Downtown Automotive

PFC appreciates the continued opportunity to resolve Mr***’ complaint. PFC sympathizes with Mr***’ situation regarding *** *** ** and, as such, will agree to delete credit reporting of the account as requested upon Mr***’ setting up of a payment arrangement. PFC, once again, stands by its handling of the account and Mr***’ payment information as supported in the attached recording. PFC looks forward to getting this matter resolve and hopes that Mr*** will contact PFC and speak to a supervisor by calling ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:Although I will make payments arranged until said time *** *** has to reimburse me so that I do not incur further court actions, I just found out from my insurance company that *** *** did submit this claim.However it was done very late and was denied because it again was not submitted in a timely manner.*** *** has a contract with *** *** and part of that contract stipulates that *** *** submit claims within a certain period of time.If *** *** cannot adequately provide a reason as to the delay of this, the responsibility of the bill becomes that of the provider and not the customer.This is the case, *** is trying to back bill me because of their untimely manner in submitting this claim and *** ***'s denial of payment.I am awaiting a letter to this fact from *** *** to prove thisI feel it it PFC's moral responsibility, in finding these things out, to send the debt back to *** to handle since it is truly not my debt and cancel litigation against me.Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: The lawyer no longer represents me and is no longer in debt collection practice; I am giving you permission to contact me through here to resolve this enough is enough
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I will pay the account off in full by the end of the month through the online payment system. At that time I expect all collection accounts for this account be removed from my credit report. I have made the first $payment today via the online site and expect to pay the remaining no later than 1/31/2018. Thanks
Regards,
*** ***

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) appreciates the continued opportunity to respond to Mr***’s complaint PFC presented Mr***’s offer to pay $to resolve this matter to *** ** *** ***. The offer was accepted. Mr*** is welcome to telephone a supervisor at PFC, Scott M***, directly at *** to arrange for payment and any letters Mr*** would like to request. We look forward to helping Mr*** resolve this matter

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) appreciates the opportunity to respond to Ms***’s complaint on behalf of her brother, *** ***. PFC was assigned accounts for collection from Mr*** on behalf of two creditors, *** *** *** *** (“***”) and ***
*** *** (“***”). of the *** accounts were included in a lawsuit filed against Mr*** on 3/25/(enclosed). *** account and *** account were not included in the lawsuit, but are still owed to *** and ***. Another *** account was owed, but went beyond the statute of limitations on 4/17/2016, and is no longer being collected by PFC.On 4/6/2016, Ms*** telephoned PFC in an attempt to discuss her brother’s accounts. PFC correctly informed Ms*** that, per the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), it was unable to discuss her brother’s accounts with her without authorization directly from Mr***. Mr*** did telephone PFC later on 4/6/2016. However, Mr*** did not give his consent to continue the telephone call with PFC, due to PFC’s policy of recording all consumer telephone calls to ensure compliance with collection laws. Collectors are neither able nor authorized to turn off recording on an ad hoc basis. Thus, Mr*** never gave any authorization to speak with Ms***. Ms*** again telephoned PFC on 4/6/and attempted to discuss her brother’s accounts. PFC again informed her it could not continue without authorization from Mr***.PFC again received several calls from Ms*** on 4/7/2016, attempting to discuss Mr***’s accounts. PFC again informed Ms*** during these calls that it would need authorization from Mr*** to discuss the accounts and that if Mr*** did not want to be recorded, he could send PFC written authorization. PFC did ultimately receive authorization to speak with Ms*** directly from Mr*** on 4/7/2016. After finally receiving authorization to discuss the accounts, Ms*** was provided with a balance and an amount at which PFC was authorized to settle the accounts. After being provided this information, Ms*** stated that she would have to speak to her financial advisor. Following that phone call, PFC received information from its process server that personal service was perfected on Mr*** regarding the lawsuit. As such, PFC added the cost of that service ($50.00), per Mr***’s agreement with *** and ***, to the total balance owed on the accounts. Ms*** telephoned PFC again later that day, was quoted the new balance with an increase for the cost of service to Mr***, and, prior to allowing PFC’s representative to explain the increase, began screaming and using profanity towards PFC’s representative. At that point, PFC’s representative was unable to discuss the account and was forced to terminate the call. PFC understands that Ms*** was upset, but was not given the opportunity to explain the status of her brother’s accounts.Ms*** presented an offer to resolve her brother’s accounts for $2,000.00, which PFC has obtained authority to accept. PFC has already reached out to Ms*** and will continue to do so in order to resolve this matter. Of course, Ms*** is welcome to contact PFC at *** and we would be happy to help her out

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:First I wanted to mention that PFC gave me the date by which I had to pay the $without additional court fees but When I called days before the allowed date they made me pay the fees anyway. Second, I am working with my insurance and they are sending a request to *** *** for reversed charges due to improper billing. I am not completely comfortable with providing my personal information here but will do so if need beHowever both *** *** and PFC should be receiving the documentation from ***. I hope all of this gets processed quickly and I get a full refund shortly.
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:Services were provided by *** ** *** *** on 5/29/14. Total billed for services $2,693.00. *** made three adjustments in amounts of $572.32, $749.98, $totaling $1,leaving balance due of $1,179.28. Payments paid by me in the amount of $and *** payments to service provider of $290.24, $344.46, $for a total of $1,inclusive of my $a **and total of $1,318.16. All payments, including over payment of $were complete to the service provider as of 03/04/2015. It took the service provider almost six months, until 08/28/2015, to realize the over payment and credit me the amount of $138.88. On 9/4/2015, sixteen months after services were provided inexplicably the Insurance now retracts $308.72? None of the services billed equal the amount in question. Colon w/Polypectomy $1,099.00, Colon w/Bx single or Multiple $or Level IV - Surgical path, gross & microscopic exam $622.00. The service provider has given unacceptable documentation or reason, on FAX page "Electronic Remittance Advice". In fact the detail of the adjustment to the service provider clearly states WO - Over payment Recovery. It does not indicate PR - Patient Responsibility
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me under the following conditions:I will pay in full the $AS LONG AS THIS COLLECTION IS PERMANENTLY REMOVED FROM MY CREDIT REPORTS WITH ALL BUREAUS AS PER YOUR PREVIOUS RESPONSE STATES AND AS ATTACHED. If you agree to do this immediately upon receipt of payment, we can resolve the matter between Professional Finance Company and myself You can probably understand my frustration with numerous collection attempts made by your client Had they not have acted in this manner, this would have been resolved long ago
Regards,
*** ***

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) appreciates the opportunity to respond to Ms***’s complaint. PFC was originally assigned an account for collection from Ms*** on behalf of *** *** on 3/24/2016. Initial notice of this debt was sent to Ms*** on
3/25/2016. On 4/7/2016, PFC received a phone call from Ms*** in response to the initial notice. During this phone call, Ms*** stated that she was going to sue the “hospital” and refused to pay the account. Thereafter, *** *** approved Ms***’s account for collection through litigation. On 1/16/2017, Ms*** was served with a summons and complaint for a legal action to collect the *** *** account. The next day, 1/17/2017, Ms*** telephoned PFC claimed to have evidence that the debt had been paid by insurance. Ms*** faxed in documentation regarding a provider named “*** *** *** ***”, but did not provide any documentation related to *** ***. Rather, *** *** itself provided. Ms*** again telephoned PFC on 1/25/and was informed that it was PFC’s intent to request judgment on the account if it was not paid, Ms*** agreed to pay the account in full. *** *** proved to PFC that the account was owing by providing a statement from Humana, clearly showing that Ms*** was responsible for the $charges to *** *** as co-pay amounts. The additional $was incurred in serving Ms*** and filing the lawsuit against her, as the account was not paid prior to legal action becoming necessary. PFC believes that the attached documentation is proof of Ms***'s complaint lacking merit, but is happy to answer any further questions that Ms*** may have

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:The bill was paid by Mr*** ONLY to clear his credit at this time. Mr*** still disputes the charges and actions taken in this matter. We encourage the Revdex.com to review the actions by PCF and the fees charged, as due to investigation, we feel the charges are not only an attempt at fraud and illegal, but also a harrsasing attack at destroying someone's credit. The freeze on Mrs***'s account has NOT been lifted at this time and date. As well, if found to be at fault for illegal charges, we request the $fee charged to Mrs***'s account be refunded by PCF in full, as Mrs*** had no attachment to this case until her account was frozen and a fee was placed upon her. As well, the "fast-tracking" of freezing of Mrs***'s account happened ONLY after MrM*** lied to Mrs*** via phone conversation and was in fact caught in the that lie the same day. It is our opinion, this action was taken out of spite by MrM*** for being caught in a bold lie to Mrs***.We again encourage the Revdex.com to further investigate the practices and company policies of PCF. We, as well, will be filing a complaint with the *** *** with the matter. And "when" PCF is able to "find" the insurance information provided that this bill again was not a commitment of Mr***, the fees, bill and any other inconvience fees be refunded to Mr*** by PCF. Mr*** was threatened by PCF through the Revdex.com per the prior statement with garnishment of wages. When fees already were associated with the account by Mrs***, it is this reason only that Mr*** paid the bill at this time. The actions by PCF have proven to disrupt the lives of both Mr*** and Mrs***, and thus endless fees were to be avoided so as futher fees associated with regaining the said fees would not be encured.We now are seeking a refund of the charges, bill and any fees that have been associated with the case.Again, we plead with the Revdex.com to investigate this company and the actions taken in this specific case. We have phone calls, dates and recordings (and one transcript of the recording in which Derek declined to allow us to record despite asking if he could record the call of Mrs***, which we feel also is a violation for the recording to be used by one side only as not is the recording statue in the state of Colorado)
Regards,
*** ***

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Ms*** complaint Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) received an account for collections from Ms*** on behalf of its client, *** *** *** (“***”), on June 30, PFC did receive a fax from Ms*** stating that
she had made a payment directly to *** *** *** and contacted *** to confirm that the account was paid in full On July 29, 2015, *** notified PFC that the account was still owing At that time, PFC sent Ms*** a letter informing her that the account was still owing However, upon being contacted by Ms*** again on August 3, 2015, PFC reached out to *** again regarding the payment On August 5, 2015, *** notified PFC that payment was received and posted to Ms*** account PFC has sent Ms*** a written statement showing that her account was paid in full and was never reported to any credit reporting agencies (attached) Unfortunately, ***’s delay in posting the payment to Ms*** account was due to payment being made directly to ***, rather than to PFC where the account was assigned PFC hopes that the proof provided resolves this matter and PFC is happy to answer any further questions Ms*** may have

Complaint: ***
I spoke with PFC manager Scott M*** on 9/and made the full paymentHe stated that his company would notify the credit bureaus to remove the collection accountAs of now, that hasn't happenedI understand that it will take a little timeI will accept their resolution and mark this matter resolved once I verify that all credit bureaus have removed the negative mark from my report
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the businessI actually just received that letter in the mailWhen I reported them to the Revdex.com I had received a letter dated August 4th, but it was stating that the item was still unpaid and that it would be reported to the credit bureau as unpaid and in disputeI had spoke with *** *** *** and *** had contacted PFC to let them know it was paid, I called PFC that evening to verify that *** called and she did but after that phone call is when I received that letter saying that I was still going to be reported to the credit bureau as an unpaid in dispute item but like I said the other letter finally showed up hereI just wanted to make sure that it was in deed marked as paid and that I would not be reported to the credit bureauThanks for helping me with this dispute, it is now resolved
Regards,
*** ***

Worst comp ever can't get there fences passed by city missing parts and screws.there illegally workers can't speak English but they do the best they can owners offers them no help.do not use them they won't last much longer

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) was assigned a *** *** *** account for collections from Mr*** on 12/14/2009. On 12/15/2009, PFC generated and mailed an initial notice of the debt as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. PFC was first able to
reach Mr*** by telephone on 3/8/2010. During this communication, Mr*** confirmed his SSN associated with the account, but claimed that the account was not his and that he would not pay the account. PFC was able to reach Mr*** again on 4/2/2010. During this communication, Mr*** alleged that his identity was stolen and used to incur this debt. PFC informed Mr*** that he could fill out a police report and identity theft affidavit, if that was his claim, and provide it to PFC for investigation. PFC never received this or any other information from Mr***. PFC attempted to contact Mr*** numerous times between 4/2/and 1/2/2015, without success. On 1/2/2015, one of PFC’s attorney’s reviewed Mr***’s account and mailed him a letter informing him of PFC’s intent to take legal action on the account. PFC received no response to this letter. After numerous attempts, PFC’s process server was able to serve Mr*** with a summons and complaint on 6/1/2015. On that same day, PFC received a call from Mr*** and a “*** ***,” who identified herself as Mr***’s girlfriend. During this communication, it was alleged that Mr*** was not responsible for the debt, no longer because of a claim of identity theft, but because he was on his father’s insurance at the time. PFC’s representative correctly informed Mr*** that since he was over at the time of service, he was responsible for the debt. PFC’s collector informed Mr*** that PFC intended to request judgment in the suit it had filed if the debt was not paid prior to the court date. On 7/17/2015, PFC’s *** appeared in *** County Court on the lawsuit filed against Mr***. Mr*** also appeared. During this appearance, the parties agreed that Mr*** would pay $100/month and extend the court date out until 8/14/for Mr*** to investigate the account. Mr*** called PFC and made a payment of $on 7/17/2015. During this communication, PFC offered to set Mr*** up on automatic payments so that he did not miss any payments. Mr*** refused this offer. PFC then informed Mr*** he would be responsible for ensuring that his payments would be made on time. On 8/14/2015, PFC’s *** appeared at *** County Court as required. Mr*** did not appear. At that time, PFC requested judgment as Mr*** failed to appear and had not contacted PFC. On 8/17/2015, Mr*** contacted PFC and made another payment of $100. Mr*** made $payments for 9/17/and 10/17/2015. Mr*** failed to make the agreed upon $payment for 11/17/2015. On 11/30/2015, PFC called the telephone number previously provided by Mr*** in attempt to continue the payment arrangement. PFC was alerted that the telephone number was not accepting calls. On 12/1/2015, PFC generated a writ of garnishment with the *** County Court in an attempt to collect the remaining balance owed on the account after Mr*** broke his payment arrangement. In doing so, PFC incurred $in fees for filing the garnishment and serving it upon Mr***’s bank. PFC received a call from Mr*** on 12/2/2015. During this communication, Mr*** became upset that additional fees had been added to his account. Mr*** asked to be transferred to a supervisor, was transferred, and offered to settle his debt. PFC refused his offer to settle for partial payment of the debt. Ultimately, this call was discontinued by PFC’s representative due to Mr***’s continued use of profane language.On 12/3/2015, “***” telephoned PFC on behalf of Mr*** and attempted to reinstate the prior $100/month payment arrangement. PFC’s representative did refuse to set up the payment arrangement again, as Mr*** had already defaulted on the arrangement, further fees were incurred, and PFC had already filed a writ of garnishment for the full amount of the debt owed. *** asked to be transferred to a supervisor who also refused to accept $100. PFC does not accept partial payments of the debt while a writ of garnishment is out for the full amount of the debt, as this can result in overpayment of the debt. PFC does accept payment in full of the debt, which allows it to release the garnishment before funds are paid to PFC. *** continued to call PFC over the next week and a half to attempt to get PFC to accept partial payment of the debt, speak to PFC’s CEO, and provide her a document that states that PFC refused to accept a payment. PFC refused these requests and notes that there is no law requiring PFC to take such actionsPFC has never received anything in writing from Mr*** and has not received any information regarding Mr*** being hospitalized in a different county or town on the date in question. PFC reserves legal action as an avenue of last resort. This is no more apparent than in the case of Mr***’s account. PFC attempted to collect the debt for nearly years and only filed suit prior to the statute of limitations approaching to preserve its client’s right to collect the debt. Initially, Mr*** refused to pay the debt. PFC attempted to allow Mr*** to pay the debt through a mutually agreeable payment arrangement, after incurring fees in filing a lawsuit and serving process, but Mr*** was unable to adhere to the terms of the arrangement. PFC then incurred additional fees in filing a writ of garnishment to collect the debt when it was unable to reach Mr*** after his payment was late for two weeks. PFC feels that it has given Mr*** every opportunity to pay this debt voluntarily and it is clear that Mr*** was unwilling to do so. PFC refused to accept partial payment on the debt while its garnishment was pending to avoid overpayment of the debt and stands by that decision. Having reviewed the recorded telephone calls and the allegations in the Complaint, PFC must disagree with summary of the phone calls contained in the Complaint. At no time was Mr*** or *** treated unprofessionally. Quite simply, PFC provided information and answers that Mr*** and *** did not want to hear. PFC was forced to file a lawsuit to collect the debt, had a judgment entered against Mr***, and allowed Mr*** to enter into a payment arrangement in which he refused automatic payments. Upon missing a payment, Mr*** failed to contact PFC for two weeks. In the meantime, PFC began proceedings to execute on the judgment it had obtained and incurred additional costs to collect the debt. Mr*** did not want to pay these additional costs and PFC was not in a position to accept partial payment while a garnishment was pending. PFC is confident that it has fully complied with all laws and regulations regarding collections

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: I have overdraft protection on my bank account. Had a request come in for payment and funds were not sufficient to cover that request the bank would have paid the request and I would have been charged an overdraft fee. A review of my bank statement for July, 2016, shows no such request for payment and no overdraft activity.As for phone calls made to my residence, we do have a block on any calls which come in on numbers or appear to be sales / solicitation calls. If PFC made as many calls as it claims with no success, the proper action would have been to initiate a letter to my attention. I was a collection manager for years and that is how it is supposed to be done I received no such correspondence.Despite what I consider to be inappropriate actions on the part of PFC I am willing to renegotiate this remaining balance with two conditions: 1) The negative report to the credit bureau be removed. 2) Once that has been done I will pay $ a month for months until the balance has been paid. I WILL NOT permit PFC to take my bank information this time. I will make payments on their web site on or before the negotiated due date for each payment.Regards,
*** ***

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) appreciates the opportunity to address Ms***r’s complaint. Ms*** did telephone PFC on 5/6/several times. During her third and final telephone call placed to PFC on 5/6/2016, Ms*** did attempt to set up a payment
arrangement on the account as stated in her complaint. In evaluating an appropriate payment arrangement that balances both PFC’s client’s expectation that payment of the debt would be received in a timely manner, and the financial capacity of Ms*** to make monthly payments, PFC must ask questions to determine a reasonable arrangement amount. There is certainly a difference in ability to pay between a single parent of children making $25,000/year and married person with a joint income of $200,000/year. In order to present a payment arrangement that is fair to the client and reasonable for the consumer, PFC asks its representatives to find out information regarding the consumer's ability to payAdditionally, under Colorado Law, married spouses may be liable for the medical debts of their partners incurred during marriage. See COLORADO REVISED STATUTES 14-6-- Joint liability for family expenses. Thus, Ms***’s marital status and date of marriage was relevant to defining and protecting PFC’s clients’ rights as to the collection of the account. However, in deference to Ms***’s wishes, PFC did reach out to set up a payment arrangement so that this matter could be resolved. On 5/9/2016, PFC entered into a payment arrangement with Ms*** without gathering further information and trusts that this arrangement resolves this dispute. If there are any further questions, PFC is happy to provide any further information

Professional Finance Company, Inc(“PFC”) appreciates the opportunity to respond to the complaint of Mr***. PFC’s records conflict with some of Mr***’s statements made in the complaint. So, PFC is providing the following information by way of background to address Mr
***’s complaint. On 1/16/2014, PFC was assigned an account from *** *** ** *** (“***”) for collection from Mr***. *** provided PFC with an address of *** *** *** *** *** *** ** ***. PFC mailed Mr*** initial notice of the debt to the *** *** *** *** address on 1/17/as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. PFC received no notice of mail return*** also received a phone number ending in *** from Mr*** at the time the charges were incurred. PFC attempted to reach Mr*** regarding the *** bill at this phone number times throughout January, February, and March of and received no response to these phone calls, despite leaving several messages. PFC began credit reporting the account on or around March 17, On July 30, 2014, Mr*** telephoned PFC and left a voice message asking for a return call to the number ending in *** or to contact his attorney. PFC telephoned Mr***’s attorney, *** ***, and learned that Mr*** had previously represented Mr*** in a bankruptcy, but was no longer representing Mr*** and the *** account had not been discharged in the bankruptcyOn 8/24/2014, Mr*** telephoned PFC. During this communication, Mr*** expressed his frustration that PFC had credit reported the *** account without notifying him. PFC’s representative confirmed that Mr*** resided at the *** *** *** *** address and that the *** number was his cell phone number. PFC’s representative explained that notice had been sent to his address and calls were made to his telephone number throughout January, February, and March of 2014. Mr*** demanded that the account be deleted from his credit report and when PFC’s representative informed Mr*** that he could not do that, Mr*** threatened to file a lawsuit against PFC and terminated the call. PFC then marked the account as disputedOn 8/27/2014, PFC received a letter from Mr*** requesting an itemization of the *** account. PFC mailed out this verification to Mr*** on 8/29/2014. On 11/13/2014, PFC received another letter from Mr*** stating “I acknowledge the debt is mine, and would like to pay the debt.” The letter went on to threaten PFC with lawsuit if it did not remove the credit reporting of the debt. Again, PFC mailed a letter to Mr*** stating that, upon payment, PFC would appropriately mark his account as “paid.” Mr*** did not make a payment on the accountOn 5/7/2015, PFC received another letter from Mr*** claiming to have paid the account and again threatening to file a complaint against PFC. PFC did not hear from Mr*** again until 8/30/2016, when PFC received a fax. In this fax, Mr*** offers to pay the *** debt to PFC in exchange for deleting the account from credit reporting. In the several communications with Mr***, both written and verbal, Mr*** never mentioned anything regarding a personal injury lawsuit regarding his son or that an attorney settled the account from some fund. Additionally, it is clearly incorrect that “[PFC] never attempted to contact us.” However, Mr*** did threaten PFC with lawsuits and complaints in every communication with PFC, despite the lack of merit to these complaints. PFC has again attached the itemized statement from ***, which has been provided to Mr*** no less than three times previously. In response to Mr***’s fax of 8/30/2016, PFC had already sent a return fax stating that it will delete credit reporting of the account in exchange for payment. As such, upon receipt of payment of $124.00, PFC will submit a deletion of the *** account to all major credit reporting agencies. If this is acceptable to Mr***, he may either mail in payment of speak to a PFC supervisor by telephoning PFC at ***