Consumer complaint received 2025-11-13 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive notice of right to dispute
Company: Spring Oaks Capital, LLC
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because Spring Oaks Capitals handling, reporting, and verification of the referenced XXXX account is not FDCPA-compliant, not FCRA-compliant, and their own written response proves multiple violations. Their investigation was not an investigation at all, and the documents provided do not meet the legal requirements for validation under federal law. 
Spring Oaks states they purchased the account in XX/XX/XXXX, yet their initial notice was not sent until XX/XX/XXXX. Under FDCPA 809 ( a ), the initial notice must be sent within five days of first communication, not two years later. This alone violates the statute.

They admit they received disputes from the credit reporting agencies and also through CFPB, but under FDCPA 809 ( b ), once a debt is disputed, all collection activity must cease until proper validation is provided. Instead, they continued updating and reporting the account, which is a violation of FDCPA 812. 
The validation they claim to have provided consists of nothing more than old billing statements and a summary of information from XXXX and XXXX. That is not legally sufficient. FDCPA 809 ( b ) requires the collector to provide documentation proving the consumer owes the debt, a full and accurate account ledger, itemized statements, and proof of ownership/assignment. A bill of sale is not validation, especially when it does not list the consumer, the account, the balance, or anything tying the consumer to the debt. They also did not provide the contract, application, service agreement, device usage, or any documentation demonstrating liability. Their response relies entirely on hearsay. 
Even more concerning, their own letter contains conflicting and legally impossible dates. They claim the account charged off on XX/XX/XXXX, but also that the last payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX. A charge-off can not occur before the last payment. This proves the information being reported is inaccurate and violates FCRA 607 ( b ), which requires maximum possible accuracy.

They further state that they determined our reporting is accurate, yet provide no documentation to support this. Under FCRA 623 ( b ) furnishers must conduct a reasonable investigation and must provide the documentation used to verify the disputed information. They failed to do this. A determination without proof is not a reasonable investigation, especially when the dates they provided contradict each other.

Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ), any information that can not be verified within 30 days must be deleted. It has been well over that, and Spring Oaks has not produced verifiable records. They have instead reissued the same statements repeatedly and attempted to shift responsibility back onto the consumer. 
Additionally, this debt appears to be outside the statute of limitations. The delinquency occurred in XXXX. In Texas, the statute of limitations on this type of debt is four years. If the debt is time-barred, Spring Oaks is required to disclose that the consumer can not be sued. They did not provide this disclosure, which constitutes a deceptive practice under FDCPA 807. 
Their response shows a pattern of misrepresentation, incomplete validation, and failure to comply with federal law. Continuing to report or attempt to collect an unverified or time-barred debt constitutes willful noncompliance under FCRA 616617 and FDCPA 813.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief