Consumer complaint received 2025-11-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint to request a full investigation into the reporting and collection activity conducted by Midland Credit Management ( MCM ) regarding two separate derogatory accounts appearing on my credit file, both identified as MIDLAND CRED XXXX * but with different past-due balances one listed as {$870.00} and the other listed as {$6200.00}. I dispute these accounts in their entirety. I have no knowledge of these alleged debts, no contractual relationship with Midland, and I have never received any documentation that would validate or substantiate Midlands claims or its right to report these accounts to the consumer reporting agencies.

Because Midland is a debt buyer, not the original creditor, the standards for validation, ownership, documentation, and accuracy are substantially higher under both the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). To date, Midland has not provided : Proof that it owns the alleged debts ; A valid chain-of-title ; A Bill of Sale linking the accounts to me ; Any underlying statements, agreements, or media from the original creditor ; Any contractual agreement with my signature ; Required itemization of amounts ; Evidence that the balances are accurate or lawfully calculated ; Proof that the accounts were not the result of fraud or error. 

I have never received any FDCPA-compliant validation, despite the law requiring Midland to provide a detailed breakdown and original supporting documentation before pursuing collection or furnishing negative information. 

XXXX. I Have No Knowledge of These Alleged Accounts I have never entered into any agreement or loan with Midland Credit Management or with the original creditor from which Midland claims to have purchased these accounts. Before these items appeared on my credit report, I received : No bills No statements No notice of default No right-to-cure letter No verification No debt validation package No communication of any kind The first time I learned of these alleged accounts was through reviewing my credit file. Because I had never heard of these debts, I immediately disputed them. However, no documentation has been provided to me to prove that these accounts belong to me or that Midland has the legal right to report them. 

XXXX. Midland Credit is a Debt Buyer and Must Provide Proof of Ownership Debt buyers are not original creditors. Under FDCPA and FCRA obligations, they must hold and be able to produce the following : A Bill of Sale specific to MY account A Forward Flow Agreement demonstrating lawful transfer Chain-of-title records documenting each transfer Media ( contract, application, statements, etc. ) from the original creditor Itemized transaction histories Evidence the balance matches original creditor records Proof that the debt buyer purchased MY individual account To date, Midland has provided none of the above. 

Often, debt buyers purchase large portfolios of data files, not actual documentation. A Bill of Sale usually covers an entire batch but does not identify the consumer, account number, balance, or details. Without individualized account-specific documentation, Midland can not legally prove ownership. 

XXXX. No Chain of Custody, Chain of Title, or Transfer Documentation Provided For Midland to legally collect or report, the following must exist : Originating creditors records First transfer documentation Intermediate transfers ( if any ) Final sale documentation to Midland Assignment showing my name, the alleged account number, and balance None of this has been provided. 

If Midland can not produce a clean, unbroken chain showing every entity that has ever handled this account, then Midland does not have standing to report or enforce it. 

XXXX. FDCPA 809 ( b ) Requires Proper Validation Which I Never Received Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), debt collectors must provide : The amount of the debt The name of the original creditor A copy of the original signed contract or agreement Itemization showing principal, interest, fees, and charges Supporting media from the original creditor Midland has provided none of this.

Midlands typical verification statements consist of generic printouts that do not meet the legal standards of validation and do not contain : A signature An original agreement An account-level transfer document Any proof the alleged debt belongs to me Because Midland furnished negative credit data without first validating the debt, this raises significant FDCPA concerns. 

XXXX. FCRA Violations Inaccurate, Unverified, and Incomplete Reporting Under FCRA 607 ( b ), furnishers must ensure that all information is : Accurate Complete Up-to-date Verifiable Supported by documentation Midland is reporting two separate accounts under the same root number ( XXXX * ). One shows a balance of {$870.00}, and the other shows {$6200.00}. These inconsistencies suggest : Duplicate reporting Balance inflation Data integrity failures Mixed files Lack of verification Errors in the debt buyers database Inaccurate or incomplete automation matching Midland has not shown how these two different balances were derived. Midland has also not demonstrated that either balance corresponds to any actual, legitimate transaction associated with me.

If Midland can not verify which balance is correct or whether either balance is correct at all then neither account should appear on my report. 

XXXX. No Evidence of the Original Contract or Agreement Midland has not produced : A signed contract A digital signature An application An original creditor agreement IP logs or device data Transaction statements Charge-off documentation Billing statements Payment records Without the original contract, Midland can not prove : I opened the account I authorized any transactions I agreed to any terms I owe any amount Any balance is legitimate Any interest or fees were lawfully applied Debt buyers often rely on data spreadsheets, not actual contracts but spreadsheets do not constitute legal proof. 

XXXX. No Itemized Breakdown of the Balance Both the {$870.00} and {$6200.00} entries lack : Principal Interest Fees Late charges Origination details Payment history Charge-off calculation Date of first delinquency Any supporting documents Under federal guidance, a furnisher can not simply report a number. They must be able to show : Where it came from How it was calculated Proof it was incurred Midland has shown none of this. 

XXXX. Failure to Provide Required Notice Before Reporting Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( D ), furnishers must notify consumers before furnishing negative information. I received no such notice.

If Midland never notified me before reporting these derogatory accounts, then the reporting itself is unlawful.

XXXX. Automated Verification Is Not a Reasonable Investigation When I disputed the accounts, the bureaus responded that Midland verified them. However, Midlands verification appears to have been processed through : e-OSCAR ACDV/Automated Consumer Dispute Verification Template data matching Automated furnisher responses Automation does not constitute compliance with : FCRA 611 ( a ) ( reasonable investigation ) CFPB regulations on furnishers FDCPA validation obligations The law requires review of original documentation, not mere system matching. 

XXXX. Reporting Two Different Balances Suggests Data Errors Midland lists : {$870.00} {$6200.00} Both under the same XXXX root number. This suggests : Incorrect account association Portfolios of mixed debts Mistaken identity Duplicate account creation A software glitch Database corruption Improper merging of unrelated accounts Midland has provided no explanation for these discrepancies. 

XXXX. No Proof Midland Has the Correct Consumer I have not received : Verification of my identity linked to this account Address match logs SSN match confirmation DOB match confirmation Merchant-level identity verification Fraud screening data Without proper identity matching, Midland may be reporting : Someone elses debt A debt belonging to a similar name A debt belonging to a recycled phone/address A mixed file caused by outdated databases A clerical or data aggregation error If Midland can not verify identity, the account must be removed. 

XXXX. Reporting Appears Procedurally Deficient and Non-Compliant Because Midland : Did not validate Did not investigate reasonably Did not provide documentation Did not provide chain of title Did not supply proof of ownership Did not provide itemization Did not provide original media Reported duplicate accounts Provided conflicting balance data The reporting is fundamentally flawed. 

Under FCRA 602A, credit reporting must be fair, accurate, and reflect the true creditworthiness of consumers. These entries do not meet that requirement. 

XXXX. These Entries Cause Harm Because of these derogatory entries, I have suffered : Lower credit scores Denial of financial opportunities Higher interest rates Emotional distress Barriers to obtaining housing and credit Long-term financial harm When a debt buyer reports unverifiable or inaccurate information, the damage to consumers is severe and ongoing. 

XXXX. Summary of What Happened I do not recognize either alleged debt.

Midland did not provide required FDCPA validation.

Midland failed to provide proof of ownership.

Midland did not produce a chain of title.

Midland did not produce a signed contract.

Midland did not provide itemized accounting.

Midland reported two conflicting balances.

Midland may have mixed or misassigned accounts.

Midland verified through automation rather than investigation.

Midland furnished derogatory data without proper notice.

Midland has not proven the debts are mine.

The reporting appears inaccurate, incomplete, unverified, and unlawful.

For these reasons, I dispute the accounts in their entirety and request full regulatory assistance in determining their legitimacy.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief