Consumer complaint received 2026-04-07 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Communication tactics — You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE Re : Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and CFPB Consent Order To Whom It May Concern : This letter serves as my formal Notice of Intent to Sue Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) for multiple violations of federal law, including FCRA 1681s2 ( b ), FDCPA 807, FDCPA 809 ( b ), and the 2015 CFPB Consent Order. PRAs XX/XX/XXXX response to my CFPB complaint is factually incorrect, legally insufficient, and demonstrably noncompliant with federal requirements governing furnishers and debt collectors. PRAs response is a boilerplate template that fails to address the specific violations raised in my complaint and contradicts PRAs own reporting history. A detailed, pointbypoint legal analysis is included below as Exhibit A. If PRA does not correct these violations within 10 days, I will proceed with litigation in federal court. -- - EXHIBIT A POINTBYPOINT LEGAL TAKEDOWN OF PRAS RESPONSE 1. PRA : We found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct. This statement is false and contradicted by PRAs own Metro2 reporting. PRAs reporting history shows : A closed tradeline was reopened A new tradeline was created Dates were altered ( illegal reaging ) Balances were inconsistent PRA continued reporting after a ceaseanddesist PRA failed to provide any validation PRA can not claim no records when the records exist in their own furnishing. Legal authority : FDCPA 807 ( 10 ) prohibits misrepresenting consumer rights FCRA 1681s2 ( b ) requires a reasonable investigation Saunders v. BB & T, 526 F.3d 142 ( 4th Cir. 2008 ) CFPB Consent Order ( 2015 ) prohibits ignoring disputes or misrepresenting account history -- - 2. PRA : We investigated the complaint. This is demonstrably false. A reasonable investigation under FCRA requires addressing each specific dispute point. PRA ignored : Illegal reaging Duplicate tradeline Reopened tradeline Inaccurate dates Inaccurate balances Failure to validate Ceaseanddesist violations Violations of the CFPB Consent Order Legal authority : Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, 584 F.3d 1147 ( 9th Cir. 2009 ) Johnson v. MBNA, 357 F.3d 426 ( 4th Cir. 2004 ) FCRA 1681s2 ( b ) must review all relevant information PRAs response is a textbook unreasonable investigation. -- - 3. PRA : We take compliance seriously. This is irrelevant boilerplate. Courts have held that generic compliance statements do not satisfy FCRA obligations. PRAs response does not address : Reaging Duplicate tradeline Ceaseanddesist violation Failure to validate Inconsistent dates Inconsistent balances This is a nonresponsive answer designed to avoid liability. -- - 4. PRA : We found no violation due to their credit reporting. This is factually impossible. Each of the following is independently an FCRA violation : Reaging Inconsistent dates Inaccurate balances Duplicate tradeline Reopening a closed tradeline Reporting after ceaseanddesist Failure to validate Failure to investigate Legal authority : Saunders v. BB & T misleading reporting violates FCRA Carvalho v. Equifax, 629 F.3d 876 ( 9th Cir. 2010 ) CFPB Consent Order ( 2015 ) prohibits furnishing inaccurate information -- - 5. PRA : We validated the account information. This is a direct contradiction. If PRA validated the account, they would have : Produced documentation Addressed dispute points Corrected inaccurate reporting They did none of these. Legal authority : Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 U.S. 291 ( 1995 ) FDCPA 809 ( b ) validation must be meaningful FCRA 1681s2 ( b ) investigation must be reasonable PRAs claim of validation is unsupported and contradicted by their actions. -- - 6. PRA : We purchased the account from XXXX XXXX This is irrelevant. Ownership of a debt does not excuse : Inaccurate reporting Failure to validate Failure to investigate Reaging Duplicate tradelines Ceaseanddesist violations This is a deflection, not a response. -- - 7. PRA : We maintain appropriate licenses and follow all laws. This is misleading. PRA has been sanctioned by the CFPB multiple times, including : 2015 Consent Order 2023 Enforcement Action Their claim of perfect compliance is contradicted by federal enforcement history. -- - CONCLUSION PRAs Response Violates Federal Law PRAs response is : Nonresponsive Contradictory Boilerplate Factually incorrect Legally insufficient A violation of FCRA 1681s2 ( b ) A violation of FDCPA 807 A violation of the CFPB Consent Order -- - DEMAND FOR RESOLUTION To avoid litigation, PRA must take the following actions within 10 days : 1. Delete all PRA tradelines from all consumer reporting agencies 2. Cease all collection activity 3. Provide written confirmation of deletion and closure Failure to comply will result in : Filing suit in federal court Seeking statutory damages under FCRA and FDCPA Seeking punitive damages where applicable Requesting attorneys fees and costs Submitting PRAs conduct to CFPB enforcement for repeat violations This notice is provided in good faith and with the intent to resolve the matter without litigation. Respetfully,

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief