Consumer complaint received 2026-05-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Complaint Against Transworld Systems Inc. Disputed Medical Debt, Defective Validation, Unsubstantiated {$910.00} Collection, and Possible Surprise-Billing / Patient-Responsibility Violations I am filing this complaint against Transworld Systems Inc. ( TSI ) , a debt collector, regarding a disputed medical collection account allegedly owed to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Consumer / Patient : XXXX XXXX TSI Reference / Account # : XXXX Creditor Account # : XXXX Alleged Amount : {$910.00} Facility Listed : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Debt Type : Medical / emergency medicine collection On or about XX/XX/year>, TSI contacted the consumer claiming that she owed {$910.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. TSIs notice stated that if the consumer disputed the debt by XX/XX/year>, TSI must stop collection until it sent information showing the debt was owed. The consumer timely disputed the alleged debt in writing and requested validation. The dispute did not merely ask for a balance confirmation. It specifically requested documentation showing : the full legal name and address of the original creditor and current creditor ; a complete itemization of the alleged debt ; date ( s ) of service ; an understandable itemized medical bill ; provider identity, specialty, and XXXX ; XXXX or billing codes ; claims submitted to insurance, EOBs/ERAs, contractual adjustments, and patient-responsibility calculation ; proof of timely insurance submission or explanation of any denial / underpayment / reprocessing ; any agreement or authorization allegedly permitting patient billing ; TSIs authority to collect ; original-creditor information if different ; payment history and account notes ; credit-reporting status ; compliance with surprise-billing protections ; and screening for financial assistance, discounts, charity care, or other billing reductions. TSI then sent a response dated XX/XX/year>, stating that it was providing materials obtained from the creditor. However, the response was grossly deficient and appears to be a rubber-stamp attempt to resume collection without meaningful verification. The validation materials did not provide a reasonably understandable itemized medical bill. They did not identify the rendering provider by XXXX. They did not provide XXXX codes. They did not include insurance claim forms, EOBs, ERAs, denial records, appeal records, or any calculation showing how {$910.00} became the patients lawful responsibility. They did not provide any signed agreement, authorization, assignment, or consent showing the consumer agreed to be personally billed for this amount. They did not provide the original creditors mailing address. They did not explain whether XXXX XXXX XXXX was in-network or out-of-network. They did not address No Surprises Act or Florida surprise-billing protections. They did not explain whether the amount is only copay, coinsurance, deductible, or an unlawful balance bill. Instead, the enclosed creditor printout appears to show only a bare account screen. It contains an UNINSURED DISC - SELF PAY DISC notation and a discount entry, but no proof that the consumer was actually uninsured, self-pay, or legally responsible for the remaining {$910.00}. This is especially concerning because the account appears connected to emergency medicine services at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, where federal and Florida surprise-billing protections may apply. There are also identity and accuracy red flags. TSIs initial notice and/or creditor materials include inconsistent address information, including XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX , while the consumers address is XXXX XXXX XXXX/ XXXX XXXX. These inconsistencies further undermine TSIs claim that it has reliably verified the account. TSIs response therefore did not resolve the dispute. It did not show that the alleged amount is accurate, legally collectible, medically itemized, insurance-adjusted, or patient-responsibility compliant. A debt collector should not be permitted to continue collection on a disputed medical debt based only on a conclusory creditor printout that fails to substantiate the actual services, coding, insurance processing, contractual adjustments, legal billing authority, and patient responsibility. This conduct appears to raise potential violations of : FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) failure to provide meaningful verification / failure to cease collection until verification is provided ; Regulation F, 12 C.F.R. 1006.38 ( c ) - ( d ) failure to properly respond to a written dispute and original-creditor request before continuing collection ; FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) and 1692e ( 10 ) potential false, deceptive, or misleading representation of the character, amount, or legal status of the alleged debt ; FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692f potential unfair or unconscionable attempt to collect an unsubstantiated medical debt ; Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. 559.72 ( 9 ) attempting to enforce a debt or legal right that may not be legitimate or legally collectible ; Florida surprise-billing protections, including Fla. Stat . 627.64194, if this was covered emergency care or out-of-network emergency/provider billing ; and No Surprises Act protections, if the amount exceeds lawful in-network cost-sharing or was billed/collected as a balance bill. I request that CFPB / Florida OFR investigate TSIs collection practices on this account and require TSI to : immediately cease all collection activity unless and until it provides complete lawful verification ; confirm in writing that the account will not be reported to any consumer reporting agency while disputed and unverified ; withdraw, close, or return the account to the creditor unless TSI can prove the amount is legally owed ; provide the full original-creditor name and address ; provide the complete itemized medical bill, CPT/HCPCS codes , provider XXXX, date ( s ) of service, and description of services ; provide all insurance claim submissions, EOBs/ERAs, contractual adjustments, denial/reprocessing records, and the calculation of patient responsibility ; identify whether the consumer was treated as insured, uninsured, or self-pay and explain the basis for that classification ; provide documentation of compliance with the No Surprises Act and Florida surprise-billing law ; provide any signed consent, assignment , agreement, or authorization relied upon to bill the consumer ; preserve all records, call logs, account notes, dispute logs, collection notes, and correspondence ; and confirm that the account has not been sold, transferred, re-referred, or placed with another collector while still disputed. This is not a refusal to cooperate. The consumer timely disputed the account and requested proof. TSI responded with an inadequate, unsupported, and internally questionable packet that does not establish the debt, the amount, the patients legal responsibility, or compliance with medical-billing protections. Collection should not continue unless TSI can prove the debt is real, accurate, legally collectible, and not barred by federal or Florida patient-protection laws.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation