Consumer complaint received 2026-02-03 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Rental debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: National Credit Systems,Inc.
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
I am disputing an alleged rental debt being reported on my credit report by National Credit Systems ( NCS ). This debt originates from XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, Minnesota, following my move-out, but the amount being reported is not supported by proper documentation and does not comply with Minnesota law XXXX federal credit reporting requirements. 

After I vacated the unit, XXXX XXXX XXXX issued a move-out statement claiming I owed a balance. I contacted the landlord to request documentation supporting the charges. I was informed that because the account had been sent to collections, it was no longer their responsibility to provide proof or justification of the charges. As a result, I was unable to obtain validation directly from the original creditor. 

I then sent a written dispute and request for validation to National Credit Systems, which they received on XX/XX/year>. Despite receiving my dispute, National Credit Systems did not respond, did not provide validation, and continued reporting the debt to the credit bureaus. 

I disputed the account with XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. All three credit bureaus found the account verified based solely on documentation provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX to National Credit Systems. The documentation relied upon was a move-out invoice that is materially deficient and misleading. 

The invoice used to justify the debt understates the amount of my security deposit, does not properly itemize or justify charges, and references an inventory list and photographs that were never attached, never provided to me, and have never been produced upon request. It includes charges without supporting documentation demonstrating damages beyond normal wear and tear and fails to show that the balance was calculated accurately or in compliance with Minnesota security deposit requirements. 

Because this incomplete and inaccurate invoice was accepted at face value by National Credit Systems and the credit bureaus, a debt is being reported as valid despite the absence of proper validation. The credit bureaus findings appear to be based on the existence of a bill, not on whether the bill is accurate, complete, or legally sufficient under Minnesota law or the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 

As a result, National Credit Systems is reporting a debt that has not been properly validated, and the credit bureaus are continuing to report the account as accurate despite material deficiencies in the underlying documentation. At no point have I been provided the referenced inventory list, inspection records, or photographs needed to substantiate the charges claimed. Without this information, neither the landlord nor the collection agency has demonstrated that the alleged damages exceed normal wear and tear or that the balance was calculated correctly. 

This situation places me in an impossible position as a consumer. The landlord asserts that documentation is no longer their responsibility because the account was sent to collections, while the collection agency relies on the landlords unsupported invoice to justify reporting the debt. This circular process deprives me of a meaningful opportunity to dispute the charges or verify their accuracy. 

I am requesting intervention because this matter involves inaccurate credit reporting, failure to properly validate a disputed debt, and the continued reporting of an alleged obligation that is not supported by complete or reliable documentation. The continued presence of this debt on my credit report is causing ongoing harm despite my timely disputes and good-faith efforts to resolve the matter. I am asking for assistance to ensure that Minnesota consumer protection laws and federal credit reporting requirements are enforced, unsupported charges are corrected or withdrawn, and any credit reporting associated with this account accurately reflects only debts that are properly documented and legally valid.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation