Medical and Professional Collection Services ( MPCS ), a third-party debt collection agency, conducting business in the State of Indiana and County of XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IN. XXXX, has violated certain acts of the FDCPA and UDAAP in their attempt to collect an alleged medical debt from me. 

The following is an introduction to the known violations : FDCPA 806. Harassment or Abuse A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 6 ) Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller 's identity. 

807. False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 2 ) The false representation of -- ( A ) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt ; or ( B ) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt.

( 4 ) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action.

( 5 ) The threat to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.

( 8 ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. 

( 10 ) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. 

( 11 ) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action. 

808. Unfair Practices A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 1 ) The collection of any amount ( including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation ) unless such amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law.

( 8 ) Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector 's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business.

UDAAP Likewise, all the aforementioned FDCPA violations qualify as violations under the Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices. 

The following is a chronicle of the communications and details of the violations made by MPCS : After receiving a notice from MPCS dated, XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 1A ), showing I owed one account ( as evidenced throughout the body of the letter using the singular tense, account ), totaling, {$1000.00}, I telephoned MPCS on XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX and spoke with a representative who identified herself using an alias as, XXXX XXXX ( FDCPA 807. False or misleading representations ( 10 ) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. ). I had to inquire about the details of the alleged debt as the letter did not disclose the specifics. I had advised her that I was not certain these charges were legitimate, and it was my understanding that insurance should have paid. I inquired if the account had been reported to the credit reporting agencies and she confirmed that it had not and would not until the end of XX/XX/XXXX. She explained this is due to the Federal law that requires a 180-day waiting period. 

Later, I received another letter from MPCS dated XX/XX/XXXX ( See Exhibit 1B ). This letter did not disclose the original creditor and it was indicating that they were now attempting to collect multiple accounts ( as evidenced throughout the body of the letter by using the plural tense, accounts ). The balance on this letter was higher than the balance noted on the first letter, Exhibit 1A. To support MPCSs efforts to embellish the extent of the alleged debt and the number of accounts, MPCS cites, RE : Various Creditor ( s ) in the opening of the letter which gives a false impression they are attempting to collect on behalf of multiple creditors. Never has it been communicated or supported that MPCS was attempting to collect more than one alleged debt/account and never has it been communicated that MPCS was attempting to collect on behalf of more than one creditor ( FDCPA 807. False or misleading representations ( 2 ) The false representation of ( A ) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt ; or ( B ) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt. ). 

In addition, this same letter, ( See Exhibit 1B ) dated XX/XX/XXXX, contains several misleading and deceptive statements. Below are the specific citations that support MPCSs devious statements : Citation 1 : On the instruction of our client, we are going to send your accounts to our attorney for collection. 

Retort 1 : From the looks of this letter, it appears to be a template, cookie-cutter like letter which raises the question, did their client or Various Creditor ( s ) truly review this/these account ( s ) and give specific direction on this account ( s ) to place the alleged account ( s ) with an attorney?

Furthermore, MPCS is very specific in stating their intended action to send this account ( s ) to an attorney for collection. This is action MPCS never intended to take at the time this letter was sent as the account ( s ) has not been sent to an attorney ( FDCPA False or misleading representations ( 4 ) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. ( 5 ) The threat to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. ) Citation 2 : These accounts will be sent to our attorney within 10 days from the date of this letter Retort 2 : This is a very specific action with a very specific timeframe that MPCS states they intend to take. This action did not and has not occurred. MPCS never intended to take such action or action within this timeframe ( FDCPA False or misleading representations ( 4 ) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. ( 5 ) The threat to take any action that can not legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. ) This action of threatening to place the account ( s ) with an attorney for collection is not consistent with the context of the relatively new Federal law that requires the suspension of credit bureau reporting on medical debt for 180 days to allow insurance time to pay out and the insured ample time to research and dispute uncovered charges. 

Citation 3 : The letter is signed by XXXX XXXX. 

Retort 3 : Using an alias is a form of deception and is illegal in some jurisdictions. In addition, the question is raised, does XXXX XXXX have the authority and capacity at MPCS to make the decision to assign accounts to an attorney for collection? ( FDCPA 807. False or misleading representations ( 10 ) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. ) Within both letters used by MPCS as referenced in Exhibit 1A and 1B, MPCS provided an enclosed return envelope in which they gave instructions to enclose payment and return to MPCS. The return envelope MPCS provided has MPCSs full and complete name, Medical & Professional Collection Services , Inc. ( See Exhibit 2A ) with a return name and address section in the upper left-hand corner that, if completed per USPS standards, would bear my name and address ( FDCPA 808. Unfair Practices ( 8 ) Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector 's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business. ). MPCS is aware of this regulatory expectation as evidenced by referencing the envelope in which the letter and return envelope were enclosed ( See Exhibit 2B ). 

I called MPCS and spoke with XXXX XXXX on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX. When I telephoned MPCS, the mini-miranda was not cited by any person or means ( FDCPA 806. Harassment or Abuse ( 11 ) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action. ). When I asked XXXX if this alleged debt had been reported to the credit reporting agencies, she confidently confirmed, without pause, that it had in fact been reported to the credit reporting agencies. After pressing XXXX several times and XXXX remaining firm and confident that it had been reported, she eventually reported that it had not yet been reported and would not report until the end of XX/XX/XXXX. When I questioned XXXX why she was so adamant and misleading to me about the credit bureau reporting, she claimed that she did not actually say that it had been reported, which was untrue. XXXX misrepresented the credit reporting status of this account ( s ).  XXXX did confirm the account ( s ) had not been sent to an attorney for collections ( FDCPA 807. False or misleading representations, ( 8 ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. ). 

On XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX, I sent an email to MPCS citing all regulatory concerns I have listed here within this complaint ( See Exhibit 3 ). Later, this same day, I telephoned MPCS and spoke with a female employee and let her know that I sent the email to XXXX and she confirmed that management reviews that email address daily and that it would be reviewed. In this email, I requested that a representative of authority contact me by email or phone within 3 business days for MPCS to provide a response and solution to the cited issues. On XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX telephoned me using a blocked number ( See Exhibit 5 ) ( FDCPA-806. Harassment or Abuse, ( 6 ) Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller 's identity ). XXXX did cite the mini-miranda however she was very guarded in her communication and would not tell me anything other than MPCS management is reviewing as a dispute and I will receive a letter within 3 days. I asked if the account has been reported to the credit reporting agencies and she would not answer the question and again stated that I will receive a letter within 3 days. After not receiving a letter or any other communication after 6 days, I sent a follow up email again to MPCS on XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX  ( See Exhibit 3 ) and advised that I have not received the letter they promised to send and gave them until XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX to respond or I would be escalating my concerns. I have not received any letter or other communication from MPCS as they promised, to date. 

In addition to what has been cited above, and in my research, I did not identify any court cases over the last 8 years where MPCS was the plaintiff in the State of Indiana and the County of XXXX, where MPCS and its hired attorney filed suit for anything close to the balance of the alleged balance of {$1000.00} they are attempting to collect from me. The smallest amount I could locate that MPCS filed suit on was approximately {$4000.00}. This supports that they never had any intention of following through with their specific threat of placing this account ( s ) with an attorney for collections.

MPCS is charging interest on the alleged debt ( s ) in which they are attempting to collect from me. Nowhere that I have seen has MPCS indicated any interest rate disclosures that would support MPCS in charging interest ( 808. Unfair Practices ( 1 ) The collection of any amount ( including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation ) unless such amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law ). 

Lastly, collection agencies are required to be licensed in the State of Indiana. The Indiana Secretary of State oversees the administration and complaints of license holders. It was found that the Indiana Secretary of State declared MPCS as not authorized to be conducting business within the first part of 2018 ( See Exhibit 4 ). Consequently, any telephone collection calls made, collection letters sent, credit bureau reporting to credit reporting agencies, payments collected, commissions paid, suits filed, interest accrued on debts and any other transactions conducted during this time should not have occurred on any and all accounts in which MPCS was servicing. By not renewing their license in a timely manner and continuing to operate illegally is another example of the disregard MPCS has for regulatory requirements. 

I feel as though I have given MPCS ample opportunity to address the issues cited in efforts to resolve without having to escalate. Unfortunately, MPCSs lack of response and false claim that I would be receiving a letter is consistent with their overall deceitfulness, negligence and disregard for accountability and regulatory expectations.