Consolidated Recovery Group

In responding to Ms [redacted] complaint, allow me to give some background informationMs [redacted] applied for and received a commercial credit card processing account from Intuit Payment Solutions for her company, The Black Book VIPMs [redacted] is the personal guarantor of that contractIn the course of business, her company received or more disputed transactions (chargebacks) from her customer(s)Chargebacks, as well as liability when a merchant receives one, are covered in great detail in Section of Ms [redacted] Merchant Agreement with IntuitThe total amount including fees totaled $ [redacted] Section of Ms [redacted] Merchant Agreement calls for 1.5% interest to accrue on any amount not paid when dueThat amount totals $ [redacted] today.The account went through Intuit's collection deptwithout success before being assigned to Consolidated Recovery for collectionAlthough Ms [redacted] has never actually done business with this firm, she agreed in Section of her Merchant Agreement that her account could be assigned for collectionWith regard to validating the debt, that was actually done on February 7, with her first dispute to this firm through ExperianAll of the documents relating to the application, chargebacks and Merchant Agreement were sent to her by US MailThe account status was updated to "Disputed" at that timeEach time she has disputed the account thereafter, we have responded with a letter indicating that she has already received the documents requestedMs [redacted] also indicated in the complaint that she spoke with someone here in November 2016, however, our records indicate that we have not had any contact with her since September Also, TX law does not require commercial collection agencies to be licensed or bondedThe law Ms [redacted] is referring to references consumer transactions onlyThat type of debt is not what we have here.We are happy to work with Ms [redacted] to either change or delete our trade line, however, Ms [redacted] will need to work with us to either pay or settle the balance due under her contract with our client

We have received Mr [redacted] 's complaint and will reiterate what we've previously told himMr [redacted] is the personal guarantor of a commercial contract between his company, Solutions You Need, Incand Intuit Payment Solutions, a credit card processing companyThe subject of Mr [redacted] ’s complaint stems from credit card transactions that were processed by his company, one for $1,and another for $1,Same card number, same cardholderWhen the charges appeared on the cardholder’s statement, the owner of the card disputed those transactions with their bank for the reason of: No Cardholder AuthorizationIt is Mr [redacted] ’s contention that the card was used fraudulently, however that may or may not be the caseBecause the cardholder disputed the transactions with their bank, they subsequently turned into chargebacksChargebacks are covered in great detail in the [redacted] and [redacted] Rules (which all Merchants, Cardholders and Processors have to play by) and are reflected in the Intuit Merchant Agreement, the contract between the partiesBasically, because the cardholder disputed authorizing the sales, the card issuing bank debited Intuit Payment Solutions for the amounts of the transactions and credited their cardholderBy contract, Solutions You Need, Incand Mr [redacted] are absolutely liable to repay those amounts back to Intuit, plus fees and now interestThe link to the Merchant Agreement can be found here: [redacted] It would be helpful if Mr [redacted] would review the following sections: Personal Guarantee; Pricing & Payment (fees associated with transactions and finance charge on unpaid balances), and; ChargebacksThis balance has been reported to Mr [redacted] 's personal credit profiled due to his guarantee of the corporate contractIf he would agree to pay the balance that is presently due on the account, that being $3,654.39, we would agree to remove our line from his report.I hope this adequately resolves Mr [redacted] 's concerns

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Regards,
*** ***
The customer being the criminal issued chargeback in order to receive money on a stolen cardThe business which is now disolved did not reap benefit and now nor do iI believe that I deserve the right to prove I was scamed and not liable for transactions in a criminal situationThank you

Mr. [redacted] probably was scammed by his customer. This is always an issue when dealing with credit card transactions when the actual card is not present at the time of the sale. Mr. [redacted] needs to realize that this was his customer that did this to him, not Intuit. Intuit simply processed the card transactions at Mr. [redacted]'s request. Those transactions were funded, meaning Mr. [redacted] was paid for them, and then Intuit was subsequently debited by his customer's bank because of the chargeback disputes. I sent the link to his Merchant Agreement yesterday. Contractually, Mr. [redacted] and his company are liable to pay Intuit back. Period. Mr. [redacted]'s remedy is to pursue an action against his customer(s). Doing so, however, does not relieve or forestall his obligation to reimburse Intuit under his contract with them.While we empathize with Mr. [redacted], and with all the merchants that we deal with daily that have had this same type of thing happen to them, the Merchant Agreement is crystal clear with regard to liability. Our offer to him still stands. If he is willing to pay the balance, as he agreed to do when he agreed to all the terms and conditions of the Merchant Agreement, we will delete our trade line on his personal credit profile.

In responding to Ms. [redacted] complaint, allow me to give some background information. Ms. [redacted] applied for and received a commercial credit card processing account from Intuit Payment Solutions for her company, The Black Book VIP. Ms. [redacted] is the personal guarantor of that contract. In the course...

of business, her company received 1 or more disputed transactions (chargebacks) from her customer(s). Chargebacks, as well as liability when a merchant receives one, are covered in great detail in Section 16 of Ms. [redacted] Merchant Agreement with Intuit. The total amount including fees totaled $[redacted]. Section 7 of Ms. [redacted] Merchant Agreement calls for 1.5% interest to accrue on any amount not paid when due. That amount totals $[redacted] today.The account went through Intuit's collection dept. without success before being assigned to Consolidated Recovery for collection. Although Ms. [redacted] has never actually done business with this firm, she agreed in Section 46 of her Merchant Agreement that her account could be assigned for collection. With regard to validating the debt, that was actually done on February 7, 2015 with her first dispute to this firm through Experian. All of the documents relating to the application, chargebacks and Merchant Agreement were sent to her by US Mail. The account status was updated to "Disputed" at that time. Each time she has disputed the account thereafter, we have responded with a letter indicating that she has already received the documents requested. Ms. [redacted] also indicated in the complaint that she spoke with someone here in November 2016, however, our records indicate that we have not had any contact with her since September 2015. Also, TX law does not require commercial collection agencies to be licensed or bonded. The law Ms. [redacted] is referring to references consumer transactions only. That type of debt is not what we have here.We are happy to work with Ms. [redacted] to either change or delete our trade line, however, Ms. [redacted] will need to work with us to either pay or settle the balance due under her contract with our client.

We have received Mr. [redacted]'s complaint and will reiterate what we've previously told him. Mr. [redacted] is the personal guarantor of a commercial contract between his company, Solutions You Need, Inc. and Intuit Payment Solutions, a credit card processing company. The subject of Mr. [redacted]’s...

complaint stems from 2 credit card transactions that were processed by his company, one for $1,500 and another for $1,600. Same card number, same cardholder. When the charges appeared on the cardholder’s statement, the owner of the card disputed those transactions with their bank for the reason of: No Cardholder Authorization. It is Mr. [redacted]’s contention that the card was used fraudulently, however that may or may not be the case. Because the cardholder disputed the transactions with their bank, they subsequently turned into chargebacks. Chargebacks are covered in great detail in the [redacted] and [redacted] Rules (which all Merchants, Cardholders and Processors have to play by) and are reflected in the Intuit Merchant Agreement, the contract between the parties. Basically, because the cardholder disputed authorizing the sales, the card issuing bank debited Intuit Payment Solutions for the amounts of the transactions and credited their cardholder. By contract, Solutions You Need, Inc. and Mr. [redacted] are absolutely liable to repay those amounts back to Intuit, plus fees and now interest. The link to the Merchant Agreement can be found here: [redacted]. It would be helpful if Mr. [redacted] would review the following sections: 3. Personal Guarantee; 7. Pricing & Payment (fees associated with transactions and finance charge on unpaid balances), and; 16. Chargebacks. This balance has been reported to Mr. [redacted]'s personal credit profiled due to his guarantee of the corporate contract. If he would agree to pay the balance that is presently due on the account, that being $3,654.39, we would agree to remove our line from his report.I hope this adequately resolves Mr. [redacted]'s concerns.

Review: I previously had an account with iTuit for $100.00 They over charged me and sent my account over to collections. My balance is over $300 now. This company Consolidated Recovery had called my cell nonstop. I moved back home in June 2013 to help take care of my elderly grandfather who is 81 years old. He uses a landline with the phone number of [redacted]. He has slight dementia and may not understand things sometimes. Consolidated Recovery illegally tracked down my address and my grandfather's phone number and proceeded to call HIS home looking for me. This is very illegal. They called harassing them and threatening to take my vehicle away. They also called and stated that they would sue me in my state. The number they told me to call was: 866-589-0664. We get phone calls all the time from these people. Consolidated recovery constantly calls his house making threats looking for me. They ask my grandfather personal information and he gives it to them because he is elderly and does not know any better. I want the phone calls and the harassment to STOP!Desired Settlement: I would like the phone calls and harassment to STOP immediately.

Business

Response:

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

Review: This company claims that I owe their client money. But this company has failed to provide me with a copy of a signed contract (showing my signature) upon my request. They sent a letter claiming they are reporting me to the credit bureau. But they still have not provided me with a signed contract showing where I agreed to pay their client any money.Desired Settlement: Remove any and all reporting from the credit bureau until they can prove or provide a signed contract with my signature showing where I agreed to pay their client money. If they can not provide such signed contract then they must remove all reporting to the credit bureaus and cease communication with me.

Business

Response:

To Whom It May Concern:

Review: THIS COMPLAIN IS IN REF TO AN UNAUTHORIZED ACCOUNT SET IN MY NAME WITH INNOVATIVE MERCHANT SERVICES I HAVE SENT THE COMPANY 4 LETTERS ABOUT THIS ACCOUNT I HAVE ASKED THEM TO VERIFY THIS ACCOUNT pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 (b) AND THIS COMPANY HAS REPORT NEGATIVE INFORMATION TO MY CREDIT REPORTDesired Settlement: I WOULD LIKE THE NEGATIVE INFO REMOVED FROM MY CREDIT REPORT THANK YOU

Business

Response:

In response to Mr. [redacted] complaint, we actually have received NO correspondence from him. We sent 3 pieces of correspondence to him dating back to November 2012, the first of which advised him of the account placement with this firm, the second advising him of the credit bureau reporting based on his personal guarantee of a commercial contract. We received no response to either letter. We then received a credit bureau dispute from Experian initiated by Mr. [redacted]. Since we had heard nothing from him, we verified the reporting as accurate and sent an inquiry to Mr. [redacted]. We received a telephone call from him on January 11, 2013 alleging that the application for credit card processing was submitted fraudulently and his identity had been stolen. We immediately marked our bureau reporting as "Disputed" and sent fraud documents directly to Mr. [redacted] by email, as he requested. In order for a fraud claim to be accepted by our client, a notarized "Affidavit of Stolen Identity" must be completed (a blank form was provided to him in the email attachment) and a stolen identity report must be made to his local police. If those documents had been returned, we would have forwarded them to our client's Risk Management Unit, closed our file and deleted our bureau line due to fraud. Unfortunately, once again, those documents have not been returned, nor have we heard another word from Mr. [redacted].

This problem is easily corrected if Mr. [redacted] would simply complete the fraud material that we previously sent to him. In the alternative, if this not fraud, Mr. [redacted] needs to contact us to resolve the balance due. In the interest of resolving the account quickly, I have ordered a new set of fraud documents to be mailed to the address he provided to you.

Review: In May, this year, [redacted] from CONSOLIDATED RECOVERY GROUP, LLC sent me letters and emails to collect around $20,000 claimed on behavior of Intuit.

After back and force several times of emails and talks, I cleanly told them the merchant account on collection was not I opened.

I repeat stated: "Intuit recorded and used my personal information, as well as my social security card number to open this merchant account without my permission and knowledge".

But on May 22, 2013, [redacted] sent me a fraudulent agreement, declared that I signed the agreement. Actually, I never signed this kind of agreement.

I told [redacted] in email:"I have the opportunity to read the "Merchant Agreement" and "Application Form" that you sent me today. This is my first time to see these documents. I said this in my last email: "Intuit recorded and used my personal information, as well as my social security card number to open this merchant account without my permission and knowledge"; "Intuit never asks me to verify, never tells me what the risks, responsibility, etc. to open this account". Now, you sent me the "application form", that was even without electronically signatures on it. I wonder who signed this application, and why didn't have electronically signed name on it."

And I requested them to stop this fraudulent collection immediately.

But [redacted] sent me email:"The merchant application was signed and transmitted online. You have just received a copy of that transmission. It was signed electronically when the "transmit" button was pressed. If you didn't do it and want to be released from liability, then the police report must be made. This issue needs to be cleared up before you receive any other information on the balance due. Once again, if you're planning to take the "fraud" route, please advice. If not, and you are admitting liability under the contract, then I will supply the balance of the account information."

After that, I gave them the warning:

Please send the "collection" back to Intuit. And you are advised:

1) Don't send me this kind harassment letter any more; Otherwise, I shall file the complaints against you and your company in General Attorney Office, Revdex.com, etc.

2) I am looking and processing to buy a home. If any my credit score to be reduced due to this "fraudulent collection", I will go to court to ask for $10,000 damage for every point of reduced my credit score. If you are keeping doing this, damaging me and my credit score, this will be the agreement if the court judges your fault since you are notified.

And I went to Police Department at my hometown, [redacted] to report this incident.

Unfortunately, [redacted] and CONSOLIDATED RECOVERY GROUP, LLC ignored my every effect. They sent this false collection to Credit Bureau anyway to damage my credit.

After I made a incident report to Police Department, I was forced to give CONSOLIDATED RECOVERY GROUP, LLC my drive license # and all my personal information, which followed what [redacted] said:"There are 2 ways to resolve this matter. Pay the bill or follow the instructions on the fraud letter. These are Intuit's requirements, not ours".

I asked if they have the fax # so that I can fax the incident report to them, and I provided to them

the incident report case number filed with my home township police department:

#[redacted] Police Department

[redacted], NJ [redacted]

Until today, I found this false collection report still is in my credit report. My mortgage application was denied due to short of a couple scores. I believe it was due to this false collection's damage. Even today, I sent an email to them and asked why the false collection still is in my credit report. They said because of "no police report was received". But even they didn't receive it, they still can get it from Police Department at least since they have the case# and location. They asked me to search their Fax # and fax the police report to them, which I will do tonight.

Now, I make this complaint against [redacted] and his company, CONSOLIDATED RECOVERY GROUP, LLC. I am demanding them to give me a formal apology and $20,000 for the damages, the sequence of my mortgage denied caused by this false collection.Desired Settlement: A formal apology and $20,000 for the damages, the sequence of my mortgage denied caused by this false collection.

Business

Response:

November 12,2013

Revdex.com of San Diego

4747 View Ridge Drive, Suite 200

San Diego, CA 92123

Re: [redacted] Complaint No. 9799811

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

I am in receipt of your email referencing the above complaint. Allow me to provide you with the facts of this case.

Brandywine Professional Services, LLC submitted an electronically signed and transmitted application for credit card processing to Intuit Payment Solutions on November 9, 2011. That application was approved based on the credit of the personal guarantor, 70% owner and principal of the company, [redacted].

Beginning in December 2012, Intuit began receiving disputed credit card transactions that had been processed by Brandywine which ended in charge back situations. The balance on the account, inclusive of the contractual fees associated with the charge backs, is in excess of $15,000. Contractually, any amount that comes due on the merchant account must be available for debit in the merchant's DDA account. When Intuit attempted to debit the funds that Brandywine was liable for, they were each returned unpaid by their bank. Because the debits were returned unpaid, Intuit closed the merchant account and transferred the balance to their Collection Dept. According to their collection notes, they had several conversations both by email and phone with Mr. ** regarding details of the charge backs themselves. Mr. ** seemed to be insistent that he be provided with the customer's name(s) who initiated the charge backs, information which Intuit is rarely privy to (other identifying information is always provided to the merchant so they can check their records and find the customer). At no time did Mr. ** indicate to Intuit that he had not applied for the account or guarantee it. Once Intuit was unsuccessful In obtaining payment, the account was placed with us for collection.

On April 9, 2013 we sent Mr. ** a notice notifying him that the account was now with our fmn for collection. Our notice specifically indicates that personally guaranteed accounts would be reported to the credit bureaus.

November 12, 2013

Page Two

Receiving no response, we sent, on May 13, 2013, an additional letter to Mr. ** notifying him that the account would be reported to the bureaus within 10 days if not resolved. Again, no response. We then called Mr. ** on May 17 to discuss the balance due. He indicated that he wanted to see all the charge back documentation previously supplied by Intuit. As a matter of procedure, we. compiled a complete detail of all the charge backs and fees. This document was emailed to Mr. ** on May 17. Several email exchanges took place between Mr. ** and this office between May 17 and June 5. Basically, Mr. ** wanted additional information on the charge backs which he found "cheating and fake" and alleged Intuit assisted with. Further, Mr. ** wanted to see a "signed" application as the one we had previously forwarded to him wasn't signed. We changed our bureau reporting to "disputed" as required and continued to inform him that the application was electronically signed not physically signed. It was at that point that Mr. ** tells us that someone in his company used his Social Security Number to open the account and that person informed him afterwards (presumably November 2011) that he had done so. Upon learning this, Mr. ** did nothing to inform Intuit that his information was used on the application without his knowledge or consent. Further, he continued to use the account for over a year, resulting in a substantial loss to the client. Even when contacted by Intuit's Collection Dept, Mr. ** failed to mention that the application was submitted fraudulently. Just to recap, we confirmed with Mr. ** in our phone conversations that he was: (a.) aware of the credit card processing account with the client; (b.) aware that his personal information was used to open the account; (c.) had access to, and was a signor of, the company bank account(s), and; (d.) knew about the transactions in question.

On July 1, Intuit informed us that there had been an increase in the balance as they had received additional charge backs. We notified Mr. ** by letter of that and promptly received a response that he was disputing the account because his personal information was used without his consent. At that point, we felt it was best for us to remove ourselves from the situation and let Intuit's Risk Management Dept decide how they wished to deal with this. Before we can close any file due to fraud, Intuit requires and must receive a signed and notarized Affidavit of Stolen Identity and a copy of a stolen identity police report from their local police unit. On July 12, we emailed Mr. ** our fraud packet with a cover letter which thoroughly explains what the client requires and how best to get the required documents back to us (email, fax or mail, all of which are clearly stated on our letterhead). After several emails back and forth with Mr. ** indicating what information he will and will not provide, we finally received the Affidavit back by email on July 28. Mr. ** indicated that the police report would follow the next day. On July 31, having not received the police report, we, as a courtesy, emailed Mr ** informing him that we were reporting to the bureaus that afternoon and if he would send the police report to us that day, the deletion due to fraud would be processed immediately.

November 12, 2013

Page Three

August 1, we received another email from Mr. ** telling us he would try to get us the police report that day. To date, we have yet to receive the police report.

It wasn't until November 10 that we heard from Mr. ** again because the disputed credit bureau line was still on his credit record. We informed Mr. ** again that the client requires a police report and he has yet tu provide that. He then responded with the complaints that he filed with you and an identical one with the CA Attorney General's office. Once again, we will be happy to forward the documents to Intuit, close our file and delete our bureau line due to fraud as we promised to do in July, if he would simply provide a copy of the police report.

I hope that details the situation to your satisfaction. If you need any further information se, please feel free to contact me.

Sr. Collector

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

On July 12, 2013, I sent an email to them:

"I have clearly stated that "Intuit recorded and used my personal information, as well as my social security card number to open this merchant account without my permission and knowledge". At that time, even I couldn't believe that Intuit would take my personal information to open this account without given any notice or verification to me when [redacted] told to me this. I always believed this account was either under [redacted]'s name or under Brandywine's name till to you sent me collection notice. I can't access into this account until Oct. 24, 2012 while I disclosed their fraudulence on this account".

Please send the "collection" back to Intuit. And you are advised:

1) Don't send me this kind harassment letter any more; Otherwise, I shall file the complaints against you and your company in General Attorney Office, Revdex.com, etc.

2) I am looking and processing to buy a home. If any my credit score to be reduced due to this "fraudulent collection", I will go to court to ask for $10,000 damage for every point of reduced my credit score. If you are keeping doing this, damaging me and my credit score, this will be the agreement if the court judges your fault since you are notified".

Now, Consolidated Recovery Group lied about my aware of the account open under my name.

"That application was approved based on the credit of the personal guarantor, 70% owner and principal of the company, [redacted]". -------That's NOT true. 1) I never sent this application; 2) I had only 19% owner of the company at that time; 3) Must Intuit fraudulently recorded my personal information if the account opened under my name.

"When Intuit attempted to debit the funds that Brandywine was liable for, they were each returned unpaid by their bank. Because the debits were returned unpaid, Intuit closed the merchant account and transferred the balance to their Collection Dept'. --------NOT true. Intuit told me different story.

"At no time did Mr. ** indicate to Intuit that he had not applied for the account or guarantee it. Once Intuit was unsuccessful in obtaining payment, the account was placed with us for collection".---------Intuit never asked me who opened this account; I would never think this account was under my name; I would never know Intuit could fraudulently record my personal info. Therefor, I never need or think to indicate to Intuit that "I had not applied for the account or guarantee it". Until received collection, I knew the account was under my name.

Although I repeatedly stated this account was not opened by me, Consolidated Recovery Group LLC had also nothing to approve this account opened by me, they still keep threatening me and deliberately damage my credit score.

"the application was electronically signed not physically signed". -------even signed by electronically, it should still have the sign record. Intuit and Consolidated Recovery Group never can provide this "sign record" to me.

"Upon learning this, Mr. ** did nothing to inform Intuit that his information was used on the application without his knowledge or consent. Further, he continued to use the account for over a year, resulting in a substantial loss to the client". -----------see above explanations. I can't access into this account until Oct. 24, 2012, which is less than one month this account was closed by Intuit. The reasons I can't access this account were I didn't have access information including account ID and password. So, the statement of "he continued to use the account for over a year, resulting in a substantial loss to the client" is NOT true.

After I made incident report to Police Department and provided them case # and where did I report, Consolidated Recovery Group LLC and [redacted] still didn't want to do anything. Even they didn't give me a simple reply after I just asked for a fax number. So, again I believe Consolidated Recovery Group LLC and [redacted] purposely threatened me and deliberately damaged my credit score. I still require them a formal apology and $20,000 for my recovering from the damage they made on me.

Regards,

Business

Response:

Dear Ms. [redacted]:

I stand by what was stated in our letter. We have an email dated May 17, 2013 from Mr. ** confirming that he was informed that his information was used to open this account after the application was submitted. It was up to Mr. ** to inform Intuit that the application was submitted using his information but without his consent as soon as he knew. If he had done so, presumably Intuit would not have sustained such a substantial loss and Mr. ** would have avoided the situation at hand. To my knowledge, Intuit was never made aware of this fact.

We can go back and forth about the particulars of the account all day, however, the bottom line is this: Mr' **'s email to us on November 10 states that he is "applying" for a home loan, and just a day later, on November 11, he tells you that his home loan was denied. First, Mr. ** was acutely aware, since July, of what documents we needed to close our file and delete our bureau line due to fraud. Surely Mr. ** would want to make getting those documents to us a priority, particularly if he knew he would be applying for a home loan later in the year. Yet, here we are on November 13 still waiting for a copy of the police report. Further, any lender has an obligation to verify a disputed collection account line, particularly if the borrower, as I'm certain Mr. ** did, informed the lender that the line was disputed due to a stolen identity/fraud issue. Yet we have received no credit bureaus disputes on this account, nor have we received any inquiries from potential lenders.

Once again, if Mr. ** would simply supply us with a copy of the police report, that would complete our process.

Sincerely,

Sr. Collector

Review: The company is asking for the debt that the Intuit Payment Solutions did not even suffer as a result of my ID theft in August 2013. The Intuit Payment Solutions reprensetative told me in March 2014 that they denied the credit to thief. However, they want money from me that they did not even lose.

Business

Response:

Dear [redacted]: