Consumer complaint received 2019-07-10 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed
Company: RentDebt Automated Collections, LLC
State: UT

Complaint narrative:
Response from company states that Statute of Limitations is 4 years in Idaho. I have linked below the documentation that shows it is 3 years. 

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. 

STATUTORY LIABILITIES, TRESPASS, TROVER, REPLEVIN, AND FRAUD. Within three ( 3 ) years : 1. An action upon a liability created by statute, other than a penalty or forfeiture. The cause of action in favor of the state of Idaho or any political subdivision thereof, upon a surety bond or undertaking provided for or required by statute shall not be deemed to have accrued against any surety on such bond or undertaking until the discovery by the state of Idaho or any political subdivision thereof of the facts constituting the liability. 2. An action for trespass upon real property. 3. An action for taking, detaining or injuring any goods or chattels, including actions for the specific recovery of personal property. 4. An action for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake. The cause of action in such case not to be deemed to have accrued until the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts constituting the fraud or mistake. History : [ ( 5-218 ) C.C.P. 1881, sec. 158 ; R.S., R.C., & C.L., sec. 4054 ; C.S., sec. 6611 ; I.C.A., sec. 5-218 ; am. 1974, ch. 41, sec. 2, p. 1603. ]  Previous dispute is as follows : " We lived in an apartment in XXXX XXXX named " XXXX XXXX XXXX '', for 2 years, from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. Upon moving out in XX/XX/XXXX, they stated we would be liable for repairs in the apartment, which we disagreed with. There was a small paint stain in the carpet a single bedroom, and they stated they would be replacing the carpet in the ENTIRE apartment as a result, which resulted in a charge of XXXX, which they informed me of over the phone after we had moved out. We told them we did not agree with this, that they were trying to basically scam us into paying for renovations on the apartment that were not our responsibility. After that single phone call, we received no further phone calls or letters in the mail for 3 YEARS. No attempt to collect the {$1600.00} was EVER made. Now, in XX/XX/XXXX we noticed on our credit report we had been sent to collection for the {$1600.00}, collections agency " RENTDEBT AUTOMATED COL ''. We have attempted to dispute this with the both the collections agency, who states that we are the ones that must provide proof we are not liable, but there is no proof we can provide. We are being charged for something that is not our responsibility. Further more, the statute of limitations in Idaho for property damage is 3 years. To reiterate everything : We lived in this apartment 3 years and 4 months ago, and no attempt to collect this was EVER made aside from a single phone call from the apartment complex, and it was sent to collections in XX/XX/XXXX, a few month after the statute of limitations for property damage in Idaho, which is 3 years. '' RentDebt 's response is as follows : " My name is XXXX XXXX. I work in the compliance department for RentDebt Automated Collection, LLC ( RDAC ) and I have been asked to respond to XXXX XXXX XXXX complaint. We have completed our investigation and the results are as follows. XXXX XXXX account was placed with RDAC for collection on XX/XX/XXXX by RDACs client XXXX XXXX with a balance of {$1600.00}. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX mailed out a validation notice to XXXX XXXX, and on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX reported XXXX XXXX account to the three national credit reporting agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) with permission from our client, XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX called RDAC and stated he wished for the account to be placed in dispute. On XX/XX/XXXX RDAC responded to that dispute by mailing XXXX XXXX the final account statement and signed lease. RDAC reached out to our client XXXX XXXX regarding the carpet complaints, and their response is as follows : I am confirming that when that carpet needs to be replaced in one certain area we have to replace it in all the apartment because sometimes we don't have the same carpet to match the current one. In his complaint, XXXX XXXX alleges that there is a three ( 3 ) year statute of limitations for property damage in the XXXX of Idaho, and therefore the statute of limitations for enforcing the debt has expired. However, pursuant to Idaho law, the statute of limitations for property damage claims is four ( 4 ) years. Idaho Code Annotated 5-224, see also, Boise Development Co. v. Boise City, 30 Idaho 675, 167 P. 1032 ( 1917 ) ; Woodland v. Lyon, 78 Idaho 79, 298 P. 2d 380 ( 1956 ). We welcome XXXX XXXX to contact our office at XXXX RDAC Phone Number XXXX   XXXX from XXXX to XXXX and XXXX from XXXX to XXXX XXXX Time, to discuss options that might be available to him and to assist in resolving his account. XXXX XXXX '' My response to the carpet replacement is that if they are unable to replace the carpet to match the current carpet, that is their own issue, and not my responsibility. A single square foot of the carpet had a paint spill on it, dying it blue. They've chosen to replace the carpet in the entire apartment as a result, and are trying to fraudulently pass the cost on to myself. I am more than happy to reach a reasonable settlement for the portion of the carpet that was dyed, but refuse to bankroll their renovations for the entire apartment, which included not just carpet replacement for the entire unit, but repainting as well. 

-XXXX  XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation