Consumer complaint received 2025-03-24 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: National Credit Systems,Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Complaint Against National Credit Systems ( NCS ) FDCPA and FCRA Violations Submitted to : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Date : XX/XX/XXXX Complaint ID : XXXX ( Previous Complaint ) Debt Amount : {$25000.00} Original Creditor : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to formally request a reinvestigation of the actions taken by National Credit Systems ( NCS ) regarding a reported debt of {$25000.00}. My initial CFPB complaint ( ID XXXX ) was closed with an explanation that I believe fails to address critical procedural violations. I respectfully urge that this case be reopened and thoroughly investigated based on the following facts and legal violations : Factual Background : Lack of Timely Notification : Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ), a debt collector is required to provide a written notice of the debt within five days of initial communication. I did not receive any such notice until I obtained a PDF document on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXsubstantially later than the statutory requirement. 

Document Generation and XXXX Issues : The document I received on XX/XX/XXXX, includes a reference to a 15-day dispute window but lacks any mailing date, signature, or evidence of prior delivery. Notably, the PDF metadata confirms that the final version was modified on XX/XX/XXXX. This indicates that the document was retroactively generated in direct response to my CFPB complaint rather than being an original, contemporaneous notification. 

In response to my initial dispute, National Credit Systems stated that charges were not assessed by NCS, thereby deflecting responsibility to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. However, under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ), NCS is obligated to validate any debt it reports regardless of its source. Their reliance on vague assertions rather than providing an itemized, verifiable breakdown fails to meet this requirement. As established in XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, debt validation must be contemporaneous and detailed. This deflection, combined with the retroactive generation of the notice, demonstrates a clear violation of the FDCPAs notice provisions. 

Failure of Validation : Despite my dispute, NCS has not provided an itemized, verifiable breakdown of the debt. The absence of supporting documentssuch as invoices, photographs, or proof of mailingrenders the debt unverified and in violation of both the FDCPA and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ). 

Legal Basis and Supporting Precedents : FDCPA Violations : NCSs failure to provide timely, clear, and verifiable notice is a violation of FDCPA 1692g ( a ) and 1692e. In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), the court held that debt collectors must adhere strictly to these notice requirements.

FCRA Violations : Furnishing unverifiable debt information to credit bureaus violates FCRA requirements. In XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), courts emphasized that inaccurate credit reporting may result in consumer liability for harm. 

Inadequate Validation : The retroactive generation of the validation documentlacking a mailing date, signature, or delivery prooffalls far short of the standard established in XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. This precedent confirms that a debt collectors attempt to validate a debt must be contemporaneous and detailed, not generated in response to regulatory pressure. 

Critical Observations : The validation documents reference to a 15-day dispute window is rendered meaningless because I received this document only on XX/XX/XXXX. This retroactive generationwithout any evidence of prior deliverydeprives me of the statutory right to dispute the debt before it adversely affected my credit. 

The metadata and absence of a mailing date demonstrate that NCS did not comply with FDCPA notification requirements. Instead, the document was clearly produced only in response to my complaint. 

NCSs reliance on a document that appears to be the bare minimuma generic, retroactively generated invoice without any substantive validationundermines their claim that I was properly notified. 

Requested Relief : Immediate removal of the unverified {$25000.00} debt from all credit reporting agencies. 

A full, itemized, and verifiable breakdown of the alleged charges, including evidence of mailing or digital delivery of the original notice. 

A formal written explanation as to why the only document provided was generated on XX/XX/XXXX, in direct response to my CFPB complaint rather than at the time of the initial collection. 

Escalation of this investigation to include potential FDCPA and FCRA violations, with appropriate enforcement actions pursued if no adequate resolution is reached. 

In the absence of a timely and satisfactory response, I will escalate this matter by filing additional complaints with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) and my State Attorney Generals Office, and I will consider pursuing civil remedies for the significant harm caused to my credit and financial wellbeing. 

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation