Consumer complaint received 2026-06-10 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Alorica Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing the accuracy of information being reported on my consumer credit file by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( SST ), a third-party loan servicer based in XXXX XXXX XXXX Missouri. I am disputing the accuracy and completeness of what SST is reporting to the consumer reporting agencies. A review of my tri-merge credit report revealed that SST is reporting an account ending in XXXX on my credit file at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The XXXX XXXX field on this account is blank on all three bureaus. SST 's own legal disclosures state they are " a debt collector attempting to collect this debt for the current creditor '' meaning by their own admission they are not and have never been the original creditor. Leaving the XXXX XXXX field blank while implying by omission that SST originated the debt is a misrepresentation of the fundamental nature of this account. I submitted a formal written dispute to SST requesting verification of the debt and an explanation of the following specific reporting inaccuracies I identified across all three bureaus : The account status is reported differently across all three bureaus Closed on XXXX, transferred on XXXX and XXXX which are irreconcilable designations for the same account at the same point in time. XXXX reports XXXX payment history for this account while XXXX and XXXX both report detailed derogatory payment history including XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late payments in XXXX, XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX, followed by charge-off marks from XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX payment history and a full derogatory record can not both be accurate for the same account. The on-time payment rate is reported as 84 % on XXXX and 63 % on XXXX a XXXX discrepancy for the same account that can not be accurate simultaneously. The last activity date differs across all three bureaus : XX/XX/XXXX, on TransUnion, XX/XX/XXXX, on XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX, on XXXX. This date directly governs the XXXX maximum reporting period under the FCRA and can not differ across bureaus without XXXX or more dates being inaccurate. XXXX misclassifies this account under Creditor Type " Auto Financing '' while XXXX reports " Finance, personal '' and XXXX reports " Personal Loan Companies '' XXXX irreconcilable account type classifications for the same account that affect how credit scoring models evaluate it. The reported high balance of {$17000.00} does not reconcile with SST 's own XXXX status field stating {$18000.00} was written off a {$1000.00} discrepancy within SST 's own reporting on the same account, with no documented explanation for the difference. The " consumer disagrees '' dispute notation required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) is missing entirely on XXXX despite appearing on both XXXX XXXX XXXX for the same account. SST responded to my dispute on XX/XX/XXXX, with a form letter stating only : " This account has been servicing released. Please contact the agency currently servicing your account, XXXX XXXX XXXX '' No specific inaccuracies were addressed. I submitted a second dispute. XXXX responded again on XX/XX/XXXX, with an identical form letter. Again, no specific inaccuracies were addressed. Following those XXXX non-responses, SST sent a verification package consisting of a generic Line of Credit Agreement template, a Table of Charges and Fees, and a page of boilerplate definitions. No account-specific statements, payment history ledger, or itemized balance breakdown was provided. The generic Line of Credit Agreement SST submitted as verification contains the following language in its first paragraph : " This Line of XXXX XXXX is your credit contract with XXXX XXXX bank, a New Jersey XXXX bank. '' The document SST provided as their own verification identifies XXXX XXXX Bank not SST and not XXXX XXXX as the originating lender. Despite this, XXXX continues to report this account with the XXXX XXXX field blank on all three bureaus. Despite admitting twice in writing that this account has been " servicing released '' meaning XXXX has explicitly stated it has no current servicing relationship with this account SST continues to furnish this account as an active tradeline on consumer credit files at Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax. The violations I am alleging are as follows : SST is reporting the Original Creditor field as blank despite the verification document they themselves provided identifying XXXX XXXX Bank as the originating lender, in violation of XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX has admitted in XXXX separate written communications that it has no current servicing relationship with this account yet continues to furnish it to consumer reporting agencies, in violation of XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX failed to conduct a reasonable investigation in response to my disputes, responding XXXX times without addressing a single specific inaccuracy identified, in violation of XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ). XXXX failed to universally report the " consumer disagrees '' dispute notation to all three bureaus as required by XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( c ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX 's reporting contains irreconcilable cross-bureau inaccuracies in account status, payment history, on-time payment rate, last activity date, account type, and balance figures that collectively demonstrate a systemic failure to maintain maximum possible accuracy as required by XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ). XXXX failed to provide meaningful debt verification under XXXX XXXX. XXXX, sending only generic template documents instead of account-specific statements, payment history, or an itemized balance breakdown. XXXX 's own Billing XXXX XXXX, which they included in their verification package, states : " We can not report you as delinquent without also reporting that you are questioning your bill. '' XXXX is reporting this account as delinquent without accurately noting the disputed status across all three bureaus, in direct violation of their own contractual language and XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). I am attaching the following documents : SST letter dated XX/XX/XXXX SST letter dated XX/XX/XXXX Line of Credit Agreement provided by SST as verification Table of Charges and Fees provided by SST Billing Rights Statement provided by SST Tri-merge credit report pages showing the disputed account across all three bureaus

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation