Debt collection -- Communication tactics -- Complaint #11346183

TransUnion Faces Complaint Over Aggressive Debt Collection Calls

Complaint Overview

Complaint ID: 11346183

Company: Transunion Intermediate Holdings, INC.

Product: Debt collection

Sub-Product: Credit card debt

Issue: Communication tactics

Sub-Issue: Frequent or repeated calls

State: Georgia

ZIP Code: 31406

Date Received: 2024-12-31T12:00:00-05:00

Date Sent to Company: 2024-12-31T12:00:00-05:00

Company Response: Closed with non-monetary relief

Timely Response: Yes

Consumer Disputed: N/A

Submitted Via: Web

Risk Assessment

Risk Level: medium

Frequent and repeated calls can be considered harassment and may violate debt collection regulations, potentially leading to regulatory scrutiny and consumer harm.

Consumer Sentiment: negative

Topics: Debt collection, Credit card debt, Communication tactics, Frequent or repeated calls

AI Analysis

CFPB complaint 11346183 was filed against TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC. regarding Debt collection (Credit card debt), specifically about "Communication tactics". A consumer filed a complaint regarding frequent and repeated calls from TransUnion Intermediate Holdings, Inc. concerning credit card debt, which was closed with non-monetary relief. The complaint was received on December 31, 2024 from Georgia. The company responded with "Closed with non-monetary relief".

What You Should Do -- Consumer Action Plan

If you are receiving excessive calls from debt collectors, document the calls and consider sending a cease and desist letter.

Legal Context & Consumer Protection Laws

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibits debt collectors from engaging in harassment or abuse, including making frequent or repeated calls.

Regulatory Insight

This complaint highlights the CFPB's focus on ensuring debt collectors adhere to communication standards and do not engage in abusive practices.

Resolution Likelihood

likely

State-Specific Consumer Protections

The complaint originated in Georgia, indicating potential state-level implications for debt collection practices.

Industry Comparison

This issue is common across the debt collection industry, with many firms facing scrutiny for aggressive communication tactics.

Related Issues

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CFPB complaint 11346183 about?

CFPB complaint 11346183 involves Debt collection (Credit card debt). The consumer reported an issue with "Communication tactics", specifically "Frequent or repeated calls". This complaint was filed against TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC. on December 31, 2024.

Which company is complaint 11346183 filed against?

Complaint 11346183 was filed against TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.. You can view all complaints against this company on their profile page at /company/transunion-intermediate-holdings-inc.

What was the company's response to complaint 11346183?

TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC. responded with "Closed with non-monetary relief". The response was marked as timely by the CFPB.

When was complaint 11346183 filed?

Complaint 11346183 was received by the CFPB on December 31, 2024. It was sent to TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC. on December 31, 2024.

What state was complaint 11346183 filed from?

Complaint 11346183 was filed from Georgia. You can view all complaints from this state at /state/GA.

Was the consumer satisfied with the resolution of complaint 11346183?

Dispute information is not available for complaint 11346183.

What product category is complaint 11346183 about?

Complaint 11346183 is categorized under "Debt collection", specifically "Credit card debt". This is one of the product categories tracked by the CFPB.

How was complaint 11346183 submitted?

Complaint 11346183 was submitted via Web. The CFPB accepts complaints through web, phone, mail, email, fax, and referral channels.

What are the consumer's legal options for complaint 11346183?

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) prohibits debt collectors from engaging in harassment or abuse, including making frequent or repeated calls. This relates to a Debt collection complaint against TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC. involving "Communication tactics".

How likely is complaint 11346183 to be resolved?

Resolution likelihood: likely. The company's current response is "Closed with non-monetary relief". The company did respond in a timely manner, which is a positive indicator.

What does the risk level mean for complaint 11346183?

This complaint is rated as medium risk. Frequent and repeated calls can be considered harassment and may violate debt collection regulations, potentially leading to regulatory scrutiny and consumer harm.

What regulatory actions apply to complaint 11346183?

This complaint highlights the CFPB's focus on ensuring debt collectors adhere to communication standards and do not engage in abusive practices. The CFPB tracks complaints like this one to identify patterns of misconduct across the Debt collection industry.

What should the consumer do about complaint 11346183?

If you are receiving excessive calls from debt collectors, document the calls and consider sending a cease and desist letter.

Are there state-specific protections for complaint 11346183?

The complaint originated in Georgia, indicating potential state-level implications for debt collection practices. This complaint was filed from Georgia.

How does complaint 11346183 compare to industry norms?

This issue is common across the debt collection industry, with many firms facing scrutiny for aggressive communication tactics.

What constitutes 'frequent or repeated' calls under the FDCPA?

While the FDCPA doesn't define a specific number, calls are generally considered frequent or repeated if they are made with the intent to annoy, abuse, or harass the consumer.

What are the implications of 'non-monetary relief' in a closed complaint?

Non-monetary relief means the issue was resolved without the consumer receiving a financial payout, such as the debt collector agreeing to stop calling or correcting an error.

Disclaimer

This analysis is AI-generated and does not constitute legal advice.

Related Pages