Consumer complaint received 2025-03-10 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX Federal Trade Commission XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX RE : Formal Complaint Against Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear CFPB and FTC, I submit this formal complaint against Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC and XXXX Bank for engaging in unfair, deceptive, and unlawful debt collection practices, in violation of federal consumer protection laws. 
Violations of Federal Law 1. Unfair Debt Collection Practices ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) 2. False or Misleading Credit Reporting ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) 3. Deceptive Litigation Practices in Violation of Federal Law Summary of Violations : 1. Filing a Lawsuit in the Wrong Jurisdiction The original creditor agreement specifies that Utah law governs any disputes. 
Portfolio Recovery Associates ignored this contractual provision and filed suit in Ohio, seeking an unfair advantage. 
This misuse of jurisdiction violates fair consumer litigation standards and is intended to pressure consumers into settlements. 
2. Omitting the Arbitration Clause from the Lawsuit The original agreement contains an arbitration clause, which likely bars this litigation from proceeding in court. 
Portfolio Recovery and its attorneys failed to disclose a legible copy of the arbitration clause, despite multiple formal requests. 
This is an intentional omission that misleads the court and denies me my legal rights. 
3. Failure to Provide Full Debt Validation ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) On XX/XX/XXXX, I formally requested validation of the alleged debt. 
Portfolio Recovery failed to provide the original contract, a full account history, or a purchase agreement proving ownership. 
Instead, they submitted partial and misleading evidence while omitting key documents, violating the FDCPA. 
Despite failing to validate the debt, Portfolio Recovery continued collection efforts, which is unlawful under federal law. 
4. False & Misleading Credit Reporting ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Despite my dispute, Portfolio Recovery continued reporting the debt without verifying its accuracy. 
XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to confirm whether the debt was sold, securitized, or written off. 
This resulted in inaccurate and misleading credit reporting, harming my financial standing. 
5. Securitization of Debt Makes it Uncollectible XXXX XXXX securitizes its receivables, meaning that the debt may have been transferred to a trust and is legally uncollectible. 
Portfolio Recovery has not provided proof that they have legal ownership to collect this debt. 
Debt buyers can not collect debts that have been securitized unless they can prove specific ownership, which they have failed to do. 
6. Fraudulent Credit Reporting & Failure to Correct Disputed Debt Portfolio Recovery knowingly reported inaccurate debt information, despite the account being disputed. 
XXXX XXXX failed to provide documentation proving Portfolio Recovery had legal authority to collect the debt. 
This violates FCRA reporting obligations and results in continued harm to my credit profile. 
7. Bad Faith Litigation & Misrepresentation Portfolio Recoverys attorneys refused to provide essential documents proving ownership of the debt. 
XXXX XXXX may have already written off or securitized the debt, making Portfolio Recoverys collection efforts improper. 
This deceptive litigation is meant to mislead consumers and pressure settlements rather than comply with legal standards. 
8. Failure to Respond to Good Faith Discovery Requests Portfolio Recovery refused to comply with multiple discovery requests regarding debt validation, ownership, and reporting. 
This is a systemic issue within their collection practices, violating consumer protection laws. 
9. Improper Service & Procedural Misconduct On XX/XX/XXXX, the judge ruled that I was never properly served with the original complaint. 
I informed Portfolio Recoverys attorney in XX/XX/XXXX that I had not been served. 
Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX acknowledged this on the record but failed to correct the issue, continuing to litigate in bad faith. 
The judge restarted the case in XX/XX/XXXX after determining that Portfolio Recovery failed to serve me properly before pursuing collection actions. 
This demonstrates Portfolio Recoverys pattern of abusing legal processes to XXXX. Misapplication of Law Due to Judicial Deference to Repeat Debt Collection Filers The judge overseeing my case has repeatedly deferred to Portfolio Recovery Associates ' experience in filing lawsuits rather than applying the actual law. 
Instead of ensuring Portfolio Recovery complied with consumer protection laws, the court assumed that because they file debt collection lawsuits frequently, they must be correct. 
This harms consumers, as the judge failed to require : o Proper debt validation ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ). 
o Proof that Portfolio Recovery actually owns the debt. 
o Recognition of the governing law ( Utah ) and the arbitration clause that likely bars this lawsuit. 
This bias toward repeat debt buyers creates a system where debt collectors file lawsuits without proper proof, knowing courts will favor them based on experience rather than evidence. 
11. Misuse of Litigation & Debt Collection Abuse by Portfolio Recovery Associates On XX/XX/XXXX, the judge ruled that I was never properly served with the original complaint. 
Portfolio Recovery Associates litigated for over a year without properly serving me. 
Instead of dismissing the case for lack of service and failure to prosecute, the court improperly restarted the lawsuit, unfairly benefiting Portfolio Recovery. 
Portfolio Recovery and XXXX XXXX violated multiple consumer protection laws : o FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ) Portfolio Recovery continued collection without validating the debt. 
o FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Portfolio Recovery reported unverified debt to credit bureaus despite my disputes. 
o Debt Buyer Procedural Abuse Portfolio Recovery ignored the governing law ( XXXX ) and omitted an arbitration clause that may bar the lawsuit. 

Requested Actions I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) : 1. Investigate Portfolio Recovery Associates & XXXX XXXX for violations of consumer protection laws. 
2. Order Portfolio Recovery to delete the debt from my credit report and cease collection efforts. 
3. Impose financial penalties against Portfolio Recovery Associates for procedural abuse.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief