Consumer complaint received 2026-04-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
b'COMPLAINANT: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Senior Citizen XXXX XXXX XXXXEnhanced Protections Apply)\nRESPONDENT: Capital One, N.A. | XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nCapital One Case Numbers on Record:\n\tXXXX (Response: XXXX XXXX XXXX)\n\tXXXX (Response: XXXX XXXX XXXX)\n\tXXXX XXXXResponse: XXXX XXXX XXXX\nXXXX XXXXResponse: XXXX XXXX XXXXn________________________________________\nI. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT\nThis complaint is filed against Capital One, N.A. for knowing, willful, and continuing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Dodd-Frank UDAAP provisions, and Ohio consumer protection law. The violations are not technical they are substantive, ongoing, and supported entirely by Capital One\'s own written responses under its own case numbers.\nThe Consumer completed four full dispute cycles beginning XXXX XXXX XXXX. The Fourth and Final Demand was delivered via Certified Mail (Tracking No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX XXXX with a mandatory compliance deadline of XXXX XXXX XXXX. That deadline has expired. Capital One has not corrected its reporting, has not deleted the disputed tradelines, and has not provided written confirmation of any corrective action.\nThis complaint is filed as a formal record in support of concurrent federal court proceedings initiated XXXX XXXX XXXX_______________________________________\nII. ACCOUNTS AT ISSUE\nAccount 1: Capital One Quicksilver XXXXn\tOpened: XXXX XXXX XXXX | Last Payment: XXXX XXXX XXXXrst Delinquency: XXXX XXXX XXXX | Charged Off: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\tTransferred to: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (XXXX XXXX)\n\tReported Balance: XXXX | Credit Limit: XXXX\n\tCapital One Case Nos.: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nAccount 2: Capital One Quicksilver XXXX\n\tCharged Off: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\tTransferred to: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)\n\tReported Balance: XXXXn\tCapital One Case No.: XXXXn________________________________________\nIII. COMPLETE DISPUTE TIMELINE DOCUMENTED\nDate\tAction\tCapital One Response\nXXXX XXXX XXXX\tFirst Demand Certified Mail\tCase No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Confirmed XXXX "correct"\nXXXX XXXX\tSecond Demand\tCase No. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Confirmed reporting "accurate"\nXXXX XXXX XXXXtThird Demand Certified Mail\tCase NoXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Admitted cannot produce Customer Agreement\nXXXX XXXX XXXXtFourth and Final Demand Certified Mail\tDEADLINE XXXX XXXX XXXX EXPIRED NO RESPONSE\n________________________________________\nIV. GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE\n________________________________________\nGROUND 1 CAPITAL ONE CONFESSED IN WRITING TO REPORTING A BALANCE IT NO LONGER OWNS TWICE\nThis is not an allegation. This is a confession in Capital One\'s own words, under Capital One\'s own case numbers.\nCapital One\'s XXXX XXXX XXXX Response (Case No. XXXX Exhibit A):\n"On XXXX XXXX XXXX we correctly reported your account\'s current balance as XXXX."\nCapital One\'s XXXX XXXX XXXX Response (Case No. XXXX Exhibit C):\n"On XXXX XXXX XXXX we correctly reported your account\'s credit limit as XXXX high credit, current balance, charge-off amount and past-due amount as XXXX."\nThe Fatal Problem: Capital One transferred Account XXXX XXXXo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX confirmed by XXXX own collection notice dated XXXX XXXX XXXX (Exhibit F). Capital One held zero financial interest in Account XXXX from that date forward.\nYet Capital One certified in writing on XXXX XXXX XXXX and again on XXXX XXXX XXXX that it was "correctly" reporting a XXXX balance. These certifications came ten and eleven months after the account was transferred. Capital One did not make an error. Capital One confirmed the error was correct twice in writing under its own case numbers.\nUnder Metro 2 Credit Reporting Standards, upon transfer of a charged-off account, the original creditor must report a $0.00 balance and update the account status to "DA Transferred/Sold." Only the current debt owner may report a balance. Capital One violated this standard for at least ten consecutive months and certified those violations as accurate.\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(1)(A), a furnisher is prohibited from reporting information it knows or has reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate. Capital One\'s own written certifications establish that it knew it was reporting a balance on a transferred account and chose to continue. This is the textbook definition of willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n entitling the Consumer to actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorney\'s fees.\n________________________________________\nGROUND 2 CAPITAL ONE\'S OWN WRITTEN ADMISSION DESTROYS THE EVIDENTIARY FOUNDATION OF BOTH ACCOUNTS\nIn its written response dated XXXX XXXX XXXX (Case No. XXXX Capital One stated:\n"Unfortunately, we are unable to fulfill your request regarding your Customer Agreement."\nThis is a judicial admission a written, signed statement by Capital One that it does not possess the governing contract upon which its claim is based. The consequences are fatal and permanent:\n\tCapital One cannot verify the debt it is reporting\n\tCapital One knew it was reporting inaccurately and certified it as correct twice\n\tCapital One cannot produce the contract that would establish the debt\'s validity\n\tNo amount of time, discovery, or litigation will change these admissions they are permanent, in writing, and signed by Capital One\nA furnisher that cannot produce the underlying account agreement has no legal basis to certify the accuracy of what it reports. The evidentiary foundation of both accounts has been destroyed by Capital One\'s own hand.\n________________________________________\nGROUND 3 THE REPORTED BALANCE EXCEEDS THE CREDIT LIMIT A MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY CERTIFIED AS ACCURATE\nCapital One\'s own XXXX XXXX XXXX response (Exhibit C) confirms:\n\tAmount\nCredit Limit\XXXX\nReported Balance\XXXX\nUnexplained ExcessXXXXCapital One has provided no explanation for how a XXXX credit limit account accumulated a XXXX balance and then certified that balance as "correctly reported." This discrepancy, confirmed in Capital One\'s own written response, is independent evidence of inaccurate reporting under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(1)(A).\n________________________________________\nGROUND 4 DUAL REPORTING CONSTITUTES A KNOWING UDAAP VIOLATION AND CREDIT FRAUD\nCapital One certified it was reporting XXXX on Account XXXX on XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. Radius\'s collection notices (Exhibits E and F, XXXX XXXX XXXX confirm Radius simultaneously reported the identical balance. Both parties\' own documents confirm the dual reporting:\nAccount\tCapital One Reports\tXXXX Reports\tPhantom Debt Created\nXXXXnThe Consumer\'s credit profile reflects $23,333.38 in apparent debt when the maximum possible legitimate debt if any is XXXX This artificial doubling directly harms the Consumer\'s credit score, housing access, and financial standing. This violates:\n\tMetro 2 Credit Reporting Standards transferred accounts must report XXXXn\t12 U.S.C. 5531 and 5536 UDAAP: unfair, deceptive, abusive acts or practices\n\t15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(1)(A) FCRA: knowing reporting of inaccurate information\n________________________________________\nGROUND 5 CONSUMER IS COMPLETELY JUDGMENT-PROOF CONTINUED REPORTING IS PURELY COERCIVE\nA. XXXX XXXX XXXX O.R.C. 2329.66(A)(1)\nOhio\'s homestead exemption shields up to XXXX in residential equity from execution, garnishment, attachment, or forced sale by any judgment creditor. The exemption is self-executing, applies to all judgment creditors including credit card companies and debt collectors, and cannot be waived by contract under Ohio law. The Consumer\'s primary residence valued at approximately XXXX is fully and completely protected.\nB. SSI Income Absolutely Exempt Under Federal Law\nThe Consumer\'s sole source of income is Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Under 42 U.S.C. 407(a) and 42 U.S.C. 1383(d)(1):\n"None of the moneys paid or payable or rights existing under this subchapter shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process..."\nThe United States Supreme Court confirmed in XXXX XXXX XXXX County Welfare Board, 409 U.S. 413 (XXXX) that SSI is absolutely exempt from any creditor without exception. This exemption cannot be waived by contract, overridden by state law, or circumvented by any collection technique. SSI funds retain their exempt character after deposit into a bank account as long as they are traceable to the exempt source. In re Colston, 539 B.R. 738 (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nC. Complete Asset and Exemption Analysis\nAsset\tValue\tExemption\tAttachable Amount\nPrimary Residence\tXXXX\tO.R.C. 2329.66(A)(1) up to XXXXt$0.00\nSSI Monthly Income\t100% of income\t42 U.S.C. 407(a) 100%, no cap\t$0.00\nBank Account (SSI deposits)\tSSI-funded\tPhilpott 100% traceable\t$0.00\nPersonal Vehicle\tXXXX\tO.R.C. 2329.66(A)(2) up to XXXX\nHousehold Goods\tNominal\tO.R.C. 2329.66(A)(4)(a) up to XXXX\nTOTAL ATTACHABLE ASSETS\t\t\t$0.00\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is completely and totally judgment-proof under Ohio law and federal law.\nD. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Common Pleas Court\nIn an XXXX XXXX XXXX, Ohio proceeding (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Ohio Common Pleas, 2019), a national bank obtained a default judgment against a retired Social Security recipient and attempted to execute on a residence valued at XXXX an SSI-funded bank account, and a vehicle valued at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Common Pleas Court sustained the debtor\'s motion declaring all assets exempt under O.R.C. 2329.66 the execution lien was void and unenforceable, the bank levy was immediately released, and the court noted that continued collection efforts against a judgment-proof debtor would constitute harassment under the FDCPA.\nE. Controlling Ohio Precedent\n\tXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ohio Supreme Court: exemption statutes must be liberally construed in favor of the debtor\n\tIn re Kuchta, 434 B.R. 837 (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Creditors who continue collection against a known judgment-proof SSI debtor may face sanctions and FDCPA liability\n\tIn re Colston, 539 B.R. 738 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2015) SSI funds retain exempt character after deposit; creditors who levy such accounts violate 42 U.S.C. 407(a) and the FDCPA\nF. Prior Ohio Court Dismissals Judgment-Proof Status Judicially Confirmed\nThe Consumer\'s judgment-proof status is not theoretical it has been confirmed by Ohio courts:\n\tXXXX XXXX XXXX Pleas Court Case NoXXXX XXXX DISMISSED\n\tXXXX XXXX Small Claims Court Case No. XXXX DISMISSED\nUnder Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 41, these dismissals combined with the Consumer\'s documented judgment-proof status establish a pattern of futility that courts and regulatory bodies recognize as conclusive evidence that continued collection efforts are:\n\tLegally pointless no judgment can ever be enforced\n\tCoercive in purpose the only effect of continued reporting is credit damage and harassment of a XXXX consumer\n\tActionable under the FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692f prohibits unconscionable means of collection against a known judgment-proof consumer\n\tActionable as UDAAP 12 U.S.C. 5531: an act is "unfair" if it causes substantial injury that is not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by countervailing benefits\nThe continued reporting of these tradelines serves one purpose and one purpose only: to damage the Consumer\'s credit standing in order to coerce payment that cannot legally be compelled. This is not debt collection. This is elder financial exploitation and it must stop.\n________________________________________\nV. RELIEF REQUESTED FROM CAPITAL ONE, N.A. AND XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXLC\n1.\tImmediate deletion with prejudice of Account XXXX and Account XXXX from all three consumer reporting agencies XXXX XXXX, and XXXX\n2.\tWritten confirmation of deletion with prejudice, including bureau submission dates and confirmation reference numbers\n3.\tPermanent cessation of all collection activity on both accounts\n4.\tAssessment of civil money penalties for UDAAP violations dual reporting and coercive reporting against a judgment-proof senior citizen\n5.\tAssessment of enhanced civil penalties under Ohio Revised Code 1345.031 up to XXXX per violation against a consumer age XXXX\n6.\tPreservation of this complaint as part of the formal record in concurrent federal court proceedings initiated XXXX XXXX XXXX\n________________________________________\nVI. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ATTACHED\n\t Exhibit I First Demand Letter XXXX XXXX XXXXn\t Exhibit A Capital One Response JXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Certifies XXXX "correct" ten months after transfer\n\t Exhibits B & C Capital One Response XXXX XXXX XXXX (Case No. XXXX Certifies reporting "accurate" eleven months after transfer; confirms balance exceeds credit limit\n\t Third Demand Letter XXXX XXXX XXXXn\t Certified Mail Receipt XXXX XXXX XXXX (Tracking: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\t Capital One Response XXXX XXXX XXXX (Case No. XXXX Judicial Admission: Cannot produce Customer Agreement\n\t Fourth and Final Demand XXXX XXXX XXXX Deadline Expired XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\t Exhibits E & F XXXX XXXX Notices XXXX XXXX XXXX Confirms simultaneous dual reporting and Radius self-identification as debt collector\n________________________________________\nVII. DECLARATION\nI, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Capital One, N.A. confirmed in writing on two separate occasions, under two separate case numbers that it was "correctly" reporting a balance on an account it had transferred ten months prior. Capital One then admitted in writing that it cannot produce the governing Customer Agreement. The mandatory response deadline of XXXX XXXX XXXX has expired. No further opportunity to cure should be granted. These are alleged debts that have never been verified, validated, or established by any competent evidence, and any information obtained through this process will be used in all available administrative, regulatory, and judicial proceedings.\n________________________________________\nVIII. CONSUMER NOTICE ALLEGED DEBT DISCOVERY PURPOSES ONLY\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ("Consumer") hereby provides formal notice to Capital One, N.A., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that the debts referenced in all prior correspondence Capital One Account XXXX XXXX) and Account XXXX XXXX, together with XXXX XXXX XXXX references XXXX XXXX XXXX are alleged debts only, which have never been verified, validated, or established by any competent evidence; consistent with the Mini-Miranda disclosure mandated of debt collectors under 15 U.S.C. 1692e(11), the Consumer provides reciprocal notice that any and all information obtained through the dispute process, CFPB proceedings, discovery, or any other means will be used in all available administrative, regulatory, and judicial proceedings; the Consumer is completely judgment-proof, his sole income being SSI absolutely exempt under 42 U.S.C. 407(a) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Welfare Board, 409 U.S. 413 (1973), his primary residence protected under O.R.C. 2329.66(A)(1), and his judgment-proof status confirmed by prior dismissals in XXXX XXXX XXXX Pleas Court (Case No. XXXX) and XXXX XXXX Small Claims Court (Case No. XXXX, leaving no attachable assets whatsoever; and therefore, continued reporting of these alleged debts serves no legitimate collection purpose and constitutes an unfair, deceptive, and abusive act or practice under 12 U.S.C. 5531, actionable elder financial exploitation under Ohio Revised Code 1345.031, and an unconscionable means of collection under 15 U.S.C. 1692f.\n________________________________________\nRespectfully submitted,\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX | XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief