Diversified Adjustment Service, Inc.

The complainant had seven communications with our officeThe complainant was insistent that we accept a deal he had offered our client in failed negotiations to end a lease he had signed for telecommunications equipment We regularly informed the complainant that we were in a position to
accept the reduced sum settlement as resolution of the account however our client parameters require that the settlement be reported to credit bureaus as a zero balance resolved for less than the full balance dueThis was not acceptable to the complainantThe complainant insisted that he would only pay his last offers for his failed prior negotiationsThe complainant specifically refused to pay anything other than what he had previously offered in his unsuccessful prior negotiationsThe complainant was informed each time that if he paid a reduced sum settlement then the credit reporting would reflect that factIn each communication our employees explained to the complainant the parameters within which we are required to work for this clientOur employees encouraged the complainant to provide information supporting his alleged position or disputeHe chose not to do soOn 12/04/the complainant stated that he had been in communication with our clientHe stated that he had reached an agreement with our client to return the leased equipment and pay $He was informed that we would need to hear this information from our client before we could act on itWe take exception to the accusations the complainant makes in his complaint that he was treated rudely, hung up on and treated horriblyIt is simply not trueHaving listened to the call recordings we can definitively state that the complainant was treated respectfully and professionally at all timesWe were not able to accommodate the wishes of the complainant but that is not a reason for this complainant to issue allegations of maltreatmentThis complaint has clearly not been submitted in good faith

I am rejecting this response because:I do not have a contract with this business therefore I don't owe any sim of money to themYou cannot report that I owe you on my credit report when I didn't purchase anything from you or enter into an agreement about repayment with youYou can try to collect a debt on Sprints behalf but you cannot report that I have an open account with because that is simply not trueI never received anything fun your company about this debt it just showed up on my credit report and you are required by law to notify me which you did notThere is nothing has there ever been a contract with me and you about anythingI will file lawsuit if this account isn't removed from my credit with all bureaus ASAP

It is interesting that the complainant did not even wait to receive and review the copies of the billing statements before stating that they would be falsifiedClearly actual facts will not deter the complainant from his firm belief in his “alternative facts”It does not matter how many times an incorrect position is reiterated, the position is still incorrectWe have no expectation that the complainant will change his mind and pay his debtHowever, back in the real world his delinquent account will remain due and owing, it will be reported to credit bureaus as an unpaid collection account, and the complainant still remains responsible for the debtThese are the actual factsThe decision as to whether to pay the debt lies with the complainantThe consequences of non-payment are not negated by the complainant’s “alternative facts”The account will not be closed as fully paid for the simple reason that it is not fully paidIn the event that the complainant wishes to remit the $that is owed his credit report will be updated to show a zero balance paid collection account

We are not able to contact the complainantThe complainant has informed us through this forum that they are not the party we are trying to reachThe laws regulating our industry preclude us from initiating contact with an uninvolved party once we have the information that they are not the party we are trying to reachWe have removed the complainant’s telephone from our file

I am rejecting this response because:I have received the email that was mentioned in this person's responseHowever, it is an invoice from the original creditorI have yet to receive any type of communication from the company which has filed a report on my credit scoreIn regards to me not alerting the original creditor of a change of address; simple answer, I had chosen to not to business with them anymoreRegardless, the original creditor still had my current phone number, as well as a current email address as wellThe phone number is listed on said invoice as the number belonging to the main account holderEssentially, what I am saying is that the "change of address" excuse is weakThere were other means to contact meI do acknowledge that my number is listed on the federal do not call registry, so that may have served some type of hindrance to them contacting me by that methodBe that as it may, I would prefer to carry out all future conversations, for the time being at least, via my email address (which the gentleman writing the response acknowledges he is now in possession of)Thank you again, for your assistance.*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: I am willing to give a release of information directly to this seedy outfit THRU the Revdex.com In fact through this reply, I authorize the collection agency named in the Revdex.com complaint to comply with my request for documentation The requested documentation may be sent through the Revdex.com OR in the alternative directly to me I am authorizing a one time exception to the "do not contact" in order to get all the documents I requested Tell that lawyer to read this and stuff it and quit playing games or I'll file a complaint against him with the State He knows there are exceptions that fool I thank the Revdex.com for their efforts, and apologize that both of have to deal with these kinds of game players
Sincerely,
*** ***

This complaint is purely frivolousThis specific “complaint” is a recent trend being seen throughout the collection industry We have never received a request for verification of the account at issue from the complainant. The complainant is simply wrong in his allegation that a
signed contract with our company is required in order for us to report his delinquent account on behalf of our creditor clientsOur credit reporting is in full compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act This is simply an improper attempt to have accurate information deleted from a credit reportWe respectfully decline the complainant’s Desired Settlement. There is simply no basis for this complaint

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2015/09/22) */
Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota
*** ** *** *** ***
*** ** XXXXX
September 22,
Re: *** ***
Your Case No.: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sir or Madam,
The complainant's delinquent account
was placed with this office for collectionThis office did not purchase this accountThe original creditor remained the owner of this account at all times
The balance due on the account when referred was accurate and dueIn accordance with our contract with the original creditor the account was reported as a collection item to credit reporting bureaus
Today, September 22, the complainant made arrangements with our office and paid the account
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office
Sincerely,
Peter M***
General Counsel
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2015/09/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I WANT THE ENTIRE ACCT REMOVED FROM MY CREDIT REPORTIT WAS REPORTED YEARS AFTER ACCT WAS CLOSEDIT IS NOW PAID, AND I WANT IT REMOVED ASAPPLEASE REMOVE ADN UPDATE MY CREDIT REPORT,THANK YOU

The complainant’s delinquent account was referred to this office for collection on 07/02/The unpaid balance on the account is $A placement letter was sent to the complainant at the address listed in this complaint on 07/07/On 07/17/the complainant contacted our office to
state that she disputed the accountWe marked the account as disputed and when we credit report the account the dispute marker will be flaggedThe complainant alleged she had already paid the debt but did not presently have access to her receiptHer creditor is not showing receipt of payment for the accountWe have not received a copy of the alleged receipt from the complainantWe suggest that the complainant provide a proof of payment if payment was indeed madeThe last payment *** received from the complainant was on 09/20/in the amount of $This would mean that the complainant actually was paying *** for a year after the time frame she alleges in the complaintWe have reviewed the statements for this account and this debt has nothing to do with a flip phoneThe debt is for non-payment of the complainant’s 6GB *** Tablet PlanPerhaps it would have been better for the complainant to wait to receive copies of the statements showing the basis for her debt prior to making accusations of nefarious purposesWe are not able to submit the statements in this forum but we will send them directly to the complainantThese are the same statements that were originally sent to the complainant by the original creditor The complainant’s account will not be credit reported prior to August 16, If we receive payment in full of $prior to that time we will not report the delinquent account to the credit bureausWe see no basis for withholding this delinquent account from credit reporting if payment or proof of prior payment is not received

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/06) */
Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota
*** ** *** *** ***
*** ** XXXXX
August 6,
Re: *** ***
Your Case No.: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sir or Madam,
The complainant's delinquent account was
referred to this office for collection on July 15, A placement letter in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations was issued on July 21, The complainant clearly received the placement letterOne component of the placement letter is the statutorily required notice informing the consumer of their statutory right to dispute an accountThe Fair Debt Collection Practices Act specifically allows a debt collector to assume the validity of a debt if no such dispute is receivedAt this point in time we have not received any such notice of dispute from the consumer
There is no evidence of identity theft here and the charges at issue have absolutely nothing to do with A significant portion of the balance due is for equipment charges for purchases made by the complainant in June of The remainder of the charges are for failure to pay monthly account chargesThe complainant has submitted a similar complaint to the CFPB and we have provided the statements showing the equipment purchases on the complainant's account, the monthly bills and the basic account information comprising the monthly chargesWe are not able to provide the statements to the Revdex.com as we do not have a release and the Revdex.com is not a governmental regulatory agencyThe account overall is in the complainant's nameThe billing address is the complainant's addressThe complainant made payments on the account after the equipment charges were made
The complainant alleges that he has "proven" that the debt at issue is a result of identity theftThis is simply not trueThe reality is that the complainant contacted our client on June 24, and was informed that he would need to complete a fraud packetThe fraud packet was immediately sent to the complainant's home addressAs of today's date the fraud packet has not been completed and returned to our clientExperience has shown that those who have a credible basis for an allegation of identity theft or fraud actually return the requested documentation
At this point in time we have no reason to believe that anyone other than the complainant is responsible for this debtThe complainant has not provided any evidence to back his allegations of identity theftThere is no connection here to anything that may or may not have happened in As we informed the CFPB this complaint appears to be simple abuse of a forum designated for individuals to relate actual events, for those events to be reviewed, analyzed and a determination made as to whether correction is neededThat is not the case with this complaintThis complaint is complete fictionThis complaint is baseless and it is unfortunate that no mechanism exists to have this type of activity expunged from the complaint database
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me
Sincerely,
*** M***
General Counsel

The complainant’s delinquent account was referred to this office for collection on 05/29/2017. The unpaid balance on the account was $156.21. A placement letter was sent to the complainant at the address listed in this complaint on 06/03/2017.We have spoken to the complainant twice and both times...

the complainant simply refused to pay his delinquent debt. There are a number of matters alleged in this complaint which are simply not true. Our office has never attempted to contact the complainant on a weekend. We have zero call attempts to the complainant’s number on any Saturday or Sunday.  Also, we do not harass, we do not threaten; we do attempt to discuss resolution of unpaid bills. The complainant was not interested in paying his debt. In accordance with our agreement with the complainant’s creditor we have reported the complainant’s delinquent account to credit bureaus. We have also reported that the complainant disputes the account. The complainant’s last payment on his account was credited on July 05, 2016. I have reviewed all of the billing statements that were sent to the complainant from that time until the final billing statement in February of 2017. These statements were all sent to the complainant at the same address the complainant lists in this complaint. The statements show the accumulation of charges until the present balance due of $156.21 was reached and the account was terminated for non-payment.  The complainant is simply not being truthful when he says he did not receive billing statements.We cannot provide the billing statements in this forum however we will send them directly to the complainant in order that the complainant may see them again (in case he did not retain the original statements he received).We see no basis for retraction of credit reporting and suggest as a resolution of this matter that the complainant immediately remit the $156.21 that he owes on the account at issue.

Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota
220 S. River Ridge Cir.
Burnsville, MN 55337
March 22, 2016
Re: [redacted]
Your Case No.: [redacted]
Dear Sir or Madam,
There is very little that we can do here. The majority of the complainant's statements have...

nothing to do with this office. Due to statutory privacy requirements we are unable to comment or give information regarding any of the relevant issues without a release from the complainant.
We would respond directly to the complainant but this complaint demands a complete restriction on contact which, in accordance with applicable law, we must honor.
We are left with no ability to respond to this complaint other than to say that the complainant's allegations are not accurate.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Peter M. [redacted]
General Counsel

We have never initiated an outbound dial to the number [redacted]. We necessarily have detailed records of every number that is dialed from our office and every incoming call to our office including detailed information regarding the date, time, duration, and connection result. The database is...

easily searchable and reflects any and all activity pertaining to any telephone number; both incoming and outbound. We have absolutely no outbound dials to the complainant’s telephone number. The only activity related to the telephone number [redacted] has been the inbound telephone calls from the complainant.We suspect that someone who is receiving our calls is targeting the complainant with a call forwarding app to auto-forward the calls knowing that it is virtually impossible to determine the source when this is done. Unfortunately this type of activity is neither regulated nor under our control. We are not calling the numbers to which our calls are forwarded. We also have no control over the improper acts of others. Given the proliferation of these call forwarding apps (simply Google “call forwarding apps” and you will see there are a seemingly endless number of them) we believe that this will occur more frequently. We are already seeing it happening. While it would seem logical to someone that receives a call from us that we are calling them, in these cases it is just not true. We can easily show from our phone records whether or not we have called a particular phone number. It makes no sense for us to call a number for someone who has no connection to our clients. We do not have the complainant’s name, address, or phone number in our database. It is impossible for us to call a telephone number that is not in our database. We cannot be responsible for the improper actions of third parties who are redirecting our calls and targeting others.

We are puzzled by the filing of this complaint. The complainant paid the debt in full within six weeks of receiving a letter from our office notifying her that her outstanding account was delinquent. We issued a receipt letter to the complainant showing a zero balance for the account. We do not...

credit report for this client. We do believe that we have done everything necessary regarding this complainant’s delinquent account. We are of the firm belief that this complaint is completely unwarranted. Sincerely, Peter M. [redacted]General Counsel

I am rejecting this response because:You are lying to say your rep was not rude.  I want a copy of the.  Tape.  I will contact [redacted] again and play this back and forth game of it's not ours by two very REPUTABLE companies.   also contract has an r in it.  Your first sentence was ride and condescending as well . Do you read the giant contract you receive when obtaining cellilar phone service?

Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota 220 S. River Ridge Cir. Burnsville, MN 55337May 9, 2016Re:       [redacted]            Dear Sir or Madam,We are sorry that the complainant feels the way she does about our response to her complaint however our response to her complaint was thorough, complete, accurate and factual. We have nothing to add to our prior response. Sincerely,Peter M. [redacted]General Counsel

Sometimes things would be easier if people read the contacts they sign. The $48.00 is a charge added to the delinquent bill by [redacted]. The specific applicable contract clause reads:If you fail to pay on time and we refer your account(s) to a third party for collection, a collection fee will be...

assessed and will be due at the time of the referral to the third party. The fee will be calculated at the maximum percentage permitted by applicable law, not to exceed 18 percent. The complainant did pay the amount that originally went delinquent. The contractual collection fee is assessed by [redacted] and not added by this company. The $48.00 is due and owing from the complainant.I have listened to the call the complainant references and our employee was not rude to the complainant. We have verification protocols to prevent information from being given to a wrong party and legally required disclosures that we must give. The complainant was rude and continually interrupted our employee during this required process.

I am rejecting this response because: fraud on my credit

I have listened to the call recordings of our interactions with the complainant and the reality is far different from the accusations. The complainant never mentioned a loan, a loan officer, or any parameter regarding any kind of a loan when she arranged payment of a reduced sum settlement of her...

delinquent account, a reduced sum that saved the complainant $716.85. The complainant was informed that paying the debt by check rather than credit or debit card would significantly delay issuance of a settlement payment confirmation. The complainant made a specific decision to pay by check rather than by credit or debit card. The complainant did agree to resolve the reduced sum settlement in two payments. Final resolution was delayed when the complainant changed the date of the second payment to two weeks later than agreed.While we are sorry that the complainant is unhappy we have done our best to work with her within the parameters we have. We were able to save the complainant 40% off of her debt and, although it was explained to the complainant at the time the payments were set up that there would be a significant delay in issuing a payment confirmation where payment is made by personal check the complainant made the decision to pay in that fashion.If the complainant had informed us that there was a home loan involved in her decision to pay her debt we would have strongly urged her to make the payment on the debt by credit or debit card. Additionally, if the complainant had informed us of her home loan situation and still insisted on making payment by personal check we would have informed her that if she provided confirmation that the check payment had cleared her bank we would be able to issue the settlement payment confirmation. Unfortunately this was information we did not have as the complainant did not disclose that information.The requested settlement payment confirmation has been issued and the complainant should have it by now.

We stand with our original response. It was the complainant’s responsibility to ensure that the funds to cover the agreed settlement were available. The credit card information was input exactly as the complainant gave it. There was no error. We attempted to contact the complainant for a month following the credit card decline with no response from the complainant. We originally allowed the complainant an extra month to pay the agreed settlement. We sent a reminder notice that the payment would be processed soon and yet the settlement funds were not available. We attempted to contact the complainant for a month prior to reactivating credit reporting for the unpaid delinquent account. One might think that if this settlement were so overwhelmingly important to the complainant that the complainant would have monitored the account on which she set up the settlement. Clearly even this did not occur.