Consumer complaint received 2025-04-10 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: ProCollect, Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing a {$300.00} debt from ProCollectXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX that is legally invalid under Texas Property Code. In addition, the debt is **No evidence of damage** : The apartment claims damage, but ProCollect is unable to furnish any photographic evidence of actual damage ; the only document ProCollect has furnished is a statement by the apartment claiming charges. Despite multiple requests for validation since XX/XX/XXXX, they have failed to provide any visual documentation showing damages beyond normal wear and tear. 

**Items referenced are " wear and tear '', not damage** : The documents from ProCollect cite " Damage Charges '' ; however, the description of charges shows that they are actually normal wear and tear ( painting, carpet cleaning, full clean ). Under Texas Property Code Section 92.104 ( b ), landlords are explicitly prohibited from charging tenants for normal wear and tear, which is defined in Section 92.001 ( 4 ) as " deterioration that results from the intended use of a dwelling. '' Texas courts have consistently ruled that routine painting and carpet cleaning between tenants constitute normal wear and tear and can not be lawfully charged to former tenants.

**Burden of proof falls on the landlord** : Texas Property Code Section 92.109 ( c ) places the burden of proof on the landlord to demonstrate that any charges are for actual damages beyond normal wear and tear. Without photographic evidence or documentation proving excessive damage, these charges remain legally unenforceable.

**Failure to respond to dispute** : I spoke with a collector, XXXX XXXX XXXX at ProCollect in XX/XX/XXXX, who informed me that I needed to share my dispute via " XXXX '', which I had already done. I was told to follow up. I later received an email from XXXX containing the " validation '', which simply contains the Apartment 's original charge statement, with no evidence ( ex. photos of damage ) for the charge. This failure to provide proper validation is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) which requires debt collectors to provide verification of disputed debts.

**Pattern of FDCPA violations** : ProCollect has engaged in a pattern of behavior that violates multiple provisions of the FDCPA : 1. Failure to properly validate a disputed debt despite multiple requests ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) 2. Continuing collection activities on a disputed debt without validation 3. Reporting an unvalidated disputed debt to credit bureaus ( violation of FCRA ) 4. Using unfair practices to collect a debt by restricting access to resolution channels **Explicit refusal to settle or allow payment** : I have called ProCollect twice this week to try to resolve this matter. Each time, I'm told that " my account is locked '', " only the owner can view it '', and " there is no way to resolve this debt unless you talk to them ''. Evidently, I'm now forced to speak to one specific individual in management at the company, supposedly named " XXXX '', who has not responded to email and has been unavailable both days for conversation by phone. This deliberate obstruction of communication channels violates FDCPA provisions that prohibit unfair practices ( 15 U.S.C. 1692f ) and is a clear attempt to prevent resolution of a properly disputed debt.

**Continued collection calls despite written disputes** : Despite my multiple written disputes and requests to communicate in writing only, ProCollect continued making collection calls multiple times per week throughout parts of 2024. This violates FDCPA provisions ( 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ) ) that require debt collectors to cease communication through channels a consumer has requested not to be used.

**TIMELINE** **XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 0 ) : ** Sent initial formal dispute email to XXXX with detailed legal arguments based on Texas Property Code , requested debt validation under FDCPA, and attached relevant documents ( Move-Out Statement and Lease Contract ). 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 23 ) : ** Sent first follow-up email to XXXX after 23 days of no response, noted continued collection calls despite dispute, and reiterated requests for debt validation and credit report correction. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 137 ) : ** Sent second follow-up email to XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 159 ) : ** Sent third follow-up email to XXXX, noted continued weekly phone calls since XXXX despite dispute, and referenced previous phone conversation confirming this was the correct dispute channel. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 163 ) : ** Received email from XXXX XXXX with two PDF attachments and responded same day explaining why evidence provided was insufficient and reiterating request for proper validation showing damages beyond wear and tear. 

**XXXX  XXXX, XXXX ( Day 321 ) : ** Sent another followup email to XXXX XXXX and XXXX summarizing 10-month dispute history, formally requested immediate credit report removal, and stated intent to file regulatory complaints if not resolved by XX/XX/XXXX. Also made phone call to ProCollect. 

**XXXX  XXXX, XXXX ( Day 322 ) : ** Made another phone call to ProCollect, was directed to email " XXXX '', was informed account is locked and can only be resolved by a specific manager, and was told " you will only receive response by email ''. Sent comprehensive email to " XXXX '' summarizing the entire dispute history. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day XXXX ) ** : " XXXX '' has failed to respond to my email. I called and was told " XXXX '' was out of the office. I requested that the agent pass along my number and ensure " XXXX '' gave me a call the next day. She said she would pass along the message. I made it clear I was expecting a phone call from XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day 333 ) ** : I called ProCollect three times. The first time, they hung up on me. The following two times, I was told that my only option was to email " XXXX '' which I have already done. Agents refused to speak further about the debt & refused to transfer me to " XXXX ''. Given that Texas is a one-party state, and both myself and ProCollect are based in Texas, I've also retained recordings of my recent calls with agents as proof of their refusal to communicate regarding this debt. 

XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Day XXXX ) ** : After ten months of dispute, multiple follow-up attempts, and numerous FDCPA violations, I'm filing complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regarding ProCollect 's failure to properly validate this debt and their continued reporting of legally invalid information to credit bureaus.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation