Consumer complaint received 2025-07-25 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Telecommunications debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: Harris & Harris, Ltd.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this formal complaint against XXXX XXXX for multiple violations of federal consumer protection laws, improper credit reporting during an active billing dispute, retaliation, and deceptive billing practices. I have made repeated attempts to settle the matter in good faith and even tried to continue my relationship with XXXX  by starting new service at a new address. Despite all efforts, I have been met with threats, obstruction, and now a collections account that has damaged my credit. XXXX 's conduct is not only unethical, it is unlawful. 

This all began when XXXX XXXX began charging me repeated reconnection fees without valid explanation or notice. On my XX/XX/year>2025 billing statement alone, I was charged over {$150.00} in {$12.00} daily reactivation fees, even though my line was not fully deactivated, I continue to receive incoming calls. I asked agents to explain these charges and received inconsistent answers, no disclosures, and no real resolution. Ultimately, XXXX credited me {$42.00} on XX/XX/XXXX and later {$58.00} on my broadband account, acknowledging the charges were unjustified. Based on that, I asked for a full review of all similar charges. I said verbatim, If these were invalid, can the rest be reviewed too? but was denied a full audit and instead had my account escalated to collections. 

These actions violate the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ), which requires creditors to investigate disputed charges and prohibits retaliation while the matter is under dispute. It also violates 47 CFR 64.2401 ( a ) and 47 U.S. Code 201 ( b ) for unjust and unreasonable billing practices. XXXX applied partial credits while continuing to bill me for the same types of charges they admitted were invalid. 

On XX/XX/year>2025, I received an email from XXXX stating that if I didnt pay the balance of {$590.00} by XX/XX/XXXX, my account would be reported to credit bureaus and sent to collections. However, I had already filed a formal complaint with the FCC on XX/XX/year>2025 ( Ticket No. XXXX ). The Fair Credit Billing Act makes it illegal to threaten or pursue credit reporting or collections on a disputed account while a formal dispute is active. This also violates 47 CFR 64.2401 ( c ) and 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 8 ) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which prohibits furnishing misleading credit information on a debt you know is in dispute. 

I then received an actual collections notice via XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, 2025 showing my XXXX  XXXX  account had been sent to Harris & Harris, with a different balance of {$530.00} a discrepancy from the {$590.00} previously claimed. This balance inconsistency is significant. Under Truth in Billing rules, providers are required to present accurate, itemized statements that reflect the true amount owed. The numbers provided by XXXX are inconsistent, conflicting, and designed to confuse. This lack of accuracy calls into question the validity of the entire debt, which should be rendered unenforceable based on inaccurate and contradictory amounts. 

Additionally, during a XX/XX/year>2025 chat, I asked XXXX if I could port out my number. I was told, Once you pay the bill, you can port out the number easily. This is a direct violation of federal law, specifically 47 U.S. Code 251 ( b ) ( 2 ) and the FCCs Local Number Portability Order ( 15 FCC Rcd 19904 ), which explicitly states that carriers can not require bill payment before allowing number portability. I cited this law to XXXX agents and was ignored. This shows clear retaliation, coercion, and denial of my federal right to maintain access to my phone number. 

I also want to point out that XXXX response to the FCC left out major pieces of evidence I had already submitted. These include : credits they issued to me ; chat logs confirming an offer for 12 months of free mobile service for a {$30.00} activation fee ; call logs with agents like XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX : XXXX ), and supervisors like XXXX ; and multiple escalation ticket numbers like XXXX. Failing to include these facts is a potential violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001 ( making false statements to a federal agency ) and 47 CFR 64.2401 ( b ) ( failure to disclose accurate billing and adjustment history ).

I also made dozens of attempts to update my address and phone number with XXXX. Every time I spoke to a new agent or supervisor, I had to repeat the request. Despite assurances that the information was updated, the new address and phone number were never saved in the system. As a result, I missed important service notices and had to start the update process again from scratch during each contact. This mismanagement reflects both negligence and a lack of transparency, violating 47 CFR 64.2401 ( a ). 

Moreover, on XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted to settle the account in full and continue service at my new address. I was told by one agent that my broadband account could be cleared for {$300.00} after applying the {$58.00} credit but that offer was later denied and replaced with further collection threats. My mobile account was never offered a settlement at all, despite the billing disputes. My attempts to settle were ignored, blocked, or simply met with our decision still stands responses from supervisors like XXXX, who told me on a XX/XX/XXXX call, Is there anything else youd like to discuss? after saying they reviewed my FCC rebuttal. 

Despite me actively trying to resolve the situation, including filing multiple complaints, XXXX retaliated by reporting me to a collection agency during an active dispute, damaging my credit by XXXX points. This has directly affected my finances, especially given that Im currently on public assistance, XXXX, and XXXX, making my hardship and good faith efforts even more relevant. I disclosed this to XXXX agents multiple times and was still denied any resolution. 

To be clear, XXXX is currently disputing my complaints, but they are doing so while omitting key evidence, misrepresenting the facts to federal agencies, issuing unlawful credit threats, and actively damaging my credit. The record proves that they issued credits for improper fees, refused to audit the rest, threatened me with collections while under federal review, misled me about porting rights, and then followed through by placing the debt on my credit report all while I was attempting to cooperate.

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief