Diversified Adjustment Service, Inc.

I am rejecting this response because:
They did not contact me about the payment being rejected.  They had my email, phone number and address.  I would have rectified the issue.  December 7th was when the payment was supposed to come out.  I’m not sure if the number was written down wrong, human error happens, but I’m not sure what card was used.  When I found out the payment was not put through, I called and made the payment.  If I wasn’t going to pay, I wouldn’t have called to get the situation corrected.  I worked too hard to build my credit, there is no way I would have intentionally allowed this.  I rescheduled my payment date, kept communication with this company so that They knew I wanted to work things out, rather than not communicate and risk having this put on my credit report

I am rejecting this response because: the information provided by the company regarding this complaint is false and very untrue. Received a call on May 2, and returned the call to be told that the account was no longer in their office. Have disputed with all three credit bureaus and called regarding account several time during the last several months but have been hung up on or transferred to vm or the credit bureaus hotline. And still to the day has hire a credit company to send letters on my behalf regarding this account. Account is still marked as a collection on experian credit report. Need them to send an update to that credit bureaus to update status or remove from report.

Mr. [redacted] is simply not telling the truth in this complaint. First, a simple pay for delete would violate our contracts with the credit reporting bureaus. Second, our creditor client for Mr. [redacted]’s delinquent debt requires us to report settlements to the credit bureau. We are not...

contractually able to delete the information. Finally, what Mr. [redacted] alleges simply did not happen. Unfortunately for Mr. [redacted] we record all of our calls. Set out below is an exact transcript of the portion of the settlement payment call ON July 06, 20107 that dealt with credit reporting:                Mr. [redacted]:                  How long before this is off of my credit?                Our Employee:                  We report it a as a zero balance settled account. Our next reporting date is the 12th. It takes 30 to 45 days after we report it for it to reflect it has been settled in full.                Mr. [redacted]:                 All right.We respectfully decline Mr. [redacted]’s desired resolution of credit deletion or refund. Mr. [redacted] was accurately informed of the circumstances of his resolution of the account for a reduced sum settlement. Our company did exactly as we said we would do. It would appear that the actual liar here is Mr. [redacted].

We do not agree with the complainant’s conclusions as set forth in this complaint. We are not able to address any issues the complainant may have had prior to her account being referred to our office for collection on August 08, 2016. Our placement letter for the account was sent in the name and to...

the address that the complainant would have provided to our client. We do not have any returned mail and it would be the complainant’s responsibility to advise her creditors of a name change. Between August and November of 2016 we made 17 calls to the telephone number the complainant lists in this complaint as her telephone number with no result. Additionally, the complainant certainly knew that the alleged $70.00 bi-monthly payments were not being made and could easily have taken it upon her to inquire about that. Clearly she did not. It is disingenuous of the complainant to allege that she had no opportunity to know about the debt.However, as the complainant has not made any bi-monthly payments since at least August of 2016 she clearly has the funds to pay the account in full. In the event the complainant shows her good faith by remitting full payment of $419.05 to our office within the next 10 days we will give credence to the complainant’s allegations and do a courtesy deletion of her credit bureau entries.

I am rejecting this response because:
 I am rejecting this response because:Shady business practices. I asked when will it be off? And she gave me a time frame. She didn't tell me it wasn't coming off. Why would anyone call to pay something off that would absolutely no affect? They know this so creative wording was used to give me an answer with out answering. It's a violation to pay for delete? It wasn't a violation when I called back and was told it wasn't fully deleted because I didn't pay more. It wasn't a violation when I was contacted to accept an offer either.

I am rejecting this response because: The contract was fully paid off to Sprint when account was closed.  Reprinting invoices  can be done at any time with any dates and does not indicate either sent nor receipt. Interesting to see that even though harassment is clearly illegal that this is the preferred business practice being utilized.  Sprint needs to close the Account as fully paid and the credit report updated.

Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota 220 S. River Ridge Cir. Burnsville, MN 55337   June 2, 2016  Re:       [redacted] L. [redacted]            Your Case...

No.:           [redacted] Dear Sir or Madam, The complainant had a check that she had authorized for a payment on a delinquent debt returned from her bank due to insufficient funds. The payment date was May 20, 2016 and that is the date we deposited the complainant’s check and credited her account. On May 25, 2016 the check was returned unpaid. The complainant informed us that because we did not actually withdraw the funds from her account on May 20, 2016 she used the funds for other purposes and that it is somehow our fault that her bank charged her a fee for an insufficient fund check. This is not reasonable. The complainant is presently on a payment arrangement with lesser payments and there are no fees attached to the payments. It appears that the complainant was treated reasonably and respectfully at all times. This office worked to accommodate her financial situation to reach an arrangement that was possible when it turned out that the arrangement to which she had previously agreed was apparently too much. I do not believe that there is anything more that we could have done or can do to accommodate the complainant. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely, Peter M. [redacted]General Counsel

Again, the complainant is simply wrong in her opinion as to the applicable laws and regulations. I suggest that rather than simply stating an unsupported opinion that the complainant cite to the statutory or regulatory authority supporting her position.

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.

The complainant’s delinquent account was referred to our office for collection on January 09, 2017. Our office is the second collection agency to which the account has been assigned. A placement letter was issued to the complainant to the same address the complainant has listed in this complaint....

The debt in question is for unpaid equipment lease fees and usage fees for a telecommunications client.We have had multiple conversations with the complainant and have heard multiple stories regarding the reasons for non-payment. The complainant has alleged that he disputes the account. He has been given our mailing address multiple times to detail his alleged dispute and have an itemization requested. We are still waiting for the promised letter.The complainant has alleged lack of work and financial hardship as the reason for non-payment. Our employees offered extended payment plans and reduced sum settlements to accommodate the complainant’s financial circumstance. No funds have been received.In the call the complainant references on February 14, 2017 it was the complainant who continually interrupted and spoke over our employee as our employee was attempting to cite legally required disclosures. The complainant’s characterization of the call is not accurate.The complainant spoke with a supervisor on February 16, 2017. Our supervisor explained that unpaid lease and usage fees to the complainant and the complainant once again promised to send in a request for an itemization. We place credit reporting on hold to once again accommodate the complainant’s promise. We have not yet received anything from the complainant. As a realistic matter we will not be able to withhold credit reporting without any cooperation from the complainant. We will keep the account on hold for another 10 day period and at that time if we have received neither payment of the account or the promised dispute letter we will need to activate credit reporting for this account.

The complainant’s account was referred to this office for collection on November 23, 2016. The debt is for $1,163.56 for two leased smart phone for which the complainant violated the lease agreement and did not complete payment nor return the smart phones. A placement letter was issued on November...

29, 2016 and sent to the same address listed on this complaint. We have not received any returned mail. The telephone number we have been calling in an attempt to resolve the complainant’s outstanding debt is the same telephone number the complainant has listed in this complaint and is also the same telephone number provided by our client when they placed the account with our office for collection.This complainant’s allegations appear to be inconsistent with the manner in which our operations are conducted. Accounts may be accessed by name, telephone number, address, or the account number from the placement letter the complainant received. We have the correct name, telephone number and address here so I find it difficult to comprehend that the account was not accessible to any of our agents.Additionally, the complainant would not have been asked for his full social security number. The full social security number is not visible to our agents, they are only able to view the last four numbers of the social security number and this, along with mailing address, are options given for secondary verification to ensure that we have the correct person prior to discussing personal financial information. This would only occur if an agent had accessed the account which the complainant alleged never happened. The complainant’s lack of cooperation may well have caused an agent to doubt that they had the correct person and choose to not discuss personal private information.There are simply too may anomalies here to give credence to the complainant’s allegations. We will note the complainant’s desire to receive no further calls regarding his unpaid debt but I will also note that there has been no harassment here and no inappropriate activity on the part of our company. A simple resolution here would be for the complainant to remit the balance due on his delinquent debt.

The complainant has filed a similar complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As a response to her Revdex.com complaint I am supplying a copy of the response to her CFPB complaint. Please note that the CFPB complaint also contained threats of legal action and that while...

we were able to provide the CFPB with copies of the complainant’s invoice and signed contract we are unable to do so to the Revdex.com without a Release signed by the complainant.____________________________________________________________________...⇄ complainant’s delinquent account was referred to our office for collection on September 24, 2016. A placement letter was issued to the complainant to the same address the complainant has listed in this complaint on September 30, 2016. On October 04, 2016 the complainant contacted our office but refused to discuss payment of the account. On October 11, 2016 we received a dispute letter from the complainant.On October 12, 2016 we sent an account statement and a copy of the complainant’s signed contract to the complainant at the same address the complainant has listed in this complaint. I have attached copies of those documents.The complainant’s only response to receiving the account statement and copy of the signed contract was to file this complaint here and with the Revdex.com. We have no information that would suggest that this debt is anything other than a debt incurred by the complainant. We have followed the statutory procedures set forth in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 USC 1692) regarding account disputes. In the event the complainant were to follow through with her threat of a lawsuit we would certainly invoke the bad faith provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 USC 1692k(a)(3)) and request sanctions from the Court as it is clear that there can be no good faith suit brought by this complainant.It is clear that this complaint is baseless and brought in bad faith. There has been no inappropriate activity by this company in regards to this account and this complainant.If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Peter M. [redacted]General Counsel           Sincerely,Peter M. [redacted]General Counsel

The complainant alleges in this complaint, and in an identical complaint he has filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, that this office committed a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, specifically of 15 USC 1692c(c). The complainant is wrong. The substance of the...

complainant’s allegation is that a cease letter he sent to this office in 2009 is effective as to a completely different account referred to this office in 2017. The law on this subject has been well settled for many, many years. The applicable section of the FDCPA reads: 15 USC 1692c Communication in connection with debt collection (c) Ceasing communication If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, ……… There is a significant body of law on this section of the statute and the holdings are all consistent. The Courts have consistently held that each referred debt is a separate matter under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and that any request from a consumer to cease communication is effective only as to debts that have been referred to the third party collector as of the time of receipt of the consumer’s request for a cessation of communication. There is no right to a continuing eternal never-ending demand for a cessation of debt collection communication. This is well settled law. A cease and desist notice from the complainant in 2009 on a completely separate account is not effective as to a different account placed in his name in August 2017. There is no violation of law here. Even if we take everything related in this complaint to be 100% true and accurate there is no violation of law. Accordingly, we do respectfully decline the complainant’s Desired Settlement as there is no basis for a claim that any law has been violated.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/11) */
Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota
[redacted] XXXXX
June 11, 2015
Re: [redacted]
Your Case No.: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to...

the information provided by the complainant.
This complainant is simply not telling the truth. We have a history on this account of the complainant not being truthful. Over the past 5 months the complainant has given numerous stories as to why this debt should be removed from her credit report. Upon investigation none of the stories were credible. Our client was willing to remove the item if the account were paid in full. Arrangements were made for the debt to be paid. Confirmation would be sent to the complainant by email at the email address provided by the complainant. The email address was confirmed and reconfirmed by our employee. The complainant's payment was applied, a credit reporting deletion request was issued, and a confirmation was sent by email to the address provided by the complainant. The email was returned as undeliverable so a mail copy was sent to the complainant.
The complainant contacted our office shortly thereafter and was informed of the above facts. The complainant became loud and abusive. The call was terminated.
This office complied with each and every action to which we agreed. The complainant's suggestions to the contrary are simply not true.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
General Counsel
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/25) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Re: [redacted]
Your Case No.: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the information provided by the Diversified Adjust Services representative [redacted].
Rather than indirectly calling someone a liar as a way to skirt the issue at hand I will respond to each statement in order. [redacted]'s statements are marked with quotations.
"This complainant is simply not telling the truth. We have a history on this account of the complainant not being truthful. Over the past 5 months the complainant has given numerous stories as to why this debt should be removed from her credit report. "
In February 2015 I pulled an annual credit report to review for possible errors and check my credit score. To my surprise there was an account listed for DAS which referenced [redacted] as the originating owner. I was confused because I moved from the state of Colorado in 2009 to Washington State. [redacted] does not exist in Washington. After I left Colorado I went through a process to transfer all of the utility bills in my name to my ex-husband or add them to bankruptcy.
Since neither [redacted] nor DAS notified me of an account with them I had no idea it existed until I looked at my credit report. When I originally called DAS to discuss this particular bill, I confused it with a different utility bill that was actually included in the Bankruptcy and was discharged in 2012. I told them specifically during that call that this account was from a Bankruptcy and it should not be on my credit report.
After my first call to DAS, I made a call to [redacted]. It was not until I spoke with [redacted] where they explained this account was from 2013, after the bankruptcy from 2012 was discharged. They also explained that the bill was generated from energy services provided to my ex-husband at his residence in Colorado.
After I spoke to [redacted] I called DAS to let them know that I was mistaken and this was not an account in the bankruptcy but also tried to explain that this account was supposed to have been my ex-husbands responsibility. I spoke to either [redacted] or [redacted] who sound similar, I was told they could not talk with me because my account was now in bankruptcy status and it was illegal. I again tried to explain that I made a mistake and the account was not in bankruptcy but the conversation was futile.
"Upon investigation none of the stories were credible."
There is a claim that none of my "stories" are credible. I am not a teacher and do not have story time. To indicate such is yet another example of unprofessionalism which has been expressed at each and every juncture of the relationship between myself and DAS. I would like to inquire as to how exactly my claims were investigated? Had any literate individual taken the time to look at my credit report that was pulled by DAS when they acquired this account the report would have indicated a list of residences dating back several years none of which are in Colorado. In addition, they could have done their due diligence to notify me of the debt. They choose however to forego that option.
That said, I can supply supporting documentation separately as it contains identifiable information and should not be displayed publicly.
"Our client was willing to remove the item if the account were paid in full."
The only reason this account was removed from the 3 major Credit Bureau reports is due to my own diligence and follow through on this matter. The client had nothing to do with it. I initiated a call on 5/22 and offered a payment in full in return I asked that the account be removed from the 3 Major Credit Reporting Agencies. I was promised a letter of deletion by May 26, 2015.
"Arrangements were made for the debt to be paid. Confirmation would be sent to the complainant by email at the email address provided by the complainant. The email address was confirmed and reconfirmed by our employee. The complainant's payment was applied, a credit reporting deletion request was issued, and a confirmation was sent by email to the address provided by the complainant. The email was returned as undeliverable so a mail copy was sent to the complainant."
DAS refused to provide a letter of prearrangement that stated they would supply a letter in exchange for payment. I therefore included my mother on a three-way phone conference to have her witness the call. After payment was made I received a receipt at my email address.
As directed by [redacted] (CS Rep) I called on May 26 to inquire about the letter of deletion.
"The complainant contacted our office shortly thereafter and was informed of the above facts. The complainant became loud and abusive. The call was terminated. "
Because DAS refused to provide a prearrangement letter I had to call customer service several times. I received a receipt at my email address twice; neither of which indicated this account would be removed from the credit reports. When I called customer service they offered to send a copy of the receipt to my home address. I had to explain multiple times that what I needed was the letter of deletion not a receipt. Each customer service rep put me on hold to speak to a manager and then directed me several times to leave a message on DAS's Q/A manager line but each time I have left a message no response was returned.
At no time did I become loud or abusive with the employees. During the conversation on June 2nd it was [redacted] the CS Rep who became rude then hung up on me. I had a witness for that conversation. The witness was confused as to why she would hang up when I was inquiring about my account. It was at that point I decided to lodge a complaint with the Revdex.com on June 2nd.
On June 3rd, 1 day following the formal complaint. I called in to inquire again about my letter. I was on the phone a CS rep for 7 minutes. The call began well. She read the account notes and inquired with a manager she suddenly became agitated and said I needed to leave a message on the Q/A line. Instead of transferring me she hung up on me. I know she hung up because I called back twice happened to reach her both times and both times she hung up on me. Which again shows a lack of professionalism and proper customer service.
I have not called back since.
It was not until after I filed the Revdex.com compliant on June 2nd that I received the letter. The letter was dated June 3rd I did not get it until a few days later.
Hopefully the information I have provided her will give you a true glimpse into the dealings with DAS. If [redacted] a member of the general counsel is allowed to make false claims on my character I am now left to question how frequently DAS representatives have blatantly lied about folks who have written in similar complaints about their poor business posture. It also leads me to question why it took me entering a complaint with the Revdex.com to finally get them to honor their word? This is a company who should employ sound individuals who not only show interest in profit but are also trustworthy, after all they are managing financial accounts.
Another oddity you may find of interest: When I call in to the DAS customer service lines using my phone, the line goes straight to an automated line then to the Q/A voicemail and has since after our first conversation in February. After recognizing what was going on I began using *67 to block my phone number from their caller ID when I do that the customer service number works correctly in fact I usually speak with a representative on the first call. You will see in my phone logs (enclosed) that on several occasions I have to call back because I have forgotten to use *67.
Sincerely
[redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/07/08) */
Revdex.com of Minnesota and North Dakota
[redacted] XXXXX
July 8, 2015
Re: [redacted]
Your Case No.: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sir or Madam,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the information provided by the complainant.
The complainant's opinion of her interactions with our office differs significantly from ours. We stand by our original response because it is an accurate response.
A couple of points to address:
1. Billing statements are issued to the service address in the name of the party responsible for the service. This was the complainant. Her arrangements with her ex-husband to assume the bill are unknown to the creditor side. Her move from the service address was unknown to the creditor side.
2. We did not pull the complainant's credit report to review. I do not know where the complainant came up with the idea that this occurred.
3. We do not provide "prearrangement" letters. We will provide confirmation of payment once payment is made.
4. No one at this office has lied to the complainant about anything at any time.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
General Counsel

The account at issue here was an unpaid telecommunications account for the complainant’s business. The account would not be locatable under the complainant’s name. The account was not paid and was closed back to the creditor in April of 2015. Our credit reporting to Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion...

was withdrawn when the account was closed back to the creditor. If Experian continues to show the account then the complainant must dispute that entry directly with the credit bureau. Each of the major credit bureaus has a simple process for disputing an allegedly incorrect entry. Here is the link for Experian: www.experian.com/disputes/main.html. The credit bureau will initiate an investigation and if an entry is found to be incorrect it will be removed.

This complaint is purely frivolous. The complainant is wrong on their facts and wrong on the requirements for credit reporting of delinquent debts. The unpaid debt at issue was not purchased from Sprint by our company. We are a collection agency and the complainant’s unpaid debt was placed...

with our company for collection on December 29, 2016. The unpaid debt is for two smart phones and a tablet, together with usage charges, which the complainant has made the choice to not pay in accordance with her contract. On April 3, 2017 we received a dispute notice and refusal to pay from the complainant. In accordance with the applicable law we restricted the account from further contact attempts. The complainant is simply wrong in her allegation that a signed contract with our company is required in order for us to report her delinquent account on behalf of our creditor clients.  There is simply no basis for this complaint.

As the complainant is apparently threatening suit and requesting damages we will not fully respond in this forum. We will state that there have been no violations of statute, regulation, or standard in our collection activity on the complainant’s account. If the complainant files suit based on the...

allegations in this complaint we would expect to recover our attorney fees and costs as sanctions for the filing of a frivolous and meritless lawsuit.

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,
The complainant is not correct in his allegation that this office is in violation of the Fair Credit...

Reporting Act.
If the complainant believes that there is an error on his credit report the appropriate procedure is to dispute that entry with the credit bureau. The credit bureau will send an inquiry to the reporting entity showing what is reported and what is alleged. The complainant has not done this. I suggest that if he believes there is an error on his credit report that he file a dispute with the appropriate credit bureau.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Peter M. [redacted]
General Counsel

I see no value in a mutual exchange of vitriol. We stand with our original response.

Admittedly the request for a letter of apology from the complainant was a long shot and not really expected. Our original response only took into account events that had occurred up to the point that this unfounded complaint was filed. If the complainant was able to reach an acceptable deal with our client then we only need our client’s direction to accept such an accommodation. I will note that the account remains unpaid. It appears that the complainant has misunderstood when we stated he chose not to provide information. In several of his communications he related that he had documentation regarding a dispute as to the account. That is the information the complainant was encouraged to send to us. That is the information he chose not to send. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the complainant was never treated rudely. The complainant was treated respectfully and professionally at all times. Perhaps the complainant’s frustration with the fact that we were unable to accommodate his wishes has colored his perceptions. However, the conduct alleged in the complainant’s original complaint simply did not occur.