

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation