Consumer complaint received 2024-09-26
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: T.S. Holdings (CA)

Starting in XXXX, I began receiving multiple calls weekly from a debt collection agency, IQ Data International, on behalf of my former apartment complex, XXXX XXXX XXXX, for a debt that I contest. I received additional mail from the debt collector, allowing me 30 days to dispute the alleged debt by mail. I disputed the charge by mail because the debt was listed for the incorrect amount. The debt collector failed to respond to my dispute, and did not provide any information despite my dispute. In particular, I requested the following : 1. Request for Validation of Alleged Debt under FDCPA Why you think I owe the debt and to whom I owe it, including : o The name and address of the creditor to whom the alleged debt is currently owed. 
o The name and address of the original creditor and any other names used. 
o A copy of the original contract or other agreement. 
The amount and age of the debt, including : o Provide a copy of the last billing statement sent to me by the original creditor.

o State the amount of the alleged debt when you obtained it.

o State the date when you obtained the alleged debt. 
o Provide an itemized list of any alleged interest, fees, or charges since the last billing statement from the original creditor. 
o Provide a copy of any agreement expressly authorizing such interest, fees, or additional Charges. 
o Provide an itemization showing any payments since the last billing statement from the original creditor. 
o State when the creditor claims this debt became due and when it became delinquent.

o Identify the date of the last payment made on this account.

o State when you think the statute of limitations expires for this debt, and how you determined that. 
Details about your authority to collect this debt, including : o Provide the number of any license to collect debt in California and the name of the issuing agency. 
o Provide the number of any license to collect debt in the state where you are located and the name of the issuing agency. 

The debt collector provided no information in response to my dispute and request for more information. Additionally, the debt collector repeatedly contacted me by phone after I disputed the debt and after asked that they no longer contact me, thereby violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( 15 USC 1692g Section 809 ( b ) ) and the California XXXX Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( Cal. Civ. Code 1788 to 1788.33 ). Lastly, the debt collector has placed this debt on my credit report and has not listed it as disputed, despite the fact that I disputed the debt in a timely manner. 


2. Factual and Legal Dispute of Alleged Debt.

As noted above, I dispute the alleged debt in this matter on several grounds, but primarily because California law under Civil Code 1950.5, provides that no later than 21 calendar days after a tenant has vacated the premises, a landlord is required to return the full Security Deposit, or provide the departing tenant with an itemized statement of deductions along with invoices and receipts if the deductions total more than {$120.00}, for any deductions made from the Security Deposit. I vacated XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX the landlord XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) provided an itemized list of the deductions of my XXXX XXXX, which included a deduction in the amount of {$450.00} for Carpet Replacement. However, XXXX failed to provide the legally required documentation ( i.e., the invoices or receipts for the carpet replacement ) to support the {$450.00} Carpet Replacement deduction. Not only did XXXX fail to provide the statutorily required documentation within the 21-day timeframe, on or before XX/XX/XXXX, they have still failed to provide a receipt or invoice for the {$450.00} Carpet Replacement deduction, as of the writing of this letter, more than three months after move out.

As you may know, the California Supreme Court in Granberry v. Islay Investments ( XXXX ) ( 9 Cal.4th 738, 745 ) held that when a landlord does not provide full documentation of items ( including the invoices or receipts ) deducted from a tenants security deposit within the 21-day timeframe, the landlord loses the right to keep any of the security deposit and must return the entire deposit to the tenant. Since XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to provide me with any receipts or invoices for the {$450.00} carpet replacement charge, I am not responsible for {$450.00} of the {$460.00} plus interest that I am claimed to owe. 

Thank You, XXXX XXXX