CCB Credit Services is a debt collection agency, which receives a lot of consumer complaints to our law firm for debt harassment. Find out who they are, why they might be calling, and how you can stop them.
CCB Credit Services, Inc. (CCB) is a third-party collection agency based in Illinois. CCB has received consumer complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), including improper use of information and attempting to collect debts not owed. If CCB has contacted you about past due financial obligations, be sure you understand your rights before you respond.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), CCB Credit Services, Inc. is a legitimate collection agency founded in 1933 and incorporated in 1964. The BBB established a profile page for CCB in 1993. CCB is listed as a collection agency. Buzzfile estimates CCB’s annual revenue at $29 million and the size of its headquarters staff at 350 employees.
According to its website, CCB has “emerged as a leader servicing various industry vertical markets.” In addition, CCB “has implemented and maintained emerging technologies, customized solutions, and proprietary processes while maintaining their founding beliefs in ethics, integrity, and professionalism.” CCB cites electronic account transfer and a multi-system interface as its technological strengths and offers specialized management reports, including new placement acknowledgement reports and payment activity reports.
CCB collects delinquent accounts in several areas, including auto finance and public utilities. Their automotive division “has decades of experience effectively recovering receivables for any segment of the automotive marketplace.” CCB’s utility division “helps clients deal with…demanding challenges” resulting from “restructuring, consolidation, deregulation, and increasing bad debt rates.” In addition, CCB collectors specialize in collecting debts for communication technology companies, education loans, healthcare providers, and financial services companies. CCB’s outsourcing division provides “leading services for…active and inactive portfolios…such as first party pre-collect, early out/cure programs, letter series, and PPA monitoring.”
As for compliance, CCB cites membership in several professional associations, including the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO); the International Association of Credit and Collection Professionals (ACA International); and the Commercial Law League of America (CLLA). However, they do not provide a dedicated consumer resources page with links and references to consumer protection laws and enforcement agencies.
Who are we? We are Lemberg Law, a Consumer Law Firm
Lemberg Law is a consumer law firm helping victims of collection harassment and abuse. We are ranked A+ by the BBB. We’ve helped more than 15,000 consumers stop harassment and recover money from debt collectors. Harassed? Abused? Misled by a collector? Call our Helpline today! There is no charge unless we win.
As of January 2019, the BBB has closed 22 complaints against CCB in the preceding three years, with 3 complaints closed in the previous 12 months. Most of those complaints cited problems with billing and collection issues; many additional complaints cited problems with customer service and sales. Since November 2016, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has closed 14 complaints against CCB. Justia lists at least 6 cases of civil litigation involving CCB.
CCB Credit Services, Inc.
5300 South 6th Street Frontage Road East
Springfield, IL 62703
Telephone: (217) 786-4800
Website: http://ccbcreditservices.com/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely CCB would sue you for a debt you may not owe or they cannot validate. However, debt collection agencies are known to have summoned debtors to court and garnish wages after a default judgement. Contacting an attorney BEFORE this could possibly happen would be a smart move. We’ve helped thousands of consumers fight back against unscrupulous debt collection harassers. Find out if we can help you too today!
Get Free BBB A+ Attorney. Call 475-277-1600 NOW
Unlawful Debt Harassment? Learn the Law & Sue the Collector.
Absolutely. Here are some Sample Complaints
In August 2013, in the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division One, a judge issued an opinion in a case alleging CCB Credit Services had violated Washington State’s Collection Agency Act. In this case, the plaintiff, a resident of Washington, had been contacted by CCB, “an out-of-state collection agency licensed in Washington,” regarding a delinquent amount due on his personal line of credit with Wells Fargo Bank. Initially, Wells Fargo Bank had contacted CCB in July 2010 to collect $27,167.36 from the plaintiff, and in July 2010, CCB sent a collection letter to the plaintiff. After receiving the letter, the plaintiff contacted CCB by telephone and disputed the debt. CCB said they would close the account, but the next day they requested and obtained a copy of the plaintiff’s credit report Three days later, the plaintiff mailed to CCB a letter requesting an itemized statement of the charges they had attempted to collect, “including a breakdown of the amount owing on the original obligation, interest charges, collection costs, and late fees that Wells Fargo applied before sending the account to CCB.” In response, “an attorney for CCB contacted the plaintiff and told him that CCB had ceased collection and closed the account. The attorney suggested that the plaintiff contact Wells Fargo to obtain the itemization.” Thus, the plaintiff’s initial complaint sought a judgement against CCB, claiming that “(1) CCB committed a prohibited practice under RCW 19.16.250(8)(c) when it failed to provide the itemization he requested; and (2) the plaintiff is entitled to the remedy provided in RCW 19.16.450.2.”
In the original complaint, CCB claimed that their request for the plaintiff’s credit report was part of an automated process, so it could not be cited as a violation of collection laws. They also denied liability for the other violations and moved for summary judgement. The trial court found in their favor, concluding as a matter of law that CCB did not violate former RCW 19.16.250 because it ceased collection activity and no longer had a duty to provide the plaintiff the information he requested.” The plaintiff appealed the decision, and the appeals court reversed the trial court’s decision. In its analysis, the appeals court noted that “Washington’s Collection Agency Act ‘imposes requirements for communications about debts and regulates such communications in several other ways… including requirements for the first notice of a claim.’” Specifically: “If the notice, letter, message, or form is the first notice to the debtor… an itemization of the claim asserted must be made including: (i) Amount owing on the original obligation at the time it was received by the licensee for collection or by assignment; (ii) Interest or service charge, collection costs, or late payment charges, if any, added to the original obligation by the original creditor, customer or assignor before it was received by the licensee for collection, if such information is known by the licensee or employee: PROVIDED, that upon written request of the debtor, the licensee shall make a reasonable effort to obtain information on such items and provide this information to the debtor.”
The plaintiff “asked the court to rule on whether CCB committed a prohibited practice by failing to make a reasonable effort to obtain the itemization he requested.” The court found merit in the plaintiff’s argument. “Wells Fargo forwarded the account to CCB without providing an itemization; …the original balance asserted in the July 6 letter from CCB was $27,167.36; …statements from Wells Fargo reflected no amount due; …the plaintiff disputed that any amount was due on his account based upon those statements; …the plaintiff requested an itemization; and… an attorney for CCB suggested the plaintiff …contact Wells Fargo for the information.” As a result, the original decision was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings
Federal laws protect you. The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) regulates the behavior of collection agencies by prohibiting actions such as the use of abusive or threatening language; harassment; or the use of false or misleading information to collect a debt. The FCRA regulates how collection agencies and creditors report delinquent debts to credit reporting agencies. Additional consumer protection laws include the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).
But here’s the rub: If you want to enforce your rights, or recover money for violations — you need to sue. These laws provide individuals like you with a means to seek monetary damages in court. For example, the FDCPA allows consumers who have been violated to recover damages of up to $1,000, plus attorney fees and court costs.
You may have a case, if…
“The group at Lemberg Law was professional, courteous, and effective. Their grasp of consumer protection laws and guidelines are second to none, and they work extremely difficult to ensure this procedure is client-friendly.”
“After a few months of frustration with a debt collector, I eventually called Lemberg Law. It was among the best financial decisions I have ever made. Jody and her staff were comprehensive, useful, and above all else powerful. I highly recommend their services and thank them for their continual efforts.”
“I just wanted to let you know we received the check from your office on now and I wanted to take some time to inform you that we really appreciate all of your efforts in this matter.”
We can absolutely help. Call us today.
Share your story
Have you had a bad experience with this agency’s debt collectors? Sound off and share your experience with other visitors in the comment box below.
Sergei Lemberg is an attorney focusing on consumer law, class actions related to automotive issues, and personal injury litigation. With nearly two decades of experience, his areas of practice include Lemon Law (vehicle defects), Debt Collection Harassment, TCPA (illegal robocalls and texts), Fair Credit Reporting Act, Overtime claims, Personal Injury cases, and Class Actions. He has consistently been recognized as the nation's "most active consumer attorney." In 2020, Mr. Lemberg represented Noah Duguid before the United States Supreme Court in the landmark case Duguid v. Facebook. He is also the author of "Defanging Debt Collectors," a guide that empowers consumers to fight back against debt collectors and prevail, as well as "Lemon Law 101: The Laws That Lemon Dealers Don't Want You to Know."
See more posts from Sergei Lemberg
