Consumer complaint received 2025-11-19 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Lloyd & McDaniel, PLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a new complaint because the previous complaint response ( XXXX ) did NOT resolve any of the issues. In fact, the companys response confirmed multiple violations. 

Lloyd & McDaniel and XXXX XXXX continue to furnish inaccurate information to the credit bureaus, continue collection activity without proper validation, and refuse to provide the required procedural documentation under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ).

False Statements & Misrepresentations 1. Contradictory Status Reporting My credit reports show the account as both " Charged Off '' and " Closed by Credit Grantor '', yet still list an active past-due amount. This is contradictory and violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 

XXXX. Illegal Past-Due Reporting After Charge-Off The entire balance ( {$10000.00} ) is reported as past due after charge-off, which violates XXXX XXXX and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ).

3. Numerical Impossibility The bureaus report a balance higher than the credit limit : Balance : {$10000.00} Limit : {$10000.00} This is factually impossible and constitutes false data furnishing. 

XXXX. Re-Aging & Conflicting Dates Different bureaus show conflicting dates : Last Payment : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX These discrepancies suggest the account has been re-aged, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ).

5. Failure to Provide Legal Debt Validation Lloyd & McDaniel only sent monthly statements, which are not legal validation. 
They did not provide : the signed agreement, digital acceptance records, the original credit application, itemized accounting from {$0.00} to charge-off, or proof of the amount allegedly owed.

Despite this, they continued collection activity, violating FDCPA 809 ( b ).

6. Furnishing Information While Disputed Both XXXX XXXXXXXX and Lloyd & McDaniel have continued reporting and updating this account even though it has been in dispute.

This violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). 

XXXX. Potential Credit CARD Act Violations I was XXXX XXXX XXXX and unemployed at the time this account was allegedly opened. 
XXXX XXXX has provided no evidence of : verifying my independent ability to repay, or obtaining a qualified co-signer, as required under the Credit CARD Act of 2009 ( 15 U.S.C. 1637 ( c ) ( 8 ) ; 12 C.F.R. 1026.51 ( b ) ).

If proper verification did not occur, the account may be invalid or unenforceable. 

XXXX. Lawsuit Filed Using Unverified and Inaccurate Information A lawsuit was filed on XX/XX/XXXX using the same unverified and contradictory information. Filing or advancing litigation without validation misrepresents the character, amount, and legal status of the debt, violating FDCPA 807.

Cease-and-Desist Request Based on Federal Law Because the debt remains unvalidated and the data furnished is inaccurate, I am requesting that the CFPB require XXXX XXXXXXXX and Lloyd & McDaniel to cease all collection activity, including litigation activity, until proper validation is provided.

Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), a collector must stop all collection activity when a debt is disputed and validation is incomplete. 
Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), they may not continue furnishing disputed information without certifying accuracy.

Continuing litigation while failing to validate the debt constitutes bad-faith collection.

Supporting Case Law Federal courts have consistently held that collection must stop until proper validation is supplied : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Continuing collection without providing proper validation violates the FDCPA. Monthly billing statements do not constitute verification. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Once a debt is disputed, the collector must cease all collection efforts until validation is provided, including threats of litigation. 

XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Validation requires meaningful evidence of the debt ; continuing collection activity ( including lawsuits ) without it violates federal law. 

These cases support my request for collection and litigation to be halted until XXXX XXXX and Lloyd & McDaniel comply with federal requirements.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation