Sign in

Consumer Debt Counselors

831 W Morse Blvd, Winter Park, Florida, United States, 32789-3708

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Consumer Debt Counselors? Use RevDex to write a review

Consumer Debt Counselors Reviews (%countItem)

I have always had a great experience with this company. They are service oriented and return calls, look up payment information and are willing to do whatever it takes to get debt paid through their program. I highly recommend CDC, Inc.

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Jan 16, 2020

Thank you, John! We appreciate the opportunity to help you.

very unprofessional company, didn't provide the service they claimed they will, end up costing me more money with my creditors.
first of all they claim they are a non profit organization but they charge for everything they do , they charged me for setting my plan up and then they charge monthly fee.

they "Thomas H" was responding to every email and phone call till I got enrolled with them then quit responding to my emails because they already got the money from me.

they delivered the money to my creditors past the due date which resulted in the creditors charging me interest fees higher than what they suppose to, I contacted Thomas many times regarding that issue but he just didn't respond to a single email.

They didn't process my Barclays card payment for month of november , I had to do it on my own , then when I decided to pay the other creditors on my own as well the following month, he (Thomas H) kept calling me and emailing me threatening me that he will contact the creditors informing them that I wish to discontinue my payment plans.

I informed him "Thomas" that I don't authorize him to contact me anymore nor to contact my creditors on my behalf anymore but he didn't respect that , he kept calling and sending me emails, also he went ahead and contacted my creditors against my wish.

I request them to refund all the money that they collected from me as service fees because first they didn't provide that service that I paid for , also they claim to be a non profit company.

Desired Outcome

I request them to refund all the money that they collected from me as service fees because first they didn't provide that service that I paid for , also they claim to be a non profit company.

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Feb 08, 2019

Contact Name and Title: Kelley C M, Dire
Contact Phone: 800-820-9232
Contact Email: [email protected]
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Mr.. We are indeed a 501(c)(3) nonprofit company. We provide financial counseling at no cost to customers at any time. Details of our fee schedule, how our agency is funded, and more can be found online at

Being a nonprofit company does not preclude that we have expenses that need to be covered, and some of our services are offered on a fee-for-service basis provided that the client does not qualify for a fee waiver based on their ability to afford our services. This determination is based on a comparison of the client's income against the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) data. Any annual budgetary surplus above and beyond what is required to cover our business expenses is reinvested into programs that benefit our clients.

Mr. has been in contact with us several times over the last several months, and he has worked closely with both Mr. H as well as Ms. Tasiah M, who is one of our client support specialists. We have ongoing correspondence between them that is evidence of this recorded in our system. Mr. was pleased enough with the initial service that he received that contacted us in November, about a week prior to the incident in question, to add more accounts from another creditor.

On November 19, Mr. contacted us regarding a delayed payment to his*** account, and he did inform us that he wished to pay the card on his own moving forward. At that time, Ms. M noted that she spoke to Mr. and explained to him there was an issue with the bank's system that caused a delay on processing the payment. Mr. was reminded of his login to our online system wherein he could check the status of payments to creditors at any time. Ms. M also confirmed that all of Mr. accounts (he had more than one enrolled in the program) were still in the DMP program and in good standing, and she reminded him that there was a lag between the time that a payment was drafted from his account and when it was passed to creditors (usually 5-7 days) so that the payment had time to all relevant banking systems. Mr. seemed appeased and ended the call with Ms. M. Mr. H also left a voicemail that same day for Mr. to follow up on the outcome of the conversation.

In mid-January, we reached out to Mr. to notify him that his automatic payment draft to our organization to pay his creditors was rejected, and Mr. H resent him the EFT form to set up his payments again.

On January 30, as we hadn't heard back from Mr., Mr. H emailed to remind him that his payment date was approaching and that we still hadn't received the updated EFT form from him. He pointed out Mr. contractual obligation that required us to make payment to his creditors on his behalf, and he advised him that he could make a payment to us directly via our website.

As a nonprofit counseling agency, we receive special concessions from creditors. Clients are not able to achieve the same concessions directly from creditors, as is evidenced by Mr. continuing to enroll further accounts in the program after being dissatisfied with the direct terms offered to him by *** in November. When a client leaves our program, we have an obligation *from the creditor itselfto inform the creditor that they are no longer in our program. This typically results in creditors removing the concessions from the client's account(s) as, in the creditor's mind, this is an indication that the account will not be paid as promised. Mr. H was simply doing his due diligence to advise the client of this fact as many clients do not realize that the concessions that they receive are only available through nonprofit counseling agencies and that we are obligated to update the creditor as to the client's continuing participation, or lack thereof, in the DMP program. At the time of the notice, Mr. H had not contacted the creditor; he was passing along warning that he would be required to do so and that there may be consequences with Mr. creditors due to this decision.

We are unable to reimburse Mr. service fees at this time as service was provided as contracted. We would like to reach an amenable resolution to the situation with Mr. and welcome the opportunity to continue to service him. If we cannot, we must fulfill our obligation to his creditors and inform them that he is no longer in the DMP program.

Customer Response • Feb 09, 2019

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
your response is absolutely not accepted, It doesn't contain anything about the truth of what happened. you just put some date together and made up the story the way you think it's good for you.

I did contacted you in November to add 2 accounts with BOFA , that's true but it's absolutely not because I was pleased with your service, Absolutely not, I did contacted you because you have already took the money from me to add these accounts, so you needed to get that job that you took money for DONE !!! beside the fact that when I contacted Thomas about these cards he said he will get me 9% APR, I responded to that email telling him that I already contacted the bank and they said they will give me 4% not 9%, he just needed to get it done because he already charged me for that , so that also make your statement about "being able to get offers from the banks that you don't give directly to customers" absolutely not truthful and actually Funny.

another thing, When you were late about delivering my payments to creditors . NO ONE DID REPLY TO MY EMAILS , it took 10 days for someone to finally answer my phone call and still didn't fix the issue, that month the payments were delivered and till now NO ONE have apologized about that , NOT EVEN YOU , what a horrible customer service.

Regarding the*** account , I did told Thomas that I want to pay it directly because you are always late on delivering it , but guess what ??? he told me "No you can't do it , it has to go through us" but it was funny that the very next day I found that you withdrew the money from my account but you deducted $294 that is supposed to go*** , really ??????? if I didn't notice it , that month would have passed without even paying them !!!

I expect you to be responsible and hold yourself accountable for all you actions , and when you respond please remember to use truthful informations and don't say half the story that makes it look good for you , that is just a shame !!!

And finally , like I have warned Thomas already that I have voided all your authorizations and I have already contacted my banks and my lawyers regarding that issue, and I will not tolerate and I will deal kindly with any actions even if it is as small as delivering false wishes to my banks that I want to cancel my payment programs.

And I request all the money that I have paid you to be refunded ASAP.

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Feb 28, 2019

Sir, as stated previously, we are incredibly sorry that you are unsatisfied with the service that you have received.

As per our previous responses, your payment was not processed on time by*** due to the veteran's day holiday. Your payment was processed on our side on a timely basis. Understanding your distress upon receiving a letter due to crossed wires, Ms. M called*** to confirm that the account was actually still in the program and in good standing, despite the contents of the letter. Your payment was not counted as late.

You are correct, and we previously stated: If you wish to remain in the DMP program, you must pay through us rather than to*** directly. We'd like for this to be the case, but if you decide to make other arrangements, your agreement does allow you to cancel at any time. In that case, we are required to inform*** and your other creditors that you are no longer in the DMP program, and, as previously stated, this may result in your creditors removing concessions that they made to you in exchange for your participation in the DMP program.

We would really like this to have a positive ending. As a sign of good faith, we would be willing to reimburse you for the two months (November and December) in question, and, if possible, get you back into the DMP program. If this is amenable, please let us know.

Customer Response • Mar 05, 2019

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
You can go ahead and refund me that 2 months, but I am not sure if I will use your service again as I have stated before many times I wasn't too happy with it neither found it considerative for customers ,I might consider it after you refund it that money.

The Director of Housing for Housing Counseling never return calls, especially when a complaint needs to be made. I heard that this Director participated in a gang up with other employees to ignore an employee to push them out of their job. Also, made a racial comment to this employee, that this person is "not one of their people, because they are not black or puerto rican." The employees in the credit counseling department from customer service treated the employee with a nasty attitude and gave wrong work information to cause this person to make mistakes. Everyone in that whole company including the IT department treated this person very badly. The owner of the company knew this was going on, stated he couldn't do anything about it. When a nasty remark was made to this employee in front of the owner, the owner heard it and walked away with a smile. This company should not be in business if they are using harassment to get their kicks or used as a way to make someone quit their job.

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Jan 31, 2019

This comment was unfortunately left by a disgruntled former employee, who we won't name here in protection of their privacy. We are sorry if we parted on bad terms, but we do not feel that this review is a fair representation of the employment or consumer experience with Consumer Debt Counselors. All calls to the business are returned within one business day, and we stand and enforce by our anti-harassment policy. We are blessed to have a very diverse workforce, and we are firmly an equal opportunity employer.

This place is unprofessional. They will not submit my application even if I qualify for a program. They will not return any of your phone calls.
I filed paperwork with this unprofessional company in mid-December. I had to call on a weekly base to talk to Ramon P, (the only person I'm allowed to talk to). Called on the first week of January, was told I should receive an email about my case. A week later and as always nothing. no email, no phone calls, nothing. As always had to call them again (mind you it's mid of the month again still no one looked at my case). Called Ramon again about my case he said: (I'm looking at it now and I'll call you back on my finding. Waited for about 10 minutes, got the phone call (for once). Ok, I need this and that paperwork for your case. (mind you he has seen all income, and application paperwork before asking for additional paper. Once the paperwork was emailed to him (which had nothing to do with income). He told me that I don't qualify for this "31 percent equation" that he can't even properly explain to me or apply to my income figures. Really, after waiting for over a month this is what you Ramon have to say or maybe you don't want to do your job and are hoping to stall me off until the program closes. That's exactly what it feels like. So I called to speak to his manager which is Charlene R. All I got was she's never there or she will toss me back to Ramon, she is just as unprofessional as he is. She will not return your emails or phone calls. So I called *** to ask them about my qualification for the program. Everything I told them including income and payment, she told me I'm well overqualified for this program and she couldn't even explain the "31 percent equation" either. So what will you say about this Ramon? I'm sure nothing, they will not call or email so I'll leave it at that. Ramon Pleas and Charlene R you guys are unprofessional and should find a different occupation. If you're not there to help people at all, please do us all a favor and quit. Let someone who is there to help the people.

Desired Outcome

Send my application to ***.

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Feb 15, 2018

Contact Name and Title: Kelley C M, Dire
Contact Phone: 800-820-9232x1200
Contact Email: [email protected]
In September, 2011, Mr. was assigned to Consumer Debt Counselors by Florida Housing Finance Corporation (Florida Housing), the fiscal agency managing the Florida Hardest-Hit Fun (HHF) programs.

At that time, we worked with him to apply for both the Unemployment Mortgage Assistance Program (UMAP) and Mortgage Loan Reinstatement Payment (MLRP) Program. On February 27, 2012, Mr. application for mortgage assistance was approved.

He received $4,932.86 via the MLRP Program, which was used to bring his mortgage current. He also received ongoing assistance via UMAP for 12 months, totaling $14,144.70. This amount was approved by Florida Housing to provide assistance due to hardship caused by his unemployed status.

In June, 2015, Mr. called to request additional assistance from the HHF programs. At that time, it was explained to Mr. that he was not eligible due to program guidelines which required him to have recovered from his initial hardship and then have a secondary hardship for re-qualification. Mr. was unfortunately still experiencing the same qualifying hardship (unemployment) and would not qualify for further assistance via HHF. The agent speaking with Mr. did offer to assist him via an in-house loan modification program; Mr. hung up on his advisor at that time.

In August, 2017, Mr. called again to request further assistance. It was at this time that Mr. case was assigned to Mr. Ramon P. Mr. P explained the requirements of the HHF programs, and Mr. stated that he still had not recovered from his initial hardship that had already been documented in 2011.

In October, 2017, Mr. called again to request further assistance. At this time, Mr. stated that he had recovered from his previous hardship and was seeking assistance based on a new hardship experience. Mr. P advised Mr. that he would need to update all of the documents required for his online application so that they could be reviewed prior to submission.

In mid-December, 2017, Mr. began to update his online application materials. He submitted the balance of the requested documents prior to the end of December, 2017.
Mr. P spoke with Mr. in January, 2018, upon reviewing some of Mr. documents. Mr. confirmed that his only source of income was rental income from his mother-in-law, approximately $800 per month. Mr. P advised Mr. that, in order to qualify for the MLRP Program, he would have to prove that (a) he had recovered from his initial hardship (unemployment), and that (b) he met the program's 31% debt-to-income ratio requirement.

According to HHF guidelines and as confirmed with Florida Housing on January 4, 2018, former aid recipients may re-apply for the program so long as:
1. He or she has not already received the maximum HHF assistance amounts. (Mr. has only maxed out his UMAP assistance; by these terms he is still eligible for MLRP.)
2. He or she has a new hardship. (No evidence was provided that supported Mr. case that he had a new hardship, but he would be eligible if this was the case.)
3. They were not cancelled for failing to submit a quarterly touchpoint (QT). (Mr. met this requirement.)
4. They did not make a 'partial payment,' which was a requirement early in the HHF program. (Mr. met this requirement.)

Upon a review of documentation, it was the opinion of Mr. P that Mr. never recovered from his initial hardship, unemployment. This is unfortunate, but does not meet the guidelines for re-acceptance into the program.

Additionally, Mr. finances do not meet the debt-to-income ratio test required by HHF.

Mr. P contacted Florida Housing on January 26, 2018, to verify his assessment and was informed that Florida Housing was in agreement with the findings. Additionally, Florida Housing recommended that Mr. could file an appeal if he desired.

Customer Response • Feb 15, 2018

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Contact was made with Florida's Hardest Hit, to ask questions about the program. Again I was told by one of FHH agents that a job is not needed to show that you are out of the hardship that you were in, as long as you have income showing you have recovered from it. I have shown that with the $800.00 a month as income, not having any income would be unacceptable I'm sure. So you're telling me if I run a home business making $800.00 a month, that the income is unacceptable? REALLY COME ON. rental, business, employment benefits, whatever the case maybe income is income no matter what or where it's coming from, am I right? If rental income can't be used, why put it on the application then. Take it off, that way you can tell your customers that rental income is not accepted, it is not income.

Additionally, they need to get their facts straight or at ***t Ms. Kelley C M, Dire does. Receiving $14,144.70 for the UMAP is a lie. I received $4,932.86 for the UMAP (not MLRP) for 6 months, NOT a year. How can I get the MLRP if I was unemployed at this time with little to no income, LITTLE TO NO INCOME! which makes no sense at all? come on.

Also, 31% of income to ratio lets talk about this. FHH told me that you take your mortgage amount which is at present time $508 everything included. Take this and times it 31% comes to 157.48 as long as it covers the mortgage I was fine. On January 26, 2018, I asked Mr. Ramon P this question Unless you're telling me that my income need's to be $1650.00 multiply that by 31% is 511.50 (which is ridiculous) and HE SAID NO. Anyways I wouldn't need help if I had this kind of income coming in. That's more then anyone around here is getting paid. I told him that if I did this math and needed to have the 157.48 at ***t. On those terms, I have more than that left over from the 31% ratio. if I paid my mortgage, I would have 292.00 dollars left over. In the end, that means I would have 134.52 dollars OVER the required 157.48. So then HOW do I not meet these requirements? Which is what they keep evading to actually answer. So Mr. P allegedly contacted *** on January 26, 2018, (Get out of here). I spoke to him on this date earlier, he wasn't even thinking about calling FHH. I asked several times during the week leading to this conversation, to speak with Chalene R and was always sent back to Ramon. I told him on Jan 26th, 2018 also, that I wanted to speak with her, after he asked me "what didn't I understand about not meeting the requirements", With an attitude at that. He also stated that he didn't even want to take on my case anymore, by saying yet again with an attitude "I will let her sort it out with you". My file was passed along to Charlene R to where she contacted me about a week later. She also contacted FHH with no response yet and it's been a week already. I myself had to wait days before FHH contacted me. So you're telling me Roman P got a repose that same day and hour before business closing, But now Charlene R can't get a response the same day and she's Roman's Manager. I think She would have more priority than him.(come on get real here).

Consumer Debt Counselors Response • Feb 16, 2018

We are very sorry that Mr. is not p***ed with our response, but unfortunately this matter is out of our control at this time. Mr. is encouraged to appeal his decision with Florida Housing should he wish.

Per Florida Housing's records, Mr. was issued the following payments:

Due ==> Amount ==> Description ==> Program ==> Payment Date
3/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 2/27/12
3/1/12 ==> $15.68 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 5/21/12
4/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 3/30/12
5/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 4/26/12
5/1/12 ==> $15.68 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 5/9/12
6/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 5/29/12
6/1/12 ==> $15.68 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 6/22/12
7/1/12 ==> $796.27 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 6/27/12
8/1/12 ==> $796.27 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 7/29/12
9/1/12 ==> $796.27 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 8/30/12
9/21/12 ==> $4932.86 ==> reinstatement ==> MLRP ==> 9/21/12
10/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 9/27/12
10/2/12 ==> $-249.32 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 10/30/12
11/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 10/30/12
12/1/12 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 11/28/12
1/1/13 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 12/27/12
2/1/13 ==> $780.59 ==> monthly payment ==> UMAP ==> 1/30/13

(Apologies on the formatting; I was pasting from a table.)

In regards to the 31% formula, it seems Mr. unfortunately has misunderstood this formula, how it is used, and how it is calculated. We apologize for any role we have had in that misunderstanding.

The purpose of the debt-to-income (DTI) ratio is to demonstrate a good balance between debt and income. According to Florida Housing (and most housing authorities) borrowers that hold that a lower DTI are more likely to manage monthly debt payments. A high DTI, on the other hand, tends to signify that the borrower is over-leveraged and owes too much debt for the amount of income he or she has.

In Mr. case, if his monthly income is $800, Florida Housing is looking for debt of less than $248 per month. Mr. mortgage, at approximately $500 per month, is over this amount.

Regarding Mr. P's conversation with Florida Housing, Mr P emailed Florida Housing, attention HHFAdvisor, on January 26, 2018, at 12:11 p.m.:

"Good afternoon -

The client above has received 12 months of assistance and some MLRP in 2013-2013. He has returned and requesting additional assistance with MLRP. His hardship is unemployment (2015). He is still unemployed and the only household income is room rental income (reviewing that income, still shows 31% of Income below PITIA). He has not recovered from his hardship.

What would be the protocol, when he does not agree with our findings? I reviewed the ineligible letter and there are no options to choice from or for client to appeal.

P***e advise.

If you have any questions or concerns, p***e do not hesitate to email me. (If you fax any documents, p***e let me know by sending me an email.)


Ramon P
Housing Counselor

Office: 800-820-9232
Fax: 407-374-1724
Email: ramon.p***

Online at
831 W. Morse Blvd., Winter Park, FL 32789"

On January 26, 2018, at 12:26 p.m., HHFAdvisor replied with the following response:

"I agree with you. He could always follow the appeal process, do you have those instructions?"

This was the limit of our guidance from Florida Housing on this matter.

We have no ill will towards Mr., and we genuinely want to help, but unfortunately we are unable to move this case forward with Florida Housing per their own instruction.

Check fields!

Write a review of Consumer Debt Counselors

Satisfaction rating
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by adding a photo

Consumer Debt Counselors Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Address: 831 W Morse Blvd, Winter Park, Florida, United States, 32789-3708


Show more...


+1 (407) 599-5954


This website was reported to be associated with Consumer Debt Counselors.

This website was reported to be associated with Consumer Debt Counselors.


Sign in to see

Add contact information for Consumer Debt Counselors

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated