Consumer complaint received 2024-11-25 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: False statements or representation — Attempted to collect wrong amount
Company: Resurgent Capital Services L.P.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
Response to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Case # XXXX ) Dear Compliance Department, This letter serves as a formal response to your correspondence dated XX/XX/XXXX, regarding the accounts under reference numbers XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. Upon review, I assert that the practices outlined in your letter fail to comply with key provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), and relevant state consumer protection laws. Furthermore, your actions demonstrate significant violations of consumer rights which, if left unaddressed, will compel me to pursue further legal remedies. The following is a detailed response to your claims.

1. Failure to Provide Adequate Validation of Debt FDCPA 809 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : You assert that the debts have been validated ; however, the documentation provided does not sufficiently establish the legitimacy of the debts nor does it comply with federal law. Specifically : Chain of Title : There is no clear evidence showing the complete chain of title from the original creditor ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) to LVNV Funding LLC. Case law, including Vazquez v. Resurgent Capital Services, XXXX, demonstrates that failure to establish the chain of title invalidates any claims of debt ownership.

Original Signed Agreements : You fail to provide original signed agreements or any documentation from the original creditors, which are required under both the FDCPA and FCRA to substantiate the debt. This lack of evidence raises serious questions about your legal right to collect these debts.

Itemization of Charges : The current balances on the accounts are presented without adequate explanation. Under the FDCPA, debt collectors are required to provide an itemization of the debt to verify that the amounts are legitimate and accurate. The failure to provide this in your communication makes your claim suspect.

2. Misrepresentation of Credit Reporting Dates FCRA 605 ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ) : You correctly reference the " Date of First Delinquency '' ( DOFD ) for each account, but your practice of listing the " Open Date '' as the acquisition date by LVNV is problematic.

Re-Aging Debt : The inclusion of the " Open Date '' misleads consumers into believing that these debts are more recent than they are. This practice of " re-aging '' debts is specifically prohibited under the FCRA. See Taylor v. Midland Funding, LLC, 2019, where the court found that re-aging debts violates the FCRA 's mandate for accurate reporting of credit information.

Legal Precedent : The re-aging of debts unlawfully extends the reporting period beyond the permissible seven years from the DOFD, which directly violates FCRA 607 ( b ). The case of Johnson v. LVNV Funding, LLC ( 2017 ) found that such actions, when reported to credit bureaus, misrepresented the credit history and damaged consumers ' creditworthiness, furthering your legal exposure.

3. Statute of Limitations Expired State-Specific Debt Collection Laws : Your admission that the statute of limitations has expired for pursuing legal action on these debts is significant. However, you fail to disclose this to consumers during collection attempts, which is a violation of state consumer protection laws, such as California 's Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and New York 's General Business Law.

State Law Violations : As established in Bartlett v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC ( 2017 ), failure to disclose when a debt is time-barred can constitute an unfair or deceptive practice under both the FDCPA and state-specific laws. This practice is not only misleading but harmful to consumers, as it may cause unnecessary confusion or pressure to pay debts that are legally unenforceable.

Legal Recourse : Debt collectors are legally obligated to notify consumers when debts are time-barred under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 3 ). Your failure to provide such disclosure could expose LVNV to claims for statutory damages, including the potential for consumer remedies under various state laws.

4. Violation of Harassment and Abuse Standards FDCPA 806 ( 15 U.S.C. 1692d ) : You deny any instances of harassment or abusive conduct, yet you fail to address my previous assertions of distress caused by your communication practices. The FDCPA explicitly prohibits the use of abusive, oppressive, or harassing conduct during debt collection efforts.

Potential Violations : If any of your collection communications made threats of legal action or implied that the debts were current when they were actually time-barred, this would constitute harassment. The court in Hollis v. LVNV Funding ( 2018 ) found that vague threats of litigation on time-barred debts can violate the FDCPAs anti-harassment provisions.

5. Consumer Credit Reporting Dispute Rights FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : The assertion that the accounts are being reported as disputed does not alleviate your responsibility under FCRA. According to Davis v. LVNV Funding ( 2019 ), the failure to conduct a reasonable investigation into disputed accounts can result in willful non-compliance with FCRA provisions.

Failure to Investigate : The reporting of these debts as disputed should be accompanied by a thorough and timely investigation as mandated by FCRA 611. Failure to perform such an investigation could expose LVNV to statutory and punitive damages. As per the ruling in Daley v. LVNV Funding ( 2015 ), continued reporting of unverifiable debts may result in claims for damages under FCRA 616.

6. Potential State Law Violations South Carolina Consumer Protection Code ( SC Code 37-5-108 ) : As a company operating in South Carolina, LVNV must adhere to the state 's consumer protection laws, which include prohibiting deceptive or unconscionable practices in the collection of debts.

Unconscionable Collection Practices : Failure to disclose that these debts are time-barred or misleading consumers about the nature of the debts may violate state law. The court in State v. LVNV Funding ( 2018 ) found that such practices expose debt collectors to civil penalties and consumer lawsuits.

Demand for Immediate Action Based on the violations outlined above, I am formally requesting the following actions : Cease All Collection Efforts : Immediately halt all collection activities on the disputed accounts.

Complete Removal from Credit Reports : If you are unable to provide valid documentation of the debts, these accounts must be removed from my credit report.

Provide Chain of Title : Supply a complete and unbroken chain of title demonstrating that LVNV legally owns the accounts in question.

Formal Apology : Acknowledge your violations of the FDCPA and FCRA and commit to rectifying your collection and reporting practices.

Compensation for Damages : In light of the severe legal violations and resulting harm to my creditworthiness, I demand compensation for any damages I have suffered as a result of your actions.

Should LVNV fail to meet these demands, I will pursue all available legal avenues, initiating lawsuits for statutory damages under the FDCPA and FCRA, and pursuing punitive damages as appropriate. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief