Consumer complaint received 2025-08-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Indicated you were committing crime by not paying debt
Company: Viking Client Services
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
REBUTTAL TO COMPANY RESPONSE DATED XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Complaint # XXXX Regarding Viking Ref. XXXX/ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Plate XXXX ) To Whom It May Concern, This is a formal rebuttal to Viking Client Services, LLCs XX/XX/2025 response. While I appreciate the acknowledgment of a billing error previously admitted, the remainder of the response fails to meaningfully or legally address the core of my complaint. The following points remain unresolved, legally deficient, or ignored : XXXX. Unverified {$810.00} Impound Fee ( Invoice # XXXX XXXX XXXX ) No evidence has been presented that connects this charge to me or to the vehicle I rented. Viking has failed to show : What incident necessitated the tow, Who authorized it, When and where it occurred, That it involved the vehicle I rented ( XXXX XXXX, CA Plate XXXX ), That I violated any term of the rental agreement. 

According to official records from the XXXX XXXX Police Department, specifically the report documented by XXXX XXXX ( # XXXX ), the vehicle in question was available for pickup by the rental company or their authorized roadside assistance provider as of XX/XX/2025. XXXX XXXX personally notified XXXX ( a XXXX brand ) by phone at the time the vehicle was located. 

The police report explicitly states : No mechanical, structural, or body damage was observed ; No technical failure or accident was reported ; The vehicle was not abandoned or inoperable ; There were no objective or emergency reasons for a tow ; The vehicle was in a safe and accessible location. 

Thus, the {$810.00} towing charge by XXXX XXXX was not justified by any documented need or emergency. There is no photograph, video, incident report, or damage evaluation substantiating this service. It is evident that the decision to tow the vehicle was made internally by a third party or an employee of XXXX or XXXX, not due to any action or inaction on my part. 

To date, XXXX has not identified this individual in any official documentation, nor provided proof that the decision to tow was warranted under the terms of my rental agreement or the law. 

I reiterate : I, XXXX XXXX, fulfilled all contractual obligations under the rental agreement. The vehicle was rented on XX/XX/2025, and returned on XX/XX/2025, on time, in good condition, and without incident. I had no further custody or control of the vehicle as of that time. 

Furthermore, while I signed the standard rental agreement, that agreement is still subject to all applicable consumer protection laws, and does not absolve the rental company from complying with federal or state legal standards. As such, the burden remains on XXXX and XXXX to XXXX : A legal basis for towing ; A connection between the tow and a breach of contract by me ; That I authorized or caused the towing event ; That the cost was reasonable and necessary. 

As a renter and consumer, I do not bear legal or financial responsibility for unilateral actions or internal decisions made by XXXX, XXXX, or their employees regarding how they choose to transport or retrieve their own property. Unless there is clear evidence that my actions necessitated towing or caused damage, I am not liable for this charge. 

Under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ), collection activity may not continue unless the debt is verified with supporting evidence. No such evidence has been provided. 



XXXX. Duplicate {$150.00} XXXX XXXX I am re-attaching a bank statement, transaction dated XX/XX/2025 for {$210.00}, which includes a {$150.00} administration fee. Please note that this is another gross violation in this case. XXXX and, together with it, the Viking collection agency, do not verify financial documents and illegally demand re-payment of invoice XXXX, which was previously paid. The fee was already paid on XX/XX/2025 under Receipt # XXXX, a fact that Viking failed to address meaningfully. They simply claimed they have no record, while failing to examine or refute the receipt I provided. This raises concerns about unlawful double billing. 



XXXX. Merged or Contaminated Account Records The prior inclusion of a towing charge for an unrelated vehicle ( Plate XXXX ) is not a clerical footnote. It raises serious doubts about : The integrity of Vikings account records, Whether multiple claims have been improperly merged, Whether any charges currently assigned to me are valid. 

Simply reducing the balance does not address the structural problem of misattributed charges. 



XXXX. Failure to Acknowledge Prior Mailed Dispute Letters ( XX/XX/2025 ) Despite being sent with XXXX tracking to both Viking and The XXXX XXXX, my detailed appeal letters dated XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX supporting documentationhave been completely ignored. Viking has not confirmed receipt nor provided any point-by-point reply to the legal and factual issues raised therein. 

This failure to respond reflects a lack of good faith engagement and violates the FDCPAs obligation to investigate disputes. 



XXXX. Debt Verification Packet Legally Deficient I acknowledge receiving a verification of debt packet from Viking, but that packet : Does not contain any evidence of towing authorization, Does not document mechanical failure, damages, or a breach of contract, Does not include photographs, repair reports, or maintenance records. 

The FDCPA requires a substantive verification of debt, not generic statements or invoices that fail to establish liability. 



XXXX Credit Reporting Concerns While Viking XXXX that they do not report car rental claims to credit bureaus, I requested formal written confirmation that no reporting has occurred or will occur. Viking has not provided that assurance, nor have they stated XXXX position on reporting. 



DEMAND FOR RELIEF In light of the above, I renew my demand for the following : XXXX. Immediate cessation of all collection efforts, as the debt remains unverified and contested ; XXXX. Formal closure of debt case # XXXX ; XXXX. Written confirmation that no negative credit reporting has occurred or will occur from either Viking or The XXXX XXXX ; XXXX. Written response to my certified letters dated XX/XX/2025 ; XXXX. Full withdrawal of this collection claim based on merged records, duplicative fees, and lack of supporting documentation. 



Due to systematic gross violations in financial documentation, illegal demand for re-payment of bills, this collection case against XXXX XXXX is illegal, and the evidence in this case can not be verified and is essentially illegal. Due to the above violations, I demand that collection in the case of fictitious debt against XXXX XXXX be immediately stopped. 

Please note that I reserve all legal rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), California XXXX XXXX XXXX et seq., and other applicable federal and state laws. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation