Consumer complaint received 2026-05-27 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Written notification about debt — Didn't receive enough information to verify debt
Company: Radius Global Solutions LLC
State: IN

Complaint narrative:
b'Company: Radius Global Solutions LLC\nAddress: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX NJ XXXXPhone: XXXXnAccount: XXXX XXXX ending in XXXXnAlleged Balance: XXXX\nWhat happened:\nI am filing this complaint against Radius Global Solutions LLC for multiple documented violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and CFPB Regulation F (12 C.F.R. Part 1006) in connection with their attempt to collect an alleged XXXX XXXX debt.\n\nBackground:\nRadius Global Solutions began attempting to collect an alleged XXXX XXXX debt of XXXX from me in XXXX XXXX. \n\nViolation 1 Late Validation Notice (15 U.S.C. 1692g(a)):\nThe earliest documented communication from Radius was a written Tax Season Offer settlement letter dated XXXX XXXX XXXX. I contacted Radius by phone on XXXX XXXX XXXX, and formally requested validation of the debt. Radiuss validation notice was not sent until XXXX XXXX XXXXa minimum of 9 days after my verbal request and 12 days after their first written communication. The FDCPA requires a validation notice within 5 days of initial communication. Both calculations independently exceed this statutory requirement.\n\nViolation 2 Willful Refusal to Provide Regulation F Compliant Validation (12 C.F.R. 1006.34):\nRadiuss XXXX XXXX validation response consisted entirely of unitemized XXXX XXXX account statements. No compliant Regulation F itemization table was ever provided identifying the debt as of a reference date, interest accrued, fees accrued, and payments credited. In their subsequent XXXX XXXX XXXX letter, Radius explicitly stated no further action is requireda willful refusal to cure this documented deficiency. Neither letter satisfies mandatory Regulation F validation standards.\n\nViolation 3 Failure to Establish Chain of Title (15 U.S.C. 1692g):\nRadius provided no documentation establishing legal authority to collect this accountno assignment agreement, no proof of account ownership, and no proof of licensure to collect debts in the State of Indiana.\n\nViolation 4 Overshadowing of Dispute Rights (15 U.S.C. 1692g(b)):\nThe XXXX XXXX XXXX Tax Season Offer letter demanded payment by XXXX XXXX XXXX, and cited Avoid Further Collection Activitybefore any validation notice was ever sent. Creating artificial payment urgency before communicating validation rights directly overshadows a consumers statutory right to dispute the debt.\n\nViolation 5 Misleading Correspondence (15 U.S.C. 1692e(10)):\nRadiuss XXXX XXXX validation letter listed XXXX XXXX XXXX as the return mail address and XXXX XXXX XXXX as the payments addresstwo conflicting addresses on the same letter. This constitutes a misleading communication under the least sophisticated consumer standard.\n\nViolation 6 Omission of Mandatory Notice of Rights (15 U.S.C. 1692g(a)(3)-(5)):\nNo mandatory Notice of Rights was included in Radius validation correspondence on XXXX XXXX XXXX informing me of my right to dispute the debt within 30 days or my right to request the name and address of the original creditor.\n\nViolation 7 Factual Misrepresentation of Record (15 U.S.C. 1692e):\nIn their XXXX XXXX XXXX letter, Radius stated my dispute was received XXXX XXXX XXXX. USPS Certified Mail tracking number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX confirms delivery on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX three-day discrepancy documented in their own correspondence.\n\nViolation 8 Post Cease and Desist Communication (15 U.S.C. 1692c(c)):\nI sent a formal Cease and Desist letter delivered to Radius on XXXX XXXX XXXX, via Certified Mail. Their XXXX XXXX XXXX letterpostmarked XXXX XXXXwas not a compliant validation response and constitutes a direct violation of an active Cease and Desist instruction.\n\nViolation 9 Failure to Communicate Disputed Status Upon Transfer (15 U.S.C. 1692e(8) and 12 C.F.R. 1006.38):\nMy dispute letter explicitly invoked 12 C.F.R. 1006.38 and required any subsequent possessor be notified the account is DISPUTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Radius transferred the account without this mandatory notation. Credit reports pulled XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXboth from XXXX and XXXXconfirm no disputed notation appears on the trade line despite my dispute being delivered on XXXX XXXX XXXX. This represents 68+ days of documented failure to communicate the dispute status. This establishes a severe reporting breakdown: either Radius completely failed to forward the dispute status down the collection chain, or XXXX XXXX is failing to accurately display the active dispute status on consumer credit reports.\n\nViolation 10 Unexplained Chain of Custody Gap (15 U.S.C. 1692e(2)(A)):\XXXX XXXX notified me via letter dated XXXX XXXX XXXX that the account was transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX However, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX subsequently sent a collection letter dated XXXX XXXX XXXX claiming to collect directly for XXXX XXXX with no reference to XXXXan unexplained gap in chain of custody. \n\nAdditional Concern Personal Data Sheet:\nRadius included in their validation response a document containing my IP address, old email address, and old physical address from my XXXX XXXX XXXX application. The inclusion of this historical identifying data in a generic collection validation packet raises consumer concerns regarding file data aggregation practices.\n\nWhat I did:\nI sent a comprehensive formal Dispute and Cease and Desist letter to Radius on XXXX XXXX XXXX via Certified Mail (tracking confirmed delivery XXXX XXXX XXXX). The letter cited all violations above and demanded file closure, cessation of collection activity, credit reporting agency deletion, and a transfer clause requiring a DISPUTED IN ITS ENTIRETY notation per 12 C.F.R. 1006.38 upon any account transfer.\n\nWhat Radius did:\nRadiuss 30-day response deadline expired XXXX XXXX XXXX, without a compliant validation response. They sent one non-compliant letter postmarked XXXX XXXX XXXX in violation of the active Cease and Desist, then closed the file and facilitated transfer of the account without the required dispute notation.'

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief