Consumer complaint received 2026-01-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: Halsted Financial Services, LLC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
This is NOT a duplicate complaint. This submission is a rebuttal and supplemental response addressing material omissions and misrepresentations in the companys CFPB response packet, which failed to lawfully substantiate the alleged debt. 

XXXX : For additional context regarding applicable XXXX XXXX XXXX debt collection requirements and ongoing enforcement review, I have filed complaints with XXXX XXXX concerning XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX and Halsted Financial Services ; copies are attached. 

In its CFPB submission, the company relied primarily on internally generated account summaries and servicing notes. These documents do not originate from the original creditor, do not prove ownership or chain of assignment, and do not establish the accuracy or enforceability of the alleged debt. The company did not provide a bill of sale, assignment agreement, schedule of accounts identifying my account, chain of title, or any document demonstrating lawful authority to collect or report. 

Critically, the companys own records contain materially inconsistent balances for the same alleged obligation : ( XXXX ) a XXXX balance of {$60000.00}, ( XXXX ) an XXXX charge-off of {$66000.00}, and ( XXXX ) an internal XXXX write-off balance of {$58000.00}. 
These figures can not all be correct, and the company provided no complete itemization or explanation reconciling these discrepancies. 

Additionally, the companys internal file contains a fraud-related warning/notation, yet the CFPB response failed to acknowledge, investigate, or explain this designation or how it was resolved prior to continued collection and credit reporting. 

As a XXXX XXXX XXXX  consumer, I dispute the companys assertion that it is not obligated to provide ownership or contract documentation while continuing collection and reporting. Under NYC Administrative Code 20-490 and DCWP Debt Collection Rules ( 23 RCNY 1-04 ), once a debt is disputed, a collector must either : ( XXXX ) provide substantiation of the debt directly to the consumer, or ( XXXX ) issue a written Notice of Unverified Debt and cease collection. 

Additionally, the companys own records indicate multiple transfers and servicing placements occurring on the same date, without accompanying documentation explaining how ownership was transferred, reconciled, or verified. This further underscores that the materials provided do not substantiate the debt or establish reliable authority to collect. 

Forwarding disputes internally, relying on self-generated summaries, or transferring the account among multiple agencies does not satisfy XXXX law. No Notice of Unverified Debt was issued. 

Regarding HALSTED FINANCIAL SERVICES : For completeness, I am copying Halsted Financial Services, who attempted to collect this same alleged debt and received written disputes. Under NYC Administrative Code 20-490 and DCWP Debt Collection Rules, each collector had an independent, non-delegable obligation to communicate directly with me by either substantiating the debt or issuing a written Notice of Unverified Debt. XXXX failed to do so. Forwarding the account or dispute internally does not satisfy XXXX XXXX, which requires direct written notice to the consumer.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation