RSI Enterprises, Inc.

We have researched this matter and the identifying information we have for this number does not match the party that has disputed. We have removed all traces of the number received from our client in our system as well as added the number to our Do Not Call list. We apologize for the repeated calls,...

but hope it can be understood that we are a legitimate company trying to reach a party on our client's behalf. Wrong numbers do happen at times and we hope to receive notification if the number is incorrect so that we may discontinue calls.

This was a very difficult conversation with the caller. Our calls are recorded and at no point was there an assertion that the person she spoke with was on the board for Revdex.com. We have no idea actually whether the caller/complainant was the consumer we were attempting to reach or if it is a wrong...

number because the caller/complainant would not cooperate and barely allowed our side to speak. The complainant may indeed be a wrong number, when she called our representative only asked what the number was that we had called. This inflamed the caller as she feels that is private information, regardless of the fact that we obviously have this information and it is how we reached them in the first place. The standard practice would be to ask for the number we called and if it is indeed a wrong number we would remove it, a very simple procedure in which no private information is exchanged whatsoever. The caller felt she shouldn't give her phone number so we were not able to help her. She also seems confused according to the complaint, as to why we are calling and to what purpose though the messages we leave and on the calls themselves we were quite clear as to who we are, what we do, where we are located and even helped her identify us online and with the Revdex.com. I am not sure why she filed a Revdex.com complaint as she also called back once she verified our business on Revdex.com. In the first call the complainants number was not blocked so we were able to locate the number and remove it from our records, as well as cancel any possibility of future calls. We feel no need to have any further contact with this person. In her return message after verifying on the Revdex.com, she gave her name and is does not match who we were attempting to contact. Of further note is in the complaint, the complainant mentions if she doesn't hear back from Revdex.com she will file with the [redacted], though I'm not sure she realizes the complaint type she submitted comes to our company and Revdex.com does not respond.We feel this matter to be resolved and consider this complaint closed.

[redacted]  [redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
No response was made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] on June 10, 2015, and I have determined that this lack of action does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
1. There is no response and therefore, nothing to address this error was done.2. The firm still has not provided documentation to verify the legitimacy of this claim.
Regards,
[redacted]

We thoroughly reviewed the complaint and followed up with our client with the original complaint on 10/19/16 with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, since this time there is no new update regarding the matter. The representative spoke with at RSI Enterprises, Inc. gave the information that...

insurance was billed and amount owed based on notes from our client of conversations with the consumer. There was a conversation with our client and the consumer on 4/1/16 in which the consumer indicated insurance needed to be billed and it was explained that it was billed and the balance was the deductible, the consumer had no further questions and then emailed the client on 4/15/16 trying to make a payment online, she was given a phone number to call, but did not do so and it was then turned over to RSI Enterprises, Inc. for collections. We also had conversation with the consumer prior to credit reporting and the consumer indicated she would call back, but did not. There has been ample time for the consumer to rectify this situation and as such this account is now in collections and reporting to credit. It is also of note that in this complaint the consumer alleges a conversation with RSI Enterprises, Inc in which she asked for her secondary to be billed, but there is no record of that conversation and it was not mentioned in her last complaint with the CFPB that we responded to. RSI Enterprises, Inc. is a collection agency and does not have the ability to bill an insurance and a consumer would not be told that we would do so. This matter has been thoroughly reviewed again and there has been no error found by RSI Enterprises, Inc. that would necessitate a removal, we have updated previously to the credit bureaus that consumer is disputing and will leave it as such until the consumer informs us otherwise.

We apologize for the inconvenience and have located the account(s) with the phone number you have listed and removed them from the calling campaigns.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

We did in fact receive the written dispute and request for validation from the consumer on 3/11/15. We then followed our process and validated the debt with our client, who sent us validation documents, which we then sent to the consumer on 3/12/15 with a letter explaining what our client made us...

aware of. As indicated in our letter, the consumer's questions were answered by the client themselves. Regarding your demand for further information including any of the following; original signed contracts, copies of state licenses, our agreement with the original creditor listed on this account, etc., there is no basis in law to substantiate your right to such information. In fact, court cases and the Federal Trade Commission have found there is no duty to comply with such excessive verification demands.**(see below)The indicated resolution from the consumer per this complaint is to receive an explanation of what the charges are for as well as an itemized statement. The itemized statement has been sent and was received by the consumer as acknowledged in the complaint. An explanation was given by the client themselves as also acknowledged. Further indicated I nthe resolution was to receive a proper response to the validation request and as indicated above that has been done to the full letter of the law.As all of these resolution requests have been complied with and the indicated resolution reached, we consider this matter to be closed.**(cases indicated above):[redacted]

We have done a thorough review of the complaint and prior disputes from the consumer. RSI has responded each time as required by law to prior disputes, but in this review, due to current age of account and other factors we have sent a deletion request to the credit bureaus. As the matter has been...

reviewed and the consumer requested remedy been completed, we find this matter to be resolved.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Attached, is written correspondence (04.09.2013) directly with [redacted] staff requesting a corrected amount for services rendered. I followed up with phone calls and emails, and no one from the billing department rectified this issue. Therefore, I am disputing the validitiy of this charge and would like it to be removed from my credit report. Regards,[redacted]

RSI Enterprises, Inc. is a legally licensed and contracted collection agent for the [redacted] in the District of Columbia. This case was sent to RSI by our client, the DC [redacted] for collection; as such, RSI is acting above-board and is not a scam, which can be verified by Ms. [redacted] counsel. Upon receipt of the original complaint through the Revdex.com, RSI Enterprises, Inc. immediately contacted its client, the DC [redacted] to verify case status. At that time, they advised for RSI to cease all activity, close and return the account to the DC OTR (our client) for further follow up. As stated in our last response, RSI did just that. We have ceased all communication with Ms. [redacted] and marked her account as closed and returned to DC OTR on our host system. This complies with Ms. [redacted] original request to cease & desist. RSI Enterprises, Inc. is no longer working this account nor is it contractually obligated to do so, as the account is owned by DC OTR not RSI. RSI has complied with all of its legal and contractual obligations, including promptly responding to the dispute/this compliant, ceasing all efforts/calls and returning this account to the original creditor, the DC [redacted]. At this time and as a contracted agent of the District, RSI is no longer involved in this case and cannot, therefore, assist Ms. [redacted] further. We are no longer in a position to take further action on this case and all further communication on this account will need to be between Ms. [redacted] and the original creditor, the DC [redacted], as outlined in the original response, which includes direct contact information for the DC [redacted]. RSI considers the matter against RSI Enterprises, Inc. closed, as we have complied with all requests and taken appropriate legal/contractual steps required.

In reviewing this complaint it is quite clear the consumer knew that RSI Enterprises, Inc. would not remove this from the credit bureaus, but would update the account accurately as Paid In Full. The Fair Credit Reporting Act requires data furnishers to fairly and accurately report the standing of...

accounts and that is exactly what RSI has done. The consumer was told this in writing after receiving a request to do so on 10/09/14. This was also told by phone on 1/5/15 when the account was settled. RSI has been very clear throughout that this would not be deleted, but would be reported as paid in full, which has been accurately completed.

It was explained in our previous reply that the desired outcome listed by the consumer was met. This fact remains true, each item requested has been followed through with. Proper validation as required by law has been provided. An itemized statement and a full review and explanation of the charges has been provided by the client. The consumer claims to still have questions, yet has spoken to the client a number of times regarding this debt and had it explained. In this most recent denial of the attempt to close the complaint, the consumer insists that RSI Enterprises is misleading our client, but in fact it is the client giving us information, not the other way around. This debt is owed to our client, we are collecting on their behalf. The consumer also insists that a signed document be received, but it has been explained that this must be requested from the client's medical records department. RSI does not obtain, store, or collect these types of documents as they are not necessary to our business or required by law. The client requires that these documents be requested by the consumer through the medical records department as it is a part of the patient medical records. Every requested item, including a full explanation and full validation, has been provided to the consumer minus this one piece of signed documentation, which can be obtained by the consumer through the proper channels and which we are not required to supply, as explained before. We consider this matter to be closed.

We did in fact receive the written dispute and request for validation from the consumer on 3/11/15. We then followed our process and validated the debt with our client, who sent us validation documents, which we then sent to the consumer on 3/12/15 with a letter explaining what our client made us...

aware of. As indicated in our letter, the consumer's questions were answered by the client themselves. Regarding your demand for further information including any of the following; original signed contracts, copies of state licenses, our agreement with the original creditor listed on this account, etc., there is no basis in law to substantiate your right to such information. In fact, court cases and the Federal Trade Commission have found there is no duty to comply with such excessive verification demands.**(see below)The indicated resolution from the consumer per this complaint is to receive an explanation of what the charges are for as well as an itemized statement. The itemized statement has been sent and was received by the consumer as acknowledged in the complaint. An explanation was given by the client themselves as also acknowledged. Further indicated I nthe resolution was to receive a proper response to the validation request and as indicated above that has been done to the full letter of the law.As all of these resolution requests have been complied with and the indicated resolution reached, we consider this matter to be closed.**(cases indicated above):[redacted]

This consumer called multiple times yesterday and was offered a supervisor, but the consumer did not want that supervisor, he wanted her supervisor who unfortunately was not available. As noted this was the Operations Manager, who was not in his office at the time. After repeated calls and...

terminations by the consumer, the Ops Manager became available and spoke with him. The consumer listed his qualifications and repeatedly asserted that he would file legal action and after listening for some time, the manager asked why the consumer was upset and what law he felt was broken. The consumers only reply was that they wanted no further contact by phone and only by mail if RSI changed the name to his, which cannot be done unfortunately. The Operations Manager replied that the first representative he spoke with had marked the account to not contact so there didn't seem to be an issue. At this time if the consumer felt there was any other problems or concerns they could have been addressed of course, but the consumer said "Great" and hung up.In looking over the consumer's account everything seems to be in order, the amount due is a deductible from insurance with most of the original balance satisfied by them, bills were sent from both our client and RSI Enterprises, as well as calls. As the consumer's original complaint has been satisfied by ceasing further contact and the insurance situation has been addressed, we feel this matter to be resolved and closed. RSI will no longer further contact the consumer.

No response was made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] on June 10, 2015, and I have determined that this lack of action does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.1. There is no response and therefore, nothing to address this error was done.2. The firm still has not provided documentation to verify the legitimacy of this claim.

Regards,

This was a very difficult conversation with the caller. Our calls are recorded and at no point was there an assertion that the person she spoke with was on the board for Revdex.com. We have no idea actually whether the caller/complainant was the consumer we were attempting to reach or if it is a wrong...

number because the caller/complainant would not cooperate and barely allowed our side to speak. The complainant may indeed be a wrong number, when she called our representative only asked what the number was that we had called. This inflamed the caller as she feels that is private information, regardless of the fact that we obviously have this information and it is how we reached them in the first place. The standard practice would be to ask for the number we called and if it is indeed a wrong number we would remove it, a very simple procedure in which no private information is exchanged whatsoever. The caller felt she shouldn't give her phone number so we were not able to help her. She also seems confused according to the complaint, as to why we are calling and to what purpose though the messages we leave and on the calls themselves we were quite clear as to who we are, what we do, where we are located and even helped her identify us online and with the Revdex.com. I am not sure why she filed a Revdex.com complaint as she also called back once she verified our business on Revdex.com. In the first call the complainants number was not blocked so we were able to locate the number and remove it from our records, as well as cancel any possibility of future calls. We feel no need to have any further contact with this person. In her return message after verifying on the Revdex.com, she gave her name and is does not match who we were attempting to contact. Of further note is in the complaint, the complainant mentions if she doesn't hear back from Revdex.com she will file with the [redacted], though I'm not sure she realizes the complaint type she submitted comes to our company and Revdex.com does not respond.We feel this matter to be resolved and consider this complaint closed.

As stated in our previous response, the validation request and dispute has been received by the consumer. These were responded to twice with full validity received and provided, above and beyond what is required by law in our industry in order to better assist the consumer. Further disputes of validity are frivolous as these have already been substantiated. In the attached email there is no resolution, but in fact an explanation from the client that the debt is probably beyond his expected copay as it was partially applied to deductible. If the consumer has further questions in that regard we would encourage him to follow up with his insurance company for an explanation of his patient responsibility.Since RSI has complied with the multiple validation requests in full, we consider this matter to be resolved.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have read the response from the business and I still don't agree with them, they didn't not provide me with any paperwork that shows the I owe that debt that thire claming. I think they have been given misleading information from theire client, Because I called the [redacted] and I spoke to a women name [redacted] that works at their billing office and she informed me that I don't owe them any money for that visit. I called ([redacted]) The client of RSI Enterprises and she refused to comment on that, and she said she didn't  want to have anything to do with this matter and advised me to deal with the collection agency. I really don't understand whats going on here and who this people are and what are they trying to accomplish, but I want them to explain and prove that this debt is mine and if I agreed to pay it, and at least provide me with some kind of paperwork that I signed. If this charges a legit and there not fraudulent, i believe they won't have any problem providing me with the basic information I requested if they can't prove and provide me me this information I want this matter to be closed and I want all the negative feedback from RSI Enterprises to be removed from All 3 Credit bureaus. Best Regards,

In reviewing this customer's account information, this account was placed with us on April 1, 2014, by our client [redacted].  On July 28, 2014, we received a formal dispute from this customer.  We confirmed with our client that this was an accurate item and provided an itemized...

statement of charges to the customer.  [redacted] again contacted our office disputing the validity of this matter on August 6, 2014.  We requested and received the signed condition of admittance from our client with [redacted]'s signature on it and we provided that to him.  RSI has appropriately responded to and provided validation of this matter to [redacted] on two occasions.  RSI has acted appropriately at all stages of this account and has met all regulatory requirements, this item will remain an open and active account.RSI feels that we've properly addressed the customer's concerns in this complaint and consider this matter with the Revdex.com resolved.