Consumer complaint received 2026-04-23 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Concord Servicing Corporation
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting an escalation regarding Account # XXXX and Concord Servicings continued failure to properly validate a disputed debt after multiple prior complaints. I dispute the validity and enforceability of this alleged debt. Concord Servicing has stated that it is a third-party servicer and does not own the debt, and that it relied entirely on documentation provided by its client, XXXX XXXX XXXX This indicates that Concord did not conduct an independent or reasonable investigation into my dispute and instead acted as a pass-through for the creditors assertions. Although Concord Servicing provided a copy of the contract, a one-page Debt Verification Information form , and an account history, this does not constitute proper validation and does not resolve my dispute. The documentation provided does not clearly explain how the amount was calculated, and does not connect the alleged fee to my specific contract selection. The only signed page of the agreement reflects selection of an Optional Activation Fee, which indicates a usage-based structure rather than a mandatory recurring obligation. The alleged 5-year refurbishing fee appears in later sections of the agreement that are not separately signed or clearly acknowledged. The agreement also contains conflicting language regarding whether fees apply only upon use versus being mandatory, creating ambiguity that was not addressed. The one-page form provided by XXXX XXXX is not objective proof. It contains unsupported statements and does not demonstrate that I knowingly agreed to the specific obligation being enforced or how the amount claimed was determined. Concord Servicing also provided an account history showing a charge labeled Q26 Maintenance Fee in the amount of {$1200.00}. However, this does not constitute proper validation. While it shows that a charge was applied, it does not explain how this amount was calculated, does not demonstrate how this fee applies under my selected contract structure, and does not reconcile the differing terminology used in the contract versus the account statement. It also does not provide documentation showing that I knowingly agreed to this specific obligation. Concord Servicing has not addressed the substance of my dispute, including how the alleged fee applies under the Optional Activation Fee structure, the lack of clear acknowledgment of that obligation, or the inconsistencies within the agreement. Providing documents without explanation does not constitute a reasonable investigation. I also note that Concord Servicing did not clearly confirm that the account was placed in disputed status after I raised my dispute. Additionally, I request documentation demonstrating Concord Servicings legal authority to collect this debt on behalf of the creditor, particularly given that this agreement originated outside of the United States. This matter is not resolved, and the responses provided do not meet the standard for proper debt validation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation