I am writing to make a formal complaint against ONEMAIN FINANCIAL previously called ONEMAIN.

1. ONEMAIN FINANCIAL has violated Arizona Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by using false representation or deceptive means to attempt to collect a debt.

2. ONEMAIN FINANCIAL has violated the FCRA by failing to conduct a proper investigation upon notice of dispute and/or by failing to report the findings of such investigation to the credit reporting agency ; and by failing to report accurate information to the credit reporting agency. FCRA liability holds statutory damages at {$1000.00} per violation. Each account is considered a separate violation.

3. ONEMAIN FINANCIAL has violated the FDCPA by engaging in conduct that is meant to harass, oppress or abuse a person ; by falsely representing the character of a debt ; by falsely representing the legal status of a debt ; by failing to note the account in dispute to the credit reporting agency ; by using false representation or deceptive means to attempt to collect a debt ; by using unfair or unconscionable means to attempt to collect a debt. FDCPA liability holds statutory damages at {$1000.00} per action. Each account is considered a separate action.

FACTS : ONEMAIN attempted to collect on an debt under false representation. On XX/XX/XXXX Onemain responded to a letter I sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX who is a collection agency. XXXX XXXX XXXX used letters deemed illegal and harassing phone calls for over a month. ONEMAIN had knowledge of this illegal activity as I had an open dispute with ONEMAIN and was in correspondence. During this time both companies were still attempting to collect on the debt while reporting inaccurate information to credit bureaus. 

As you know, Section 1692g ( b ) requires the debt collector to cease collection of the debt at issue if a written dispute is received within the 30-day validation period until verification is obtained. Even reporting a charged-off debt to a consumer reporting agency, particularly at this stage of the collection process, constitutes " collection activity '' on the part of the collector.

ONEMAIN FINANCIAL sent a lengthy correspondence letter with a copy of their response letter included from XX/XX/XXXX. This response letter proves ONEMAIN and XXXX XXXX XXXX were in fact carrying out unlawful collection activity while I was in dispute with the original furnisher. 

ONEMAIN FINANCIAL deliberately omitted the correspondence letter which precedes the response letter that provides the context of the correspondence. For integrity purposes ONEMAIN FINANCIAL should have submitted a copy of the letter that preceded the response letter as it should be a matter of record also. 

Evidence supports ONEMAIN FINANCIAL intentionally omitted the preceding letter and misrepresented the context of the XX/XX/XXXX correspondence with XXXX XXXX XXXX to mitigate its responsibility for violating the FDCPA on numerous occasion. 

ONEMAIN FINANCIAL stated that it was attempting to collect a debt using its own employees so it was not in violation of FDCPA. XXXX XXXX XXXX is not ONEMAIN FINANCIAL and your company responded to correspondence to XXXX XXXX XXXX which is verifiable proof of FDCPA violation. ONEMAIN FINANCIAL did attempt to collect on a debt by deceptive means. 

Please be advised that the FDCPA is a strict liability statue and one only needs to show a violation occurred in order to be awarded statutory damages. Provable infractions have taken place and are still subject to damages payable to the consumer. 


ONEMAIN FINANCIAL made unauthorized charges to my XXXX XXXX  account in the amount of XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. I have submitted a copy of my bank statements and your representatives simply deny any record of the withdrawal which is a matter of record. I have even offered to arrange certified copy be sent directly to ONEMAIN FINANCIAL from XXXX XXXX. 

ONEMAIN FINANCIAL allowed double jeopardy reporting of the same debt with different account numbers to the credit bureaus. Please be advised I have disputed these various inaccuracies since XXXX. In your correspondence letter you explained that Springleaf Financial and ONEMAIN merged to become ONEMAIN FINACIAL and all accounts were merged into one. XXXX  has record that ONEMAIN FINANCIAL was in fact reporting the same debt two times with two different account numbers and this matter was only recently corrected in XX/XX/XXXX.