Consumer complaint received 2025-12-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: False statements or representation — Impersonated attorney, law enforcement, or government official
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
LVNV Funding, through XXXX XXXX XXXX, continued to sue and collect on a debt even though I was already in active communication with Resurgent Capital Services, LVNVs servicer, about resolving the account. While LVNV was litigating, Resurgent confirmed that the account had been placed with them for handling and that XXXX XXXX XXXX no longer had authority over the account since XX/XX/XXXX. 

Resurgent began settlement discussions with me on XX/XX/XXXX, and processed my settlement payment of {$830.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. Their records show they were actively servicing the account at the same time XXXX XXXX XXXX continued pursuing litigation. 

At the hearing on XX/XX/XXXX, the person who appeared for LVNV was not the attorney of record, XXXX XXXX. The court sign-in sheet listed XXXX name, but the individual who appeared was XXXX American and fit the description of XXXX XXXX XXXX not XXXX XXXX, who is Anglo. This person did not identify herself, did not explain her authority, and acted as if she were the attorney of record. 

The stand-in attorney denied any knowledge of Resurgent, even though Resurgent is LVNVs own servicer and had been communicating with me about resolving the account. She pursued the full balance plus interest and attorney fees as if no settlement activity existed. She only changed her position after I challenged the information she was presenting. 

During settlement discussions outside the courtroom, I overheard the stand-in attorney being told by her office that the case had been removed from their authority. When I attempted to raise this with the court, she invoked attorney-client privilege to prevent me from speaking. When I informed the judge that I had been in communication with Resurgent, the stand-in attorney responded by suggesting it could be fraud, despite knowing that Resurgent is LVNVs own servicer.

I requested proof of ownership of the debt, but LVNV and its representatives did not provide it. They did not explain why two different entities were acting on the same account at the same time or why someone who was not the listed attorney appeared in court under another attorneys name.

LVNV continued litigation and collection activity while I was actively corresponding with Resurgent about settlement, and they did not respond to my requests for documentation or clarification. This created conflicting information and placed me at a disadvantage. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a Motion to XXXX XXXX explaining that the judgment had been obtained using outdated and inaccurate information and that LVNVs own servicer confirmed the law firm should not have been litigating at all. 

As a result, I was sued while the account was in settlement, represented in court by someone who was not the attorney of record, and pursued for payment by a firm that no longer had authority to collect. This caused serious confusion, financial harm, and unnecessary legal action.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation