Consumer complaint received 2025-11-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: Southwest Credit Systems, L.P.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a another complaint against Southwest Credit Systems ( SWC ) because their response to my previous dispute is not FDCPA-compliant, not FCRA-compliant, and does not meet the CFPBs validation standards. Their letter actually confirms they did not validate the debt properly and that they are relying on hearsay from XXXX rather than providing the legally required documentation. 
Southwest Credit Systems stated in their response that they did not receive a written dispute or validation request prior to the complaint, but under FDCPA 809 ( b ), the moment I filed my CFPB dispute, they were required to cease collection and validate. Whether they received a dispute earlier is irrelevant. A CFPB complaint is a dispute, and they are fully aware of that. 
Their response claims they forwarded the complaint to XXXX and received billing statements. Billing statements are not validation. FDCPA 809 ( b ) requires proof of liability, proof of accuracy, and proof of ownership or assignment. A reprinted bill does not meet the federal validation standard. They did not provide : A copy of any service agreement A contract or application showing I authorized services IMEI/device usage records Proof of equipment return or non-return Chain of title showing SWC has legal authority to collect A complete account ledger showing how they calculated the balance Validation requires evidence, not a restatement of charges. 
Their letter says : SWC is not obligated to produce a signed agreement as the consumer is not always required to sign one. This is misleading. Whether or not a signature is required, they are obligated to prove I am legally responsible for the debt. They did not do that. 
T-Mobiles summary in the response also raises problems. They list dates, amounts, and a final bill, but they do not provide any documentation proving that I actually agreed to the equipment plan, agreed to the charges, or even used the service during the period in question. Every piece of information they cited is hearsay, which is not acceptable under FDCPA or FCRA guidelines. 
Additionally, XXXX stated they do not have a direct relationship with credit bureaus. That means SWC is the furnisher. Under FCRA 623 ( b ), the furnisher must perform a reasonable investigation and provide the documentation it used to verify. SWC has not done that. Their investigation consisted of sending me billing statements and saying the debt is valid, which is not a reasonable investigation under FCRA 611. 
They also failed to address the statute of limitations. The account became delinquent in XX/XX/XXXX. In Texas, the statute of limitations on telecom debt is four years. The debt is now beyond the legal period to sue, and collectors are required to disclose when a debt is time-barred. They did not provide that disclosure, which is another FDCPA violation. 
Nothing they supplied proves the debt is accurate, complete, or legally collectible. The CFPBs 2021 Debt Collection Rule requires itemized validation, proof of liability, and clear documentation. SWC provided none of that. 
They also failed to address whether the information they are furnishing to the credit bureaus is accurate. Under FCRA 611 and 607 ( b ), they must provide maximum possible accuracy. They did not validate anything and yet continue to furnish derogatory information. 
A reprinted bill, a summary paragraph from XXXX, and a long explanation about their internal process does not satisfy federal law. They are attempting to shift responsibility back onto me rather than fulfilling their obligations.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief