Diversified Recovery Bureau LLC

On, May 1st 2017, a message was left on phone number [redacted] requesting a callback from Mrs [redacted] On May 2nd, 2017, a woman identified as [redacted] contacted our office from the same phone numberUpon verification of right party identification information, the debt was disclosed to the womanThe woman stated she had never heard of the original creditor nor aware of the debtUpon further verification of right party information, the woman stated the information did not verify correctlyAs a result, the number was marked as "bad" (not the consumer): by doing so, the number will be set for no more calls at the end of the business day markedDue to the marking as "bad" occurring that same date, and the system not yet marking the change in disposition of the number, an attempted contact was made at that number later on the same dateThe woman again verified right party contact information and stated what happened on the previous callThe associate verified that what the woman was saying was true: the number was marked as bad; notation had been placed where the woman stated she was unaware of the debtAs a result of no right party contact with the consumer, skip tracing collection efforts were implemented including attempted calls with third parties to obtain location information of the consumerDuring one of these calls, a woman would only identify herself as Mrs [redacted] For the necessity of right party contact verification, the woman was asked to verify information related to the consumerThe information was successfully verifiedUpon discussion of the debtMrs [redacted] stated that some of the information relative to the debt was for her, some was a match for her daughterMrs [redacted] (mother) gave us permission to speak to Mrs [redacted] (daughter) and wanted us to allow her daughter to contact our office to discuss this and determine if she had any information concerning the debtMrs [redacted] (daughter) called our office and upon verification, was determined to be the same individual spoken to on 05/02/and who had stated that she had no knowledge of this debtThe associate asked Mrs [redacted] (daughter) if she could initiate a conference call with Mrs [redacted] (mother)Upon agreement of such, Mrs [redacted] (mother) was joined to the call on a conference callMrs [redacted] (daughter) began cursing and making lewd suggestions to the associate during the conference callMrs [redacted] (mother) stated that she was hanging up and for Mrs [redacted] (daughter) to handle the matter with the associateMrs [redacted] (daughter) continued cursing and the associate, upon advising the woman that the call would be terminated as a result, then terminated the callsDue to a lack, by either Mrs [redacted] (mother or daughter) to completely and fully verify right party verification, and in conjunction with the Company's standard of performing correct practices, the Company is unable to legally send a verification of debt letter to either party: as information is split between both Mrs [redacted] 'sAll phone numbers for both Mrs [redacted] were marked as "bad" -no further contact, and the account was closed in our office and returned to our client as a potential fraud account due to the conflicting informationOur client is currently reviewing the conflicting information due to possible fraudulent behavior or identity theft

Sirs and Madams, In response to Ms***'s inquiry, we did receive both her name and phone number as a reference for a [redacted] *** A message was left for Ms [redacted] to return a call as requested/supplied by [redacted] *** Upon obtaining contact with Ms***, she stated she wished not to discuss [redacted] and wished for no more calls As a result, her number was removed In response to the number provided for Ms [redacted] to return a call, it is a phone number wholly owned by our company and is given in effort to assure Ms [redacted] would not incur any charges (long distance) should she decide to return a call to our office Diversified Recovery Bureau LLC is registered in both the State of Ohio and New York, dispite Ms***'s opposing opinion In conclusion, no state or federal regulatory offenses were made, Ms***'s request for no further contact was honored, and dispite [redacted] (not Our Company) listing Ms [redacted] as a reference, we have notated the contrary on her behalf.Regards

Im not sure what to select for resolutionMy name was put down as a reference, point of contact, for a bill that I don't oweThey keep asking for a *** ***When I contacted them back they said to remove my restriction from my caller ID, so they could see my nameI'm private for a reason and
exercise my right to privacyI have the voice mail message where they asked for *** ***, he doesn't live hereIm not even married to himThey live next door at *** *** ***I know that it's against the law for them to ask for my neighbor in effort to perform skip tracing, for location servicesI want them to remove my name from their contact list, as *** *** did not inform me, that they were using me as a reference for a pay day loanSo, diversified is calling my house, asking for his whereaboutsI don't know where he is, it's not my job to locate someone I don't knowThanks so much!!!

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory only because they will no longer be in contact with me, but it's pretty crystal clear that these people are liars. How do you claim to successfully verify information and then say that you couldn't send a debt verification because you couldn't verify information. These people are pathetic lying individuals 
Regards,
[redacted]

On, May 1st 2017, a message was left on phone number [redacted] requesting a callback from Mrs. [redacted] On May 2nd, 2017, a woman identified as [redacted] contacted our office from the same phone number. Upon verification of right party identification information, the debt was...

disclosed to the woman. The woman stated she had never heard of the original creditor nor aware of the debt. Upon further verification of right party information, the woman stated the information did not verify correctly. As a result, the number was marked as "bad" (not the consumer): by doing so, the number will be set for no more calls at the end of the business day marked. Due to the marking as "bad" occurring that same date, and the system not yet marking the change in disposition of the number, an attempted contact was made at that number later on the same date. The woman again verified right party contact information and stated what happened on the previous call. The associate verified that what the woman was saying was true: the number was marked as bad; notation had been placed where the woman stated she was unaware of the debt. As a result of no right party contact with the consumer, skip tracing collection efforts were implemented including attempted calls with third parties to obtain location information of the consumer. During one of these calls, a woman would only identify herself as Mrs. [redacted]. For the necessity of right party contact verification, the woman was asked to verify information related to the consumer. The information was successfully verified. Upon discussion of the debt. Mrs. [redacted] stated that some of the information relative to the debt was for her, some was a match for her daughter. Mrs. [redacted] (mother) gave us permission to speak to Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) and wanted us to allow her daughter to contact our office to discuss this and determine if she had any information concerning the debt. Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) called our office and upon verification, was determined to be the same individual spoken to on 05/02/17 and who had stated that she had no knowledge of this debt. The associate asked Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) if she could initiate a conference call with Mrs. [redacted] (mother). Upon agreement of such, Mrs. [redacted] (mother) was joined to the call on a conference call. Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) began cursing and making lewd suggestions to the associate during the conference call. Mrs. [redacted] (mother) stated that she was hanging up and for Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) to handle the matter with the associate. Mrs. [redacted] (daughter) continued cursing and the associate, upon advising the woman that the call would be terminated as a result, then terminated the calls. Due to a lack, by either Mrs. [redacted] (mother or daughter) to completely and fully verify right party verification, and in conjunction with the Company's standard of performing correct practices, the Company is unable to legally send a verification of debt letter to either party: as information is split between both Mrs. [redacted]'s. All phone numbers for both Mrs. [redacted] were marked as "bad" -no further contact, and the account was closed in our office and returned to our client as a potential fraud account due to the conflicting information. Our client is currently reviewing the conflicting information due to possible fraudulent behavior or identity theft.

Sirs and Madams, In response to Ms. [redacted]'s inquiry, we did receive both her name and phone number as a reference for a [redacted].  A message was left for Ms. [redacted] to return a call as requested/supplied by [redacted].  Upon obtaining contact with Ms. [redacted],  she stated she wished not to discuss [redacted] and wished for no more calls.  As a result, her number was removed.  In response to the number provided for Ms. [redacted] to return a call, it is a phone number wholly owned by our company and is given in effort to assure Ms. [redacted] would not incur any charges (long distance) should she decide to return a call to our office.  Diversified Recovery Bureau LLC is registered in both the State of Ohio and New York, dispite Ms. [redacted]'s opposing opinion.  In conclusion, no state or federal regulatory offenses were made, Ms. [redacted]'s request for no further contact was honored, and dispite [redacted] (not Our Company) listing Ms. [redacted] as a reference, we have notated the contrary on her behalf.Regards

The Company takes all consumer inquiry and complaints very seriously and always strives to implement best practices when dealing with consumers.  The Company did attempt to contact Ms. [redacted] in regards to a collection of a debt.  The Company does have the ability and regulatory authority...

approval to attempt to obtain location information for a consumer, as The Company did in this instance.  All efforts implemented by The Company to obtain location information for Ms. [redacted] were performed as permissible and within compliance of all federal and state laws and regulatory requirements. The Company, upon Ms. [redacted]'s request did furnish her with both her bursar agreement (contract for enrollment at [redacted] College) and her Ledger Card (detailed billing).  The Director of Operations then reviewed the documents with her in real time telephonically to ensure Ms. [redacted] was aware of hot the debt was comprised.  It appears, as a result of this complaint and similar complaint that has previously been answered through the CFPB, that Ms. [redacted]'s statement to The Company of her understanding of the situation, may not be entirely correct.  In effort to provide further explanation to Ms. [redacted]'s statement, the debt is not a Federal Student Loan, nor a loan in general.  As a result, the servicer for her Federal Loans, would not have knowledge of or be able to determine the legitimacy of this debt.  It was explained to Ms. [redacted], and agreed to in contract under the terms of her Bursar Agreement, that any deficiency balances owed from her attendance and registration at [redacted] College, would be her liability to pay.  "[redacted]", as Ms. [redacted] referenced, is the name of the program overseeing her deficiency balances under [redacted] College.  Ms. [redacted] did not, nor was she informed that she has, attend a college named "[redacted] College" as there are none known to be in existence.  Ms. [redacted], has in fact and with acknowledgement, attended [redacted] College.  In the "Student Ledger" provided to Ms. [redacted] by The Company, a detailed (line item by line item) accounting of her billing from [redacted] College was provided.  In the Ledger, all Federal Loans obtained are invoiced, as are any requests for book stipends by Ms. [redacted], and any Pell Grants/Financial Aid received in addition to any tuition or costs billed.  As advised to Ms. [redacted], there are also line items noted as "[redacted] Transfer Institutional Financing" with varying amounts of money being invoiced in each semester Ms. [redacted] has been registered at [redacted] College.  These monies are the balances that were oversaw through "[redacted]" and to which The Company is collecting a debt for.  These balances are calculated as a result of Ms. [redacted]'s Federal Loans and Financial Aid Awardments not covering the total cost of her Tuition.  Upon calculation, the total of these invoiced line items total the balance being requested by The Company.  In regards to [redacted] College being closed, the money is not owed to the college directly, nor would whether or not the College is open, release Ms. [redacted] from her Bursar Agreement or liability within.  A direct correlation with this is the fact that Ms. [redacted] is assumingly still required and, by admission, still paying her Federal Loans for the semesters enrolled at [redacted] College, even with the College currently being closed.  As a result, this is not a scam.  The Company is a fully registered and licensed collection agency and is a RMA and ACA Member.   As a result of Ms. [redacted]'s complaint, The Company has notified our client of our inability to resolve the matter with her and have closed the account internally and returned the account to our client to proceed with further collection efforts.    (Another copy of Ms. [redacted]'s Ledger Card has been included in this response - with the line items totalling her balance highlighted for ease of viewing.  As this contains personal information, The Company here in requests that this information not be published in any fashion, but instead is being issued to allow Ms. [redacted] further clarification, if needed. )