Consumer complaint received 2025-10-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was result of identity theft
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against Midland Credit Management , Inc. ( Midland ) for willful and negligent violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq.

Midland is reporting and attempting to collect a fraudulent XXXX XXXX. account allegedly ending in XXXX, showing a balance of {$24000.00}. I have never opened or authorized this account. The account was added to my XXXX  and XXXX  file around XX/XX/XXXX, identified as a debt buyer trade-line. 

I am a confirmed victim of the XXXX  data breach, which compromised my Social Security number and identifying data. I filed a valid FTC Identity Theft Report and sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury, as authorized by FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ). The law requires that upon receipt of such a report, any consumer reporting agency or furnisher of information ( like Midland ) must block and delete the disputed account within four business days. 

Despite that, Midland continues to assert ownership of this alleged account and refuses to honor the block request. Their response through the CFPB portal dated XX/XX/XXXX falsely claims they mailed a validation notice on XX/XX/XXXX. I never received this notice, and Midland has provided no proof of mailing, nor any certified record of delivery. Under FDCPA 809 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ), a debt collector must cease collection and verification activity until it mails actual validation. Merely claiming to have sent a notice is not compliance.

Midland also falsely stated that a police report is required to investigate my identity theft claim. This is untrue and directly contradicts FCRA 605B ( b ), which clearly defines a valid identity theft report to include an FTC Identity Theft Report. Federal guidance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB, 12 C.F.R. 1022.3 ( i ) ) and Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) explicitly states that a police report is not required for a 605B block. Midlands refusal to honor the FTC report is therefore unlawful.

Midlands response further admits they have no correspondence received directly from me prior to the CFPB complaint. This is false ; disputes were submitted through XXXX XXXX XXXX and the CFPB portal as well as snail mail, and their continued furnishing after receipt of dispute data violates FCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - ( D ), which mandates reasonable reinvestigation and correction of disputed information.

Their continued reporting of a fraudulent tradeline constitutes willful noncompliance with FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( prohibiting re-aging or false date of delinquency ). Their failure to mark the account as disputed until compelled by the CFPB violates 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).

Midlands conduct also violates FDCPA 807 ( 10 ) ( false representation of the legal status of a debt ) and 805 ( c ) ( continued contact after cease and desist ). Their written acknowledgment of a Cease and Desist notation, while still issuing unsolicited correspondence through the CFPB portal, constitutes further FDCPA violation. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  : CRAs and furnishers must conduct a reasonable independent investigation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Unverified information must be deleted. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Continued reporting of disputed, inaccurate data creates FCRA liability. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Furnishers failure to investigate disputed identity theft constitutes willful violation. 

Midlands willful disregard of federal law and misuse of collection communication channels are causing ongoing harm to my credit reputation. XXXX  has since deleted this account following my FTC submission, confirming that the reporting lacked lawful basis. However, Midland continues to furnish the tradeline to other agencies such as XXXX, which further aggravates their liability under 623 ( b ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation