Consumer complaint received 2025-09-04 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Credit Control, LLC
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
This complaint and notice is being filed for unlawful conduct against Credit Control , LLC, a debt collector that recently initiated collection activity on an alleged account previously placed in active dispute with XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. It appears Credit Control has now assumed servicing or collection responsibilities. However, they have done so without providing the legally required documentation to establish a valid right to collect, including the original contract, chain of title, full account history of every transaction, and any assignment or transfer documentation. To be very clear, this is my continued formal dispute of this alleged debt to Credit Control pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ). This complaint also serves as formal notice of a cease and desist, prohibiting all communication except through U.S. Mail, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ). I will also be submitting separate CFPB complaints against XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  for their respective roles in this unlawful conduct. 
Credit Control 's actions constitute multiple violations of federal and Utah consumer protection laws. Their conduct demonstrates bad faith, unlawful assumptions of authority, and participation in deceptive and unfair practices. Credit Control must cease all collection activities until they provide full and complete verification, as required by case law, of the alleged debt.

Credit Control has initiated collection activity on an account that was already in active legal dispute with prior collectors, including XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( see attachments ). Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ), once a consumer disputes a debt in writing, the collector must cease all collection efforts until proper validation is provided. While Credit Control did send a collection letter ( a " dunning notice '' ) that included a vague and unverifiable account summary, they did so without resolving the previously established dispute or providing any legal proof of their authority to collect the debt. If Credit Control is acting on behalf of, or in coordination with, XXXX or XXXX, then they are jointly liable for continuing unlawful collection practices. If they are a purchaser of the debt, they assumed responsibility for any unresolved disputes tied to the account. If Credit Control failed to obtain or review prior account dispute history before initiating collection, that may constitute a reckless disregard for compliance and consumer rights under the FDCPA.

Credit Control violated the FDCPA under 15 U.S.C. 1692e, which prohibits the use of any false, deceptive, or misleading representation in connection with the collection of a debt. Their collection letter includes an unexplained {$10.00} discrepancy between the balance reported by the prior collector ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and the amount now claimed by Credit Control. In response to this discrepancy, Credit Control stated : " You paid or were credited this amount toward the debt. '' This is a false and misleading statement. I have never made any payment toward this debt, nor have I received any documentation showing a credit applied to the account. No invoice, transaction receipt, or account activity ledger has been provided to validate this alleged credit. This appears to be an unlawful attempt to reconcile an error or gap in the account history brought to XXXX  attention without proper documentation or explanation, possibly to avoid responding to my previous dispute. The absence of a paper trail to support this claim, combined with their failure to provide full account-level documentation renders this statement not only deceptive but materially misleading, violating 1692e. The mischaracterization of a known discrepancy as a " credit '' misleads the consumer into believing the balance has been properly calculated and validated, when in fact it has not. This is especially problematic because accuracy in the amount claimed is essential for any lawful collection effort, and such unexplained inconsistencies can materially affect my legal position, defense, and standing in court. Misrepresenting this detail without substantiation is not only unlawful, it undermines the fairness of the entire collection process.

Credit Control has further violated the FDCPA under 15 U.S.C. 1692f, which prohibits the use of unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. In this case, Credit Control initiated collection efforts on an account that had not been properly validated, and which originated under a pattern of noncompliance and procedural violations by XXXX and XXXX. Attempting to collect on a disputed and unvalidated debt, especially one tainted by prior statutory violations is unfair, misleading, and abusive under 1692f. This conduct lacks transparency, disregards due process and places the consumer at a legal and evidentiary disadvantage, all of which are expressly prohibited by the statute.

Credit Control has also violated Utah Consumer Sales Practices Act ( UCSPA ) by initiating collection on a disputed debt without providing any proof of ownership, contract, or legal standing. The account had been the subject of prior disputes and administrative notices sent to XXXX and XXXX, which Credit Control had a duty to review upon acquiring the account. Proceeding without this due diligence constitutes deceptive conduct under UCSPA. Statutory violations include : misrepresentation of the legal right to collect ( up to {$2000.00} ), attempted collection on a disputed and unresolved account ( up to {$2000.00} ), and failure to provide required documentation and respond to prior consumer demands ( up to {$2000.00} ). 
Credit Control shares joint liability with XXXX and XXXX as a successor and beneficiary of the transferred account. 
This account has been the subject of multiple certified dispute letters and lawful consumer notices sent to XXXX and XXXX, none of which received a legally sufficient response. At no point have I been provided with an original signed contract, original agreement, complete itemized account history, or lawful proof of assignment or legal title. Credit Controls attempt to collect continues an unlawful chain of custody and pattern of statutory violations across multiple entities, each failing to comply with federal and Utah consumer protection laws.

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