Collection Technology , Inc. (CTI) is third-party collection agency based in Southern California. CTI has received consumer complaints alleging problems with their customer service such as failing to provide proper documentation and inaccurate or inappropriate disclosure of information. If you have been contacted by CTI, understand your rights before attempting to resolve disputes.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) indicates that Collection Technology, Inc. (CTI) is a legitimate collection agency founded and incorporated in Southern California in 1954. The BBB did not initiate a profile for CTI until 2014. Buzzfile lists a founding date for CTI of 1960, estimates their annual revenue at $11 million, and the size of their headquarters staff at 100 people.
According to its website, CTI “meets all federal and state compliance requirements and follows the highest ethical philosophies and practices” in pursuit of its mission “to make a measurable difference through committed client partnerships, innovative solutions, and respectful customer service to achieve responsible recoveries and deliver top performance.”
CTI offers Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) services in the form of first-party collections, pre-collection notification and billing, and early-out accounts receivable management. In addition, CTI is a full-service third-party collection agency that accepts both delinquent and charged off accounts. CTI’s clients include Fortune 500 companies; federal, state, and local government agencies; and small- to mid-sized businesses. Their clients are lenders in education;government; financial services and banks; healthcare; telecommunications; and utilities.
CTI advertises compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA); membership with the Association ofCredit and Collection Professionals (ACA International) and the California Association of Collectors; and its standing as a General Services Administration Contract Holder. However, consumer resources can only be found via a link on the Consumer Portal page and consist almost entirely of external links to government student loan providers, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice, and the US Treasury Department’s policy on wage garnishment. Consumer protection information appears at the bottom of the list as a link to Ask Doctor Debt, a website sponsored by ACA.
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 33 complaints against CTI in the past three years, with 5 closed in the past twelve months. Almost all of the complaints allege problems with customer service, although one complaint resulted from problems with billing and collection. The 2 negative reviews allege incompetent handling of accounts by collection agents. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has logged 7 complaints against CTI since April 2015. Justia lists at least 3 cases of civil litigation naming CTI as either plaintiff or defendant.
Collection Technology, Inc.
10801 6th St., Suite 200
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Telephone: (800) 743-4284
Website: http://collectiontechnology.com/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely CTI 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 Cases
In February 2017, a complainant indicated difficulty establishing payments for a student loan that CTI was servicing. After receiving an agreement for monthly automatic withdrawals, the agreement was never implemented due to a paperwork error. While reinitiating the process, the complainant was approved for an auto loan on the condition that CTI provide a letter indicating the loan payoff agreement was in place. CTI’s failure to produce the letter caused the complainant to lose the auto financing. CTI insisted the delays were the result of a “back-up” caused by a large volume of similar requests that required due diligence. Despite having the money to pay off the loan, CTI appeared unable to find a way to accept payments.
Interestingly, in a case of civil litigation, CTI acted as a plaintiff bringing charges against the United States. In this 2017 case, CTI joined other debt collection companies “that didn’t make the final cut” in the contracting process to obtain lucrative delinquent student loan debt accounts form the Department of Education. Collection agencies view Department of Education contracts as “‘[t]he most sought-after contract within this industry’ because of the ever-increasing volume of student loan debt that is extremely difficult to discharge in bankruptcy.” However, the distribution of contracts was disrupted due to “erroneous payments in the student loan and Pell grant programs.” These errors included “improper payments for student loans in fiscal year 2016 [of] $3.86 billion, up from $1.28 billion the previous year [and] [i]mproper payments in the Pell grant program [that] increased from $562 million to $2.21 billion over the same time period.” These increases were accompanied by payments of $430,000 in bonuses to the head of the Office of Federal Student Aid since 2010. As of September 2017, The United States was granted its request to file with the court updated Status Reports of the May 2017 hearing into the matter.
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…
“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 am so blessed that through this dreadful, terrifying encounter, your company was there to help me. I can not thank you enough”
“Never did I feel anything less than your most important customer. I love your service, and wish that more people were aware that there was a remedy for these vile creatures that call themselves collectors. Do not get me wrong, I pay my debts, or at least attempt to, but those agencies are aware of what they’re doing is illegal and know that the person on the other end of the line probably does not know that.”
Chances are good that we can help. Call us today and we’ll explain.
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