Credigy Receivables or CRI 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,
Credigy Receivables, Inc. (CRI) is a debt purchaser and third-party collection agency based in Georgia. CRI has received consumer complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA), such as attempting to collect debts not owed and threatening to take actions that cannot legally be taken. If CRI has contacted you about past due collection items, make sure you know your rights before you respond.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), Credigy Receivables, Inc. was founded in 2002 and incorporated in Nevada in December 2003.The BBB established a profile page for CRI in July 2003. The BBB lists CRI as a collection system, financial services, and credit repair corporation. Buzzfile estimates CRI’s annual revenue at$19.6 million and the size of its headquarters staff at 127 employees.
According to its website, CRI“is a global specialty finance company with flexibility across the capital structure to acquire or finance a diverse range of assets.” CRI “is a consolidated subsidiary of National Bank of Canada,” and has a “performing, prime portfolio… diversified across a wide variety of consumer-related assets.” CRI states that it has “closed more than 260 deals, representing [more than] $12 billion in assets…and counting.”
CRI does not identify itself as a bill collector on its website. CRI appears to be a debt purchaser, although they do not specifically identity themselves as such. The CRI website does not provide any detailed information about its business practices or the types of industries or businesses who comprise their client base. However, they do state that they “invest in consumer assets across multiple asset classes and geographies.” They also claim to be the “partner of choice when financial institutions face complex challenges and strategic changes.”
CRI states that its success results from its association with its “parent company’s significant capital commitment to the dedication and alignment of its leadership team”; its adaptability to “rapidly changing market conditions”; and its diversified investment strategy based on “emphasizing model risk over credit risk, leveraging a flexible model for servicing portfolios, and maintaining the perspective of a long-term, value investor and growth partner.”
The CRI website includes a Company Culture page for prospective employees and a Careers page that lists vacancies. However, there is no information about its regulatory compliance policies or practices. In addition, there are no indications of any affiliations with professional associations, and there are no links or references to financial regulatory or consumer protection resources, laws, or 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 March 2018, the BBB has closed 15 complaints against Credigy in the past 3 years, with 5 complaints closed in the previous 12 months. Most of those complaints alleged problems with billing and collections. As of May 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has closed 4 complaints involving CRI, all of them attributed to Gryphon Corp. Justia lists at least 2 cases of civil litigation involving CRI.
Credigy Receivables, Inc.
3715 Davinci Court, Suite 200
Norcross, GA 30092
Telephone: (678) 728-7310
Website: http://www.credigy.net/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely Credigy 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 November 2006, in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas, a judge issued a memorandum opinion in a case alleging Credigy Receivables had violated procedural laws in their effort to sue a consumer for a delinquent debt. In the original case, CRI had filed suit against the plaintiff on July 7, 2005. According to court documents, CRI officially served notice to the plaintiff on August 27, 2005, leaving the plaintiff until September 19, 2005 to file an answer. On October 18, 2005, CRI “filed a motion for entry of default judgment. The motion’s certificate of service states a copy of the motion was mailed to the plaintiff …on a date that is handwritten and illegible. On October 19, 2005, the day after the motion for default judgment was filed, the court entered default judgment against the plaintiff, citing as a reason that ‘although duly cited to appear, the plaintiff has failed to file an answer within the time allowed by law.’” Subsequently, the plaintiff “filed notice of restricted appeal,” claiming the court had made an “error on the face of the record, namely, that the trial court erred in entering the default judgment because she had timely filed an answer.”
At the November 2006 appeals hearing, the court reviewed the reasons for the plaintiff’s objections. Specifically, the plaintiff entered evidence showing that “through her attorney, …she had filed her answer on…Friday, September 16, 2005. The answer included a certificate of service stating it was served the same day by facsimile on CRI’s counsel at the number listed on CRI’s petition.” Furthermore, CRI’s motion for entry of default judgment, which included a handwritten and illegible mailing date, had been “mailed to the plaintiff personally—not to her attorney.” The court cited “rule of civil procedure 239, which states,‘the plaintiff may in term time take judgment by default against such defendant if he has not previously filed an answer.’” As a result, because the plaintiff… had timely filed an answer,” the appeals court judged that the “trial court erred in rendering a no-answer default judgment against” the plaintiff The appeals court“concluded there had been an error on the face of the record,” and therefore reversed “the trial court’s judgment and remanded the cause to the trial court 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…
“With your help the nagging collection calls have finally ceased! I was thrilled I was also able to get damages from the collection agency. I am unable to adequately express my joy. I am so thankful I made the call.”
“When I first emailed the office, I was not exactly sure what they could do for me. I had an idea, but they responded back with everything I could expect to take place. I never believed I would be receiving a check, it was definitely a silver lining. I highly recommend them to anyone seeking customer legal services.”
“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