Consumer complaint received 2026-01-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: National Credit Systems,Inc.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
I have spoken with National Credit Systems on numerous occasions and have repeatedly advised them that the alleged debt they are attempting to collect and report contains multiple material inconsistencies and inaccuracies. 

I explained that the current owners of XXXX XXXX  were not the owners of the property at the time I resided there.The alleged debt is based on a 6 year-old lease agreement with a prior property owner. I further explained that I never entered into any lease, contract, or agreement with the subsequent owners, and that it is unlawful for subsequent owners to assume or enforce a debt as if I had contracted with them, when no such contractual relationship ever existed. 

I was on HUD Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher participant during the tenancy. HUD regulations and the lease prohibit charging tenants for normal wear and tear, and only allow charges for damage beyond normal wear and tear. 

This same debt has been incorrectly reported on the credit report of an individual who moved out of the unit well before I decided to end tenancy. The documentation I am attaching shows there were inspections done while I resided at this unit, if this other person who is being charged with this debt resided with me, her name would be addressed on this document. You cant not reside with a person who has section 8 unless section 8 has the person on your case, this individual is not on my case yet national credit system is still reporting this debt on her credit. This individual had her on unit, it is no way she can be on my lease and have a lease of her own in the same apartment complex. 

I also advised National Credit Systems that there are significant discrepancies in the documentation they are relying upon. Specifically, the security deposit amount reflected on the alleged move-out statement does not match the deposit amount listed on the original lease executed over 6 years ago. Because the deposit amount itself is incorrect, there is no valid basis upon which National Credit Systems can claim the alleged balance is owed. A debt can not be validated when the foundational figures used to support it are inaccurate. 

The move-out statement provided further reflects charges totaling approximately {$1800.00} for paint, cleaning, carpet, carpet shampooing, and related items. I explained that these charges are expressly prohibited under California law. 

Under California Civil Code 1950.5 ( e ) ( 2 ), a landlord may not deduct from a tenants security deposit for ordinary or normal wear and tear, regardless of the length of the tenancy. Deterioration resulting from ordinary use and aging as opposed to tenant-caused damage is not chargeable to the tenant. 

Examples of non-chargeable normal wear and tear include, but are not limited to : Worn or faded paint from normal living Slight carpet wear from foot traffic Small nail holes from hanging pictures Worn flooring due to ordinary use Minor fading, scuffs, or aging of fixtures Civil Code 1950.5 further prohibits : Deductions for ordinary wear and tear occurring before or during the tenancy Charges for pre-existing conditions present at move-in Charges exceeding what is reasonably necessary to restore the unit to its move-in condition, excluding normal wear and tear All of the above was clearly explained to National Credit Systems, yet they have continued to report this inaccurate and unvalidated account to consumer reporting agencies. 

As a direct result of this continued inaccurate reporting, I am being denied housing. Despite my repeated good-faith attempts to resolve this matter and provide clarification, both XXXX XXXX and National Credit Systems have ignored and disregarded these disputes. 

I am attaching documentation showing that I was a HUD-assisted tenant at the time of my tenancy, as well as copies of the applicable California statutes that National Credit Systems is disregarding by continuing to report this inaccurate account. 

If this matter is not immediately corrected, I will proceed with formal litigation against both XXXX XXXX  and National Credit Systems for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, California Civil Code 1950.5, and other applicable state and federal laws.

Laws Being Violated FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. 1692e, 1692f ) False representation, unfair practices FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Furnishing inaccurate credit data California Civil Code 1950.5 Normal wear and tear not chargeable HUD Section 8 regulations Tenants not responsible for ordinary wear and tear

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation