Crosstown Auto Body

The fundamental issue I have with this issue is the underlying proof of due diligence performed that matches the company's claim that "The Firm made attempts to locate a current address and mailed notices to [redacted]."  The DMV has had two other addresses in the past 5 years that I have been registered with. Neither of those addresses ever received any documentation regarding the outstanding balance. I also traded in that vehicle in December 2018 to a certified car dealership. At that point, the vehicle/license plate number would have automatically shown as a new Owner. Subsequently, the Firm could have then contacted the DMV, or requested their client acquire a new address. I obviously never received a copy of the invoices since I was not living at that location. I certainly was not intentionally avoiding the invoices. And while its a recommended practice, I'm not aware of any legal requirement to place a forwarding address on file with my landlord. I had vacated my registered address prior to the written invoice from [redacted]. And again, without an invoice or any verification from [redacted] within their system, how can I make a payment? While I do not blame the Firm, nor [redacted] directly for my 'penalty' of driving on the [redacted] highway without an [redacted] tag, the ~$** in fees, which lack any transparency, are absurd for this scenario. How is it fair for someone who has $[redacted] in outstanding bills to pay the same fees as someone who has $[redacted] in outstanding toll bills? I understand it requires similar amounts of work. But in these circumstances, where the Firm, nor [redacted], 'made attempts' to reach me, it would go a long way for your Firm/[redacted] to provide a fair amount of due diligence. If you choose not to offer me a refund for at least a portion of the overhead costs you incurred in your 'multiple attempts, you will confirm you are just a capitalistic company, that in a collusive setup with [redacted], preys on society's loopholes as a profit center that are one step away from a class action suit. I will offer no rebuttal following this email, but your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted]'s complaint regards unpaid toll violation owed to our client, Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA).On February 13, 2016, HCTRA recorded three toll violations incurred by Mr. [redacted]'s vehicle.  HCTRA captured a picture of his vehicle using the EZTAG lanes without a valid...

EZTAG. DMV records showed Mr. [redacted] as the registered owner of the vehicle.Pursuant to the Texas Transportation Code 284, the vehicle owner is responsible for payment of all toll violations and related fees. On February 24, 2016, HCTRA mailed Mr. [redacted] a Violation Toll Statement with a due date of March 9, 2016, alerting him that failure to pay the toll violations would result in the account incurring additional fees and being referred to collections.  The invoice was not resolved and referred to our firm by HCTRA on May 2, 2016.  We received and responded to Mr. [redacted]'s letter on June 6, 2016 by mailing the Violation History Report that provided the breakdown of the fees and a copy of the original invoice sent by HCTRA, as requested.  We have confirmed that the balance in collections is due in full.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:A representative of LGBS, LLP told me it was a 2014 volkswagon jetta with  my plate number. I never said it was a volkswagon jetta, that is the reason I questioned it.   So let's not mix words I never said it was a volkswagon their representative told me it was. But obviously the photos I was sent 6/13/16 from Carlos from the LGBS firm, shows that it is definately my vehicle, without the photos from yesterday I would not have known.  So they owe me an apologize, if I was told from the start it was a toyota prius,I would not have questioned it.
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] currently has a balance owed to the Harris County Toll Road Authority in the amount of $456.25.  His vehicle was captured violating a total of 9 times between 1/24/2004 through 3/18/2004.  HCTRA mailed three separate invoices that contained three violations each to the...

registered address of the vehicle.  The invoices were not resolved or paid in full by the due date and sent to collections on 12/22/04 where additional fees were added.  Mr. [redacted] was set for an Administrative Hearing on 5/2/2005 for the amount of $245.25 and did not appear.  An additional hearing fine of $211.00 was added and the current balance of $456.25 is due in full.Mr. [redacted] contacted HCTRA and was informed the vehicle was not listed on an EZ TAG account at the time of the violations as stated on his complaint.  We attempted to contact Mr. [redacted] and left a voicemail.

I am responding to the consumer complaint filed with your office by [redacted].  Mr. [redacted]’s complaint regards amounts owed to our client, the 91 Express Lanes, owned by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), located in Los Angles, California area.   On August 17, 2013,...

a vehicle incurred one toll on the 91 Express Lanes.  OCTA incorrectly determined that the license plate on the vehicle was California plate [redacted], registered to Mr. [redacted]. Two notices were mailed to Mr. [redacted] for the toll usage to the registered address for the plate – [redacted], Carlsbad, CA 92010.When no response was received to the notices, the account was referred to the firm for collection on November 25, 2013. The firm mailed two notices to Mr. [redacted] and received returned mail on January 22, 2014. A possible new address of [redacted], El Cajon, CA 92021 was located and six notices were mailed to Mr. [redacted] at this address. Mr. [redacted] contacted the firm on May 9, 2016 and stated that the vehicle associated with this violation was not his. The agent asked Mr. [redacted] to dispute the charges in writing so the account could be reviewed with our client. Upon receipt of this complaint, we asked the OCTA for a review of the license plate and this account. Their review indicated that this violation was issued due to a plate misread. As such, OCTA dismissed this violation and recalled the account from our office.

I am responding to the consumer complaint filed with your office by [redacted]. Mr. [redacted]’s complaint regards unpaid tolls and fees owed to our client, the Northwest Parkway (NWP). On May 18, 2013, a vehicle with California license plate [redacted], registered to a Mr. [redacted] incurred two...

tolls on the Northwest Parkway.   On May 29, 2013, NWP mailed Mr. [redacted] a statement for $5.35; the amount of the tolls incurred.  When no response was received a second invoice was mailed June 29, 2013 for $5.95 which included a $0.60 mail fee. A third statement was mailed on July 29, 2013 for $11.55 which included a $2.50 late fee for each toll and an additional $0.60 mail fee. A Past Due Notice was mailed on August 29, 2013 for $57.15 which replaced each late fee with a $25.00 past due fee. Each of these statements was mailed to the registered address for the plate – [redacted]. NWP system notes show the receipt of a partial payment of $5.95 on August 29, 2013. This payment was received well beyond the time frame for payment of the amounts owed at that amount. With the pre-collection balance of $57.15 being open and no response being received to the last of the four notices, the account was referred to the firm for collection on September 30, 2013.  Two notices were mailed to Mr. [redacted] on October 3 and October 31, 2013 for $77.15 which included a $20.00 collection fee.  On April 13, 2016, the firm received a possible new address of 740 Oakland Ave, Oakland, CA 94611. One notice was mailed to this address on April 25, 2016. This complaint was received on May 12, 2016. Upon receipt of this complaint, we confirmed with NWP the outstanding balance due. The previous payment of $5.95 had been applied to the account. But, as noted above, the payment was received well past the due date.  No other payments or correspondence had been received by NWP or the firm.  Due to the prior payment, we have been authorized to reduce the past due fees by 80% as a courtesy.  Mr. [redacted]’s current balance is now $31.20.     [redacted] Partner Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP Attorneys at Law [redacted] Main: [redacted] Direct: [redacted] Fax: [redacted] http://www.lgbs.com/ CallSend SMSCall from mobileAdd to SkypeYou'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype

As explained in our previous response, the firm responded to Mr. [redacted]’s calls in a legal and professional manner.We consider this matter closed.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Wow! No wonder I didn't remember that. Please check the date on those violations and invoice date. They are from 2007! He could have told me that on the phone. I can't believe that they sent me one invoice in 2008, and 7 years later they send me to collections! Is that even legal? They sent me an invoice in 2008, and added over $100 in fees in 2015? I will be happy to pay the original invoice from 2008.
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] states on the complaint that his vehicle has not been in Florida and the license plate does not match any that he has owned.  After an image review,  the client confirmed the license plate was misread, and Mr. [redacted] will not be held liable for the balance.  The account has...

been noted and it will be removed from collections.  Neither LGBS nor our client reports to the credit bureau.  Mr. [redacted] will not have his credit impacted due to this incident. We have attempted to contact Mr. [redacted] at the number provided but have received no answer.

As previously stated, notices were mailed to Mr. [redacted] at the registered address for the vehicle.  When the tolls were incurred, Mr. [redacted] was driving with Maine license plates.  As such, the notices were mailed to the Maine address for those plates.  We were able to locate Mr. [redacted] in Colorado.  They additional fees he paid were a direct result of his using a Maine license plate while residing in Colorado.We consider this matter closed.

I am responding to the consumer complaint filed with your office by [redacted].  [redacted] complaint regards amounts owed to our client, the [redacted]   On October 12, 2013, a vehicle with Texas plate [redacted], registered to [redacted],...

incurred three tolls on the Sam Houston Tollway.  On October 18, 2013, [redacted] mailed a first and final notice in the amount of $[redacted]; $[redacted] in toll and $[redacted] in administrative fees.  The notice was mailed to the DMV registered address of the vehicle – [redacted] ** [redacted]  [redacted] did not record any mail-return.   On December 30, 2013, [redacted] referred the account to the Firm when no response was given.  On January 2, 2014, the Firm mailed a collection notice in the amount of $[redacted]; this included the amount of the tolls, the administrative fee and a collection fee of $[redacted].  On February 4, 2014, the Firm mailed a second collection notice in the amount of $[redacted].  Both notices were mailed to - [redacted] ** [redacted].  The firm did not record a mail-return until the second notice was mailed.   The Firm made attempts to locate a current address and mailed notices to [redacted].  It was not until a recent address update and notice mailed on February 1 , 2018 that [redacted] was able to contact [redacted] and LGBS to resolve the balance due.  As of March 6, 2018, [redacted] has no remaining balance due.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:Thank you for responding to my concerns regarding any reports to credit agencies. I did not request any of the debtors personal information; although, Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP has already provided some of the debtors private information (name, account number, city and state, and amount of funds owed). I would like this firm to provide hardcopy or printable documentation correcting the, assignment of a debt to me, error.  I would like the document to include the firm’s internal, 8 digit, numerical account number (also has already been provided in the original document). Please include Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP letterhead (much like the letterhead on the original document I received).To reiterate, I am not requesting any of the debtors personal information. Thank you for your effort and time. 
Regards,
[redacted]

I am responding to the consumer complaint filed with your office by [redacted]. Ms. [redacted]’s complaint regards unpaid tolls and fees owed to our client, the Northwest Parkway (NWP).From December 31, 2010 through October 6, 2011, a vehicle with Wyoming license plate 53758, registered to Ms....

[redacted] incurred five tolls on the Northwest Parkway.  On February 11, 2012, NWP mailed Ms. [redacted] a statement for $17.15; the amount of the tolls incurred.  When no response was received a second invoice was mailed March 11, 2012 for $17.75 which included a $0.60 mail fee. A third statement was mailed on April 11, 2012 for $30.85 which included a $2.50 late fee for each toll and an additional $0.60 mail fee. On May 11, 2012, a Past Due Notice was mailed to Ms. [redacted] for $143.95; which replaced each late fee with a $25.00 past due fee and included an additional mail fee. Each of these statements was mailed to the registered address for the plate – [redacted], Cheyenne, WY 82007.When no response was received to the four notices, the account was referred to the firm for collection on June 11, 2012.  Two notices were mailed to Ms. [redacted] on June 14, 2012 and July 12, 2012 for $163.95 which included a $20.00 collection fee.  A possible new address of [redacted], Ft Collins, CO 80526 was located on April 13, 2016 and a new notice was mailed on April 15, 2016; again for $163.95. Ms. [redacted] contacted the firm on April 27, 2016 after contacting NWP directly and was offered a reduction as a courtesy to resolve this account. Ms. [redacted] requested an itemized statement and was advised that she would need to request information in writing. Ms. [redacted] contacted the firm again on May 2, 2016 and requested the same itemized statement. The supervisor she spoke to asked that she fax her request to us so that it could be processed. Though no written request was received, the firm mailed and faxed a copy of the previous statements and the itemization of charges to Ms. [redacted] on May 3, 2016 (prior to the receipt of the Revdex.com complaint). This itemization reflected the reduced amount owed of $63.95. Ms. [redacted] contacted the firm again later that day and paid the reduced amount of $63.95 to close this account. Once Ms. [redacted]’s credit card charge processes, there will be no further amounts due on this account.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted]. The fact that a law firm can turn a $9.00 toll fees from 12 years ago (that I was never contacted about till now) into a $456.25 up charge, is the reason people are getting tired of this country and it's government officials. I've spent thousands of dollars on the HCTRA toll system for years now, and not once was this brought up to me when I visited their offices while registering multiple vehicles for EZ Tag. My guess, is they want the charges to reach a certain amount before it becomes critical enough for them to go after. This will now become one of my priorities to get this type of legislation demolished.
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:this was not an authorized charge I contested because my vehicle was disabled at the time the ticket was written I send the city all documents regarding this rewuest and the city of Chicago did not send me any notifications after I contested this request! 
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
I am emailing you, letting you know that complaint #[redacted] has been resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

We
have been in contact with Ms. [redacted], provided her with the information she
asked for and processed her payment.  The account is paid in full and
closed.

We stand by our original response. NWP made accommodations for Mr. [redacted] to pay only the toll amount for his charges due to his ExpressToll account as explained in our previous response. Mr. [redacted] did not pay this amount in a timely manner and the account was escalated as explained to him by NWP at the time of his first Revdex.com complaint in January 2016. Payments have been made to Mr. [redacted] ExpressToll account, but no payment has been received by NWP nor the firm for these tolls.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Our concerns with the Linebarger group differ from the original bill distributor, North West Parkway. We were bullied and...

disrespected by the associates at this law firm. They were rude, condescending, and didn't answer any of our previous questions that we filed with the Revdex.com. They lied about their attempts to contact us, the number of times they contacted us, and made clear that finding our mailing information was incredibly simple, but that they waited until our $11 bill ballooned to well over $100 to make any attempt to find our correct address. Thank you, Revdex.com, for facilitating these conversations, but we are appalled and disquieted by the illegal collection methods by this business, as well as the way they spoke to my wife, [redacted]. We are incredibly disappointed in having to pay 4Xs more than the original bill, and certainly do not consider paying that bill as any sort of resolution with this law group.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution of this specific issue is satisfactory.However, I am...

unsatisfied that, given the number of similar complaints made to the Revdex.com about this same type of outrageous behavior by this firm with others, it continues.  The law firm needs to change its practice of apparently sending every person in the country who happens to share the same first and last name of their offender.  This is particularly unacceptable with common names such as "[redacted]."  Their first contact, if contact is made, should not be a letter threatening jail and seeking to collect a fine from completely innocent and uninvolved people.My son has a very unique middle name.  Had they taken the step of comparing his middle name to that of their offender, they would have taken my son off their list before sending any letter.  Not every person who is the victim of their tactics has the wherewithal to act as I did.  The Revdex.com needs to put a stop to this practice if they do not improve on their own.  I'm sure the state attorney general in Texas would like to hear about this untenable business practice.Please act.
Regards,
[redacted]