Consumer complaint received 2025-11-15 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Medical-Commercial Audit Inc
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns the manner in which MCA Management Co. has reported a collection/charge-off account to the nationwide consumer reporting agencies. The information reported by MCA Management Co. appears to be inaccurate, incomplete, unverified, and unsupported by necessary documentation. The reporting practices of MCA Management Co. raise substantial concerns under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and CFPB regulations governing consumer reporting accuracy, verification procedures, and furnisher obligations.

The negative information being reported by MCA Management Co. includes a past-due balance that the company claims is owed, and it is listed as a derogatory collection/charge-off account. However, I have not been provided with any documentation establishing that MCA Management Co. has legal ownership of the debt, any contractual right to collect the debt, or any original documentation from the original creditor that substantiates the existence, amount, accuracy, or legitimacy of the alleged debt. Additionally, there has been no documentation proving that MCA Management Co. has the legal authority to furnish the account to the credit bureaus.

The credit bureaus are reporting this account as a collection or charge-off, with a past-due balance owed. However, MCA Management Co. has never provided verification or validation of the debt within the meaning of the FDCPA, nor has it demonstrated that it followed the FCRAs procedures for accurate reporting. When I disputed this account with the credit bureaus, I did not receive any supporting documentation showing that MCA Management Co. conducted a lawful investigation, reviewed any original documents, or provided any verifiable records confirming the accuracy of their reporting. 

Instead, the bureaus responses simply stated that the account was verified, without any explanation as to how that verification occurred, whether documentation was provided, or whether the investigation followed FCRA 611 requirements. The lack of transparency strongly suggests that the credit bureaus relied solely on automated furnishers responseslikely through the XXXX systemrather than conducting a legitimate reinvestigation.

MCA Management Co. has not provided : The original contract or agreement Original billing statements Proof of the debts origin Proof of the debts amount Proof of account ownership Proof of assignment or transfer from the original creditor Chain-of-title documentation Any communication validating the debt Without these documents, the information being furnished can not be considered verified. 

Under the FDCPA, a debt collector must provide validation of the debt upon request. Validation must include evidence that the debt exists, evidence that the consumer owes the debt, and evidence that the collector has the right to collect it. MCA Management Co. has never supplied validation, nor did they provide it during the reinvestigation process with the credit bureaus.

Additionally, FCRA 623 ( a ) requires furnishers like MCA Management Co. to only report accurate information. Reporting information without validating its origin violates this requirement. FCRA 623 ( b ) requires furnishers to conduct reasonable investigations upon receiving disputes ; however, the lack of documentation provided suggests that MCA Management Co. responded to the credit bureaus in a superficial, automated manner without actually reviewing any documents.

Given the nature of third-party debt collection, MCA Management Co. must also demonstrate : That it acquired the account legally That a sales agreement or assignment exists That the agreement includes this specific account That the debt was not returned or recalled That the amount reported is accurate That the company is licensed to collect in the relevant jurisdiction None of this supporting documentation has been provided or referenced by MCA Management Co .

Another issue concerns the possibility of errors in the balance reported by MCA Management Co. Unless MCA provides documentation showing how the balance was calculatedincluding principal, interest, fees, or any additional chargesthe accuracy of the amount can not be verified. Debt buyers frequently receive incomplete, outdated, or unreliable data, which can lead to inaccurate reporting. Without documentation, there is no proof the amount reported is correct.

Additionally, if the debt was sold multiple times before reaching MCA Management Co., they must provide a complete chain of assignment showing every transfer. Without this chain, there is no legally recognized ownership, and the company can not claim the right to report or collect the debt.

Another concern is whether MCA Management Co. provided the legally required written notification under the FDCPA within five days of first contact, including a statement of the amount owed and the name of the original creditor. If no such notice was provided, the reporting is unlawful.

When I disputed the account, the credit bureaus were required to notify MCA Management Co. of the dispute. MCA Management Co. was then required to conduct a reasonable investigation, review all available evidence, and provide the results to the bureau. However, because the credit bureaus did not provide any documentation during the reinvestigation response, it appears MCA Management Co. did not supply any supporting evidence.

The FCRA requires a furnisher to delete or modify information that can not be verified. Because MCA Management Co. has not provided evidence, the continued reporting constitutes a violation of FCRA 623 ( b ).

Additionally, it appears that MCA Management Co. may not have marked the account as disputed during the reinvestigation process. Furnishers are required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) to update an account to reflect a dispute whenever a consumer disputes the accuracy of the information. If MCA Management Co. failed to mark the account as disputed, this also violates federal law.

Furthermore, the credit bureaus verifications were completed unusually quickly, suggesting that no documents were reviewed and that the verification relied solely on electronic responses. A reasonable investigation can not occur within such a short time unless documents already exist and have been reviewedwhich did not occur here.

There is also a concern that MCA Management Co. may be reporting obsolete, outdated, or inaccurate information. In some cases, collection companies attempt to report debts that are beyond the statute of limitations or debts that have been previously resolved. Without documentation, it is impossible to determine whether the debt is legally reportable.

Many collection agencies obtain debts through bulk purchases or incomplete data files, which often lack account-level documentation. When a company lacks original records, reporting such debts to credit bureaus is unlawful.

Additionally, the presence of this unvalidated negative information has caused harm, including credit denials, higher interest rates, and loss of financial opportunities. The severity of the harm is heightened because the derogatory status of the account significantly impacts creditworthiness.

When I attempted to dispute the MCA Management Co. account directly with the credit bureaus, I expected a legally compliant reinvestigation involving the furnisher obtaining and reviewing original documents. Instead, the bureaus marked the account as verified without providing any evidence. This indicates that the bureaus likely relied on automated responses without reviewing documentation.

Because MCA Management Co. has not produced : Proof that the debt exists Proof that the consumer owes the debt Proof that the company owns the debt Proof that the balance is accurate Proof that the debt is legally reportable Any documentation supporting the derogatory reporting It is not possible for the reporting to meet the accuracy and verification standards required by the FCRA.

This account should not remain on a consumers credit report unless it is supported by complete, verifiable documentation. Absent this proof, the reporting is unlawful.

MCA Management Co. must demonstrate, through documented evidence, that : The account is legitimate The balance is correct The account is legally owned The debt was properly assigned The reporting is accurate The debt is legally collectible They followed FDCPA and FCRA requirements Without this documentation, MCA Management Co. can not lawfully furnish negative information to the credit bureaus.

The CFPB should require MCA Management Co. to provide : All records supporting their claim A full chain of assignment Original creditor documentation Billing statements Account histories Charge-off records if applicable Any notices required by law Verification of the accuracy of the reported balance Licensing or registration information showing legal collection authority If MCA Management Co. can not produce these records, the CFPB should require that the account be deleted from all consumer credit reports.

Because derogatory information has severe consequences on creditworthiness, and because MCA Management Co. has not demonstrated compliance with federal law, the consumer is entitled to relief.

Given the lack of documentation, the lack of validation, the lack of proper reinvestigation, and the potential legal violations described above, the CFPB should intervene to ensure that the furnisher and the credit bureaus comply with federal requirements.

If MCA Management Co. can not verify the account with proper documentation, the account must be removed.

Company public response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief