Consumer complaint received 2015-09-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.)
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed — Debt was paid
Company: SUNRISE CREDIT SERVICES, INC
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
XXXX, XXXXTo Whom It May Concern : Yesterday, I received a phone call from Sunrise Credit Services, regarding a debt that I do not owe. They called to collect {$1600.00} on behalf of XXXX XXXX. However, XXXX XXXX is not legally entitled to collect this money from me, and so neither is Sunrise Credit Services. I am therefore filing a claim in the hopes that the CFPB will help me file this claim against Sunrise Credit Services. Please allow me to explain. 

In the XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX charged me {$1100.00} for XXXX of the XXXX non-functional " Certified Like-New Replacement '' phones it had sent me since XXXX XXXX, claiming that the phones were never returned to XXXX XXXX. However, the United States Postal Service confirms delivery of the package containing those XXXX phones to XXXX XXXX at XXXX on XXXX XXXX, XXXX in XXXX XXXX, TX. The tracking number associated with the delivered package, XXXX, was on a shipping label sent to me by XXXX XXXX for the express purpose of returning those XXXX non-functional phones. After several hours speaking to XXXX XXXX representatives on several different occasions, I was told that the phones had been found, and that the charges had been removed from my account. 

Exactly one month after the package was delivered, on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX charged me {$1200.00}. Of these charges, {$66.00} was for that month 's phone services. The remaining {$1100.00} was for the returned devices, as well as taxes, surcharges, and late fees thereon. In accordance with the Fair Credit Billing Act of XXXX, I initialed a billing inquiry into the matter with the assistance of XXXX XXXX. I disputed only the {$1100.00}, not the {$66.00} in fair charges. The dispute was initiated on XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, after XXXX XXXX had failed to respond within the government-allotted 30-day period, XXXX XXXX reversed the charges. 

This should have been the end of the matter, as the Federal Trade Commission plainly states that " Any creditor who fails to follow the settlement procedure may not collect the amount in dispute, or any related finance charges, up to {$50.00}, even if the bill turns out to be correct '' ( XXXX ). However, on the day that XXXX XXXX reversed the charges, XXXX XXXX immediately cut off my phone service, rebilled me the disputed amount, and also billed me for several new surcharges, including a hefty fee to reinstate the service that they had just shut off before billing me. Those charges came to {$1300.00}. I immediately contacted XXXX XXXX, who again reversed the charges, this time banning XXXX XXXX from accessing my funds. 

For further information about my first billing inquiry ( {$1100.00} ), which according to the FTC should have legally ended matters, please see the attached letters from XXXX XXXX, or contact XXXX XXXX in reference to Billing Inquiry XXXX. For further information about the second billing inquiry, which concerns the amount of {$1300.00} ( plus new surcharges ), please see those same letters or contact XXXX XXXX in reference to Billing Inquiry XXXX. A letter similar to this one was also filed with the FTC on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Thank you for your help in resolving this matter. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation