Payliance, Inc. is a third-party collection agency and payment processing company based in Ohio. Payliance has received complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), including attempting to collect debts not owed and improper contact or sharing of information. If you have been contacted by Payliance, make sure you understand your rights before responding.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. According to the BBB, Payliance, Inc. was incorporated in 2008 and started in 2009. The BBB established Payliance’s profile page in 2009. Payliance is listed as a collection agency that uses the alternate business names, TigerTranz, Security Check, LLC, and Collections Acquisition Company.
According to its website, Payliance “provides merchants with customized payment processing, risk management, and recovery solutions that make them competitive in an evolving marketplace and enhance their bottom line.” Payliance “works closely with each merchant to solve specific payment processing and cash flow management problems to increase… profitability.” Payliance offers payment processing services and additional administrative services.
Payliance’s payment services include ACH processing, eCheck processing, RCC processing, credit card processing, payment recovery, payment verification, payment gateway, recurring payments, mobile payments, and virtual terminal options. Payliance “partners with leading-edge payments and technology companies whose offerings complement their own…allowing them … to configure seamless, integrated solutions.”
Payliance’s additional services include payment guarantee, presentation manager, electronic recovery, consolidated returns, check conversion, consumer authentication, bank account verification, and debt collection. Their debt collection services are “designed for a wide variety of common debt situations…and utilize… proven collections expertise for a higher return rate for recovery.” Payliance employs an “experienced collection team balancing recovery with consumer/merchant relationships.” They are “nationally licensed and bonded…to collect… both consumer and commercial accounts.” Payliance is “compliance focused with strict compliance of all regulatory requirements, including FDCPA, FCRA, and TCPA.” The Payliance website does not include links or references to 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.
The BBB has closed 38 complaints against Payliance in the preceding three years, with 19 complaints closed in the past 12 months. Almost all of those complaints allege problems with billing and collection services. Since September 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has closed 9 complaints against Payliance. Justia lists at least 2 cases of civil litigation involving Payliance.
Payliance, Inc.
2 Easton Oval, Ste. 310
Columbus, OH 43219-6193
Telephone: (614) 944-5788
Website: http://payliance.com/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely Payliance 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
Complaints against Payliance commonly cite complications resulting from collection activity resulting from bounced checks. In September 2016, a complainant indicated that a check she had made payable to a company called “Family Practice” in the amount of $148.59 had been returned. Soon afterward, Payliance had debited her checking account for the face amount of the check, plus a $30 NSF fee. Payliance also debited the complainant’s bank account for an additional $148.59. The complainant indicated that she had not authorized Payliance to debt her bank account for any of these amounts and alleged that they were illegal because Payliance had no judgement against her. The complainant indicated she had paid the bill in question by check and did not enter into any agreement with Payliance. In response, Payliance indicated that when the check to Family Practice was returned, they added a “state-allowable $30.00 returned check fee.” Payliance also indicated they were under contract with Family Practice to “collect on returned checks written to the business,” and that Family Practice “has, at the point-of-sale, a returned check notice posted. This notice states that in return for accepting a consumer’s payment by check, the consumer understands that if the check is returned unpaid, the face amount of the check may be electronically re-presented along with a state allowable return fee to the customer’s bank account.” The charges to the complainant’s checking account were the result of the return check fee and the electronic re-presenting of the check to the complainant’s bank. Payliance also indicated that they had contacted Family Practice and confirmed that the return check notice was posted, and therefore denied “the consumer’s request to reimburse her for the previously outstanding balance collected via electronic re-presentment.” In addition, because “Payliance mailed the consumer’s check payment back to her on September 12, 2016, no double payments have been accepted by Payliance concerning this matter.” They therefore declined to refund the double payment, as well.
The complainant rejected the response, indicating that Family Practice stated she was to have mailed them a check or money order, and that “nowhere on the statement does it state that they will or can debit her personal account.” In addition, the complainant confirmed with an individual in the accounting department of the medical provider “that no such agreement exists whereby a third party may extract money from her account without her knowledge or permission.” In their rebuttal, Payliance reversed its earlier position and stated that, in fact, “Family Practice did not have the returned check notice displayed within the business…and that due to the contradicting information Payliance had received regarding the presence of the return check policy notice, they have canceled the consumer’s collections account and have forwarded the outstanding balance back to Family Practice.” In addition, “Payliance… also processed a credit in the amount of $29.00 to reimburse the complainant for the overdraft fee she incurred as a result of Payliance’s failed re-presentment attempt for the $148.59 face amount of her returned check.” Although the complainant accepted this resolution, she urged the BBB to “look into this organization, and whether or not it is in compliance with practices authorized in your state.”
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.
Your debt harassment checklist:
“As we discussed on the phone earlier today, this settlement is perfectly okay to me. I need to thank you and all of your cohorts at Lemberg Law to get a project handled so professionally. Please allow Amy, the first person who contacted me from Lemberg, know how much I appreciate her efforts, kindness, and professionalism.”
“My mom and I want to say thanks to the team of Lemberg Law for all the hard work and effort that was taken to take care of the debt collector and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Because of this, the phones do not ring off the hook .”
“We realize that ours is only one little case among many — and a lot more serious — but are heartened by the fact that you accepted it represented us with a professionalism that belied the dollar amount.”
“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
Complaint Details
On 10/27/17, I made a $63 deposit via my TD Checing account to NYRABETS, a legal horse racing betting account. On 11/1/17, I discovered the deposit was declined by my bank due to insufficient funds. Totally my fault. Once I realized it on 11/1/17, I immediately contacted NYRABETS to straighten it out. I was told by Account manager “Q” that due to recent changes to all NYRABETS accounts, my account had been suspended and immediately sent to their Collection Agency, Payliance. This was news to me as I was never informed of changes to my account. Nonetheless, I contacted NYRABETS several times over the next week via phone, email, and their live chat feature on their website to try to pay them what I owed($63) plus any fees($25). No one would return my emails or calls. Several days later, NYRABETS withdrew the $63 from my TD Checking account, which I was happy about. My real concern was that a few days after that, Payliance withdrew $25 from the same account,even though I never authorized them to access my account. So for about a year now, I have been emailing both companies, requesting proof that Payliance ever had my permission to access my checking account and proof that NYRABETS had my permission to give that access away, to no avail. I finally received a few return emails from NYRABETS two days ago claiming they “reserve the right” to collect fees in any matter they choose. My argument is no reasonable person would ever agree to have their checking information released to a third party without their consent, especially after their account terms were changed without notice. I also noticed that Payliance put a negative report on my credit report one week ago. I disputed it with Experian, and Experian removed it in three hours, which has to be some sort of record. To this day, I am willing to pay NYRA the $25 fee they require for a returned payment, I just refuse to pay a shady third party collection agency that accessed my account without my permission, after terms of my NYRABETS account were changed without my knowledge or notification. On top of that, I’m making this complaint because I know if it happened to me, it has potentially happened to hundreds of people. NYRABETS customers deserve to know that their checking account information is not secure.