Consumer complaint received 2025-08-31 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX, Midland Credit Management filed lawsuit XXXX claiming ownership of {$1600.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX  and {$1300.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX. However, MCM 's own documentation reveals a fatal XXXX timeline impossibility that proves they lack legal standing and filed this lawsuit with fraudulent ownership claims. 

FATAL TIMELINE DEFECT - MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY : MCM 's Bill of Assignment shows they purchased these debts from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. But XXXX XXXX XXXX didn't acquire the debts until XX/XX/XXXX - creating a XXXX impossibility. XXXX XXXX XXXX could not sell what they didn't own for XXXX XXXX, making MCM 's entire ownership claim legally void. 

SPECIFIC CHAIN OF TITLE DEFECTS : XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX Bank assigned debts to XXXX Receivables, XXXX XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : MHC Receivables assigned to XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX, XXXX assigned to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX " sold '' to MCM ( IMPOSSIBLE - predates their ownership by 15 months ) This timeline proves MCM filed lawsuit knowing their Purchase Agreement dated XX/XX/XXXX was fraudulent, as XXXX XXXX XXXX had no ownership rights until XX/XX/XXXX. 

VALIDATION DEMAND FAILURE : On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent comprehensive validation letter demanding proof of ownership, complete chain of assignments, and account stated evidence. MCM received this XX/XX/XXXX, but completely failed to respond with any documentation. Their silence confirms they can not prove the impossible timeline or validate their ownership claims. 

FDCPA VIOLATIONS : XXXX. FRAUDULENT OWNERSHIP CLAIMS : Filing lawsuit with impossible Purchase Agreement dates violates 15 USC 1692e ( false representations ) 2. VALIDATION FAILURE : Continuing litigation after XX/XX/XXXX without validation violates 15 USC 1692g 3. ACCOUNT STATED WITHOUT PROOF : Claiming I accepted account balances without evidence violates 15 USC 1692e 4. CEASE AND DESIST VIOLATIONS : Any communication after XX/XX/XXXX violates 15 USC 1692c ( c ) 5. PATTERN OF IMPROPER COLLECTION : MCM filed lawsuit without conducting adequate investigation of ownership rights, used account stated claims without consumer acceptance proof, and continued litigation after validation failure - demonstrating systematic violations of consumer protection laws. 

SECURITIZATION DESTROYS MCM 'S OWNERSHIP CLAIMS : XXXX XXXX XXXX  routinely securitizes credit card receivables at origination into asset-backed securities trusts. CFPB precedent from XXXX XXXX sanctions ( {$8.00} XXXX penalty ) established that securitization creates ownership transfer to trust beneficiaries, eliminating original creditor authority to assign individual accounts. If these debts were securitized, original creditors transferred ownership to trust holders, eliminating their ability to assign individual accounts to MCM. MCM 's claims XXXX violate securities laws and trust agreements. 

If these debts were securitized before XX/XX/XXXX : - Credit One lacked authority to assign to MHC Receivables - Trust beneficiaries are true owners, not MCM - MCM collecting on trust property without authority violates securities law - Chain of title breaks at securitization point, regardless of timeline impossibility PATTERN OF SYSTEMATIC MCM VIOLATIONS : Similar timeline defects have been successfully challenged in Midland Funding, LLC v. Bassett ( Michigan Court of Appeals, April 24, 2018 ), where the court held : 'plaintiff failed to affirmatively establish a continuous chain of title to defendant 's debt ... plaintiff only established a continuous chain of title to a generic debt pool. ' MCM 's documentation shows identical defects : - No specific account identification in assignment chain - Generic debt pool transfers without individual account proof - Multiple entity signatories ( same person signing for different companies ) - Missing intermediate assignments proving specific debt transfer MCM 'S RESPONSE - COMPLETE SILENCE : After receiving validation demand, MCM ceased all collection contact, indicating they can not prove ownership or standing. This behavior pattern suggests they know they lack legal authority to collect these debts but continue litigation hoping I won't defend properly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation