Consumer complaint received 2025-12-18 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: LendingPoint Holdings LLC
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
The information below has been shared with XXXX and XXXX  - XXXX of the attorneys and also the XXXX  Specifically, regulations that governed the collection process have been violated, the fair practice is to allow the XXXX an opportunity to determine the merit of this specific case. 

XXXX. XXXX of Limitation Lapsed I am requesting that all of my funds be immediately returned on or before Monday, XX/XX/XXXX. There is a court date slated for XX/XX/XXXX, which I will be at if this matter is not resolved by then. In XXXX of my last emails, I requested a schedule of payments. I dont need the schedule ; I merely wanted your firm to examine the last date a payment was made. In essence, know for yourself, not my word, that the XXXX of Limitations had lapsed. Given that XXXX XXXX sold the contract to XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$650.00} on XX/XX/XXXX, the last payment was made before that date. 

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) requires that the collector tell the truth. If the debt is time-barred, but the debt collector has threatened to sue you or take other legal action to pressure you into settling that debt, then it probably violated the FDCPA. The FDCPA prohibits debt XXXX from bringing or threatening to bring a legal action on a time-barred debt. ( XXXX C.F.R. XXXX ( b ) ) .At the hearing on XX/XX/XXXX, the presiding judge will determine if the statute of limitations were waived. 

Specifically, In general, debt XXXX can not legally collect on a debt after the statute of limitations has expired. This means that once the statute of limitations has run out, the debt is considered " time- barred, '' and the creditor or collector can no longer sue you for it. However, they can still attempt to collect the debt through voluntary payment, such as phone calls or letters. 


XXXX. Garnished Funds XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX on behalf of XXXX XXXX Funds garnished from my wages between XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX was under the auspices that XXXX and XXXX  was representing XXXX XXXX. I telephoned XXXX XXXX and learned that the account was sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$650.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. Given the misrepresentation ( specifically on a legal document ) that XXXX and XXXX  was representing XXXX XXXX, the funds seized should be returned, thereby, allow the court to determine the validity of XXXX and XXXX  legal claim in XXXX of XXXX. It is my understanding that If a debt collector places an incorrect name on the court summons, it does not automatically invalidate the summons. Courts may allow corrections to the name used in the documents, even if the documents use an old name. If the error creates confusion about the identity of the parties involved, it could be grounds for dismissal. It is best to consult with a legal professional for advice specific to your situation. Ignoring the documents could lead to a default judgment against you. 

The name has been corrected ( based on the information I provided to XXXX and XXXX a new summons issued, however, it is my understanding that the funds collected on behalf of XXXX XXXX, has to be returned to me. I suspect this is the reason XXXX and XXXX did not have representation in XXXX in XXXX of XXXX. However, it will be noted in court that XXXX and XXXX failed to notify me that the hearing was postponed. Again, I have the XXXX receipt to and from XXXX. 

It is my understanding that funds can not be garnished from payroll before a court hearing with the exception of child support and government owed funds. My wages outlined below have been held since XX/XX/XXXX, and given the balance XXXX and XXXX is now reflecting, have been applied to this account. There are several legal challenges at this point. The most significant is that the garnishment occurred under the auspices that XXXX and XXXX was representing XXXX XXXX. The funds should be immediately returned to me and allow the court to determine the validity of the cause launched by XXXX and XXXX in XXXX of XXXX. Holding my wages at this point, given this notification, certainly lends itself to a major lawsuit especially given that XXXX and XXXX is/was not representing XXXX XXXX. From my laypersons perspective, it now sounds like fraud, given that XXXX and XXXX  listed Lending Point, as the Plaintiff on the Court Summons. I can not wait to hear the court ruling on the below. Given such, from my lay person perspective, the funds garnished from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, should be immediately returned. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$2600.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Brand learned that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX another Debt Collector ) is the rightful owner of this account via my correspondence in XXXX of XXXX. Given such, it appears that XXXX and XXXX ( certainly explains why representation was not at the XXXX hearing, understanding the repercussions of obtaining funds in the name of a company, XXXX XXXX the firm is not representing. 

Given that XXXX XXXX XXXX is a debt collector funds extracted from my account on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, must be returned. Specifically, The Fair Credit Report Act and the Fair Credit Report Act ( FCRA ) stipulates that a debt collector can not represent, as such, collect on behalf of another debt collector, now we are talking about violation of XXXX federal acts. Given such, the funds garnished from my salary on XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX must be ( this one is not a should ) be returned ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief