Consumer complaint received 2026-01-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: Kingston Data & Credit International Inc.
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns Kingston Data & Credit International Inc.s continued collection posture and threatened credit harm on a disputed health club membership debt, and its post-dispute reconstruction of records to justify a balance after the fact. 
1. Initial collection notice and credit threat On or about XX/XX/2026, Kingston sent a written collection notice regarding an XXXX XXXX ( XXXX, LA ) membership account and asserted a current balance of {$560.00} ( balance as of XXXX ). The notice stated that a negative credit report may be submitted if payment was not made. 
2. Timely dispute and request for validation / accounting Immediately after receiving Kingstons notice, I disputed the debt and requested full validation and a complete itemized accounting, including a signed agreement, a transaction-level ledger, and documentation showing how the claimed {$560.00} was calculated and contractually authorized. I directed Kingston to cease collection and furnishing until legally sufficient validation was provided. 
3. Kingstons response was incomplete ; continued credit leverage Kingston responded by stating the creditor claimed I initiated a membership and missed payments and stated the balance was reflecting on my credit history. Kingston then emailed that it had documents proving the debt, directed me to pay, and stated that if payment was not received the account would continue to remain on my credit history as a collection item. The documents provided consisted of a signed membership agreement and a payment history, but no complete transaction-level ledger showing how the claimed balance was calculated. 
4. Credit reporting dispute and CFPB complaint I disputed the tradeline with XXXX and notified Kingston in writing. This triggered Kingstons duties under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) to conduct a reasonable investigation and report only information that can be verified as accurate. On or about XX/XX/2026 I filed a CFPB complaint. In the CFPB record, Kingston asserted it had provided the agreement and payment history and included a balance summary indicating principal {$540.00} plus fees {$28.00} to reach {$560.00}. I responded that the {$28.00} was not substantiated : the payment history showed {$0.00} late fees and {$0.00} service fees and contained no transaction corresponding to {$28.00} ; Kingston did not identify the nature of the fee, the date assessed, or the contractual provision authorizing it. I also noted Kingstons admission in the CFPB process that it asked its client to spell out the specific calculations, which raises concern that the amount was not independently verified at the time of furnishing/verification. 
5. Ombudsman escalation and executive admissions After continued nonresponse, I escalated to Kingstons consumer ombudsman. Kingston acknowledged the dispute and stated it had requested the full accounting in the ombudsmans absence. After I sent a formal notice of intent to litigate, the company president replied that Kingston does not add any fees and only passes along the amount provided by its client, and that Kingston had asked XXXX XXXX to provide documentation of the {$28.00} fee and how it relates to the service agreement. This confirms Kingston did not have documentation substantiating the fee when it was furnishing/collecting and only sought it after dispute and escalation. 
6. Post-dispute ledger production and threatened reactivation Afterward, Kingston produced a ledger exported from XXXX XXXX billing system and claimed it showed late fees totaling {$28.00} and constituted a complete accounting. Despite that, Kingston then stated in writing that the tradeline was not deleted but merely marked Disputed, and that Kingston would give me 30 days to review before changing the status from Disputed back to Active XXXX. Kingston further stated it was prepared to accept payment or investigate any portion I disputed. I responded that a unilateral review period does not suspend statutory protections and that Kingston can not resume collection or threaten renewed credit harm while the dispute remains unresolved, particularly where the ledger was obtained only after dispute and Kingston still did not cite specific contractual provisions authorizing the late-fee assessments and their enforcement/non-waiver. 
7. Current issue and requested resolution Kingstons communications show ( a ) repeated use of credit harm as leverage, ( b ) inconsistent positions regarding credit status ( deleted vs disputed vs active collection ), ( c ) post-dispute reconstruction/collection of records to justify the fee and balance, and ( d ) a stated intent to return the account to Active Collection after 30 days despite an unresolved dispute. This conduct is improper and appears inconsistent with federal consumer protection obligations. I request that Kingston be required to : ( 1 ) cease collection activity and any threatened reactivation while disputed ; ( 2 ) permanently withdraw and not re-furnish the tradeline; and ( 3 ) confirm in writing that the account will not be sold/assigned or re-reported in any form. If Kingston contends any balance is owed, it must provide a complete transaction-level accounting and cite specific contractual authority for each fee/chargerather than post-hoc justificationbefore any further furnishing or collection.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation