BBB Business Reviews may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.


BBB Accreditation

A BBB Accredited Business since

BBB has determined that Agency of Credit Control meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints. BBB Accredited Businesses pay a fee for accreditation review/monitoring and for support of BBB services to the public.

BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services.

Find a Location


Reason for Rating

BBB rating is based on 13 factors. Get the details about the factors considered.

Factors that raised the rating for Agency of Credit Control include:

  • Length of time business has been operating
  • Complaint volume filed with BBB for business of this size
  • Response to 5 complaint(s) filed against business
  • Resolution of complaint(s) filed against business


Customer Complaints Summary Read complaint details

5 complaints closed with BBB in last 3 years | 2 closed in last 12 months
Complaint Type Total Closed Complaints
Advertising/Sales Issues 3
Billing/Collection Issues 0
Delivery Issues 0
Guarantee/Warranty Issues 0
Problems with Product/Service 2
Total Closed Complaints 5

Customer Reviews Summary Read customer reviews

0 Customer Reviews on Agency of Credit Control
Customer Experience Total Customer Reviews
Positive Experience 0
Neutral Experience 0
Negative Experience 0
Total Customer Reviews 0

Additional Information

BBB file opened: June 02, 1973 Business started: 12/24/1956 Business started locally: 12/24/1956 Business incorporated 12/24/1956 in CO
Licensing, Bonding or Registration
Many local municipalities, townships and counties have registration, bonding and/or licensing requirements. The BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

Permit and license requirements for regulated industries in the State of Colorado can be viewed at the following website:

http://www.colorado.gov/pacific/dora/licenses-and-permits-0

To view the registration of a business with the Colorado Secretary of State click below:

http://www.sos.state.co.us/biz/BusinessEntityCriteriaExt.do

Licensing, Bonding or Registration

This business is in an industry that may require professional licensing, bonding or registration. BBB encourages you to check with the appropriate agency to be certain any requirements are currently being met.

These agencies may include:

Colorado Attorney General Consumer Protection
1300 Broadway, 7th Floor, Denver CO 80203
http://www.ago.state.co.us
Phone Number: (720) 508-6000
attorney.general@state.co.us

Type of Entity

Corporation

Business Management
Mr. Michael L. Horstmann, President
Contact Information
Principal: Mr. Michael L. Horstmann, President
Business Category

Collection Agencies

Industry Tips
Collection Agencies

Additional Locations

  • 2014 S Pontiac Way

    Denver, CO 80224 (800) 655-6808 (303) 757-5147

  • THIS LOCATION IS NOT BBB ACCREDITED

    27 N 27th St Ste 18D

    Billings, MT 59101

  • THIS LOCATION IS NOT BBB ACCREDITED

    27 W Broadway St

    Butte, MT 59701

X

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating Overview


BBB Customer Reviews Rating represents the customers opinions of the business. The Customer Review Rating is based on the number of positive, neutral and negative customer reviews posted that are calculated to produce a score.

Customer Review Experience Value
Positive Review 5 points per review
Neutral Review 3 points per review
Negative Review 1 point per review

BBB letter grades represent the BBB's opinion of the business. The BBB grade is based on BBB file information about the business. In some cases, a business' grade may be lowered if the BBB does not have sufficient information about the business despite BBB requests for that information from the business.
Details

BBB Letter Grade Scale

BBB Rating Value
A+ 5
A 4.66
A- 4.33
B+ 4
B 3.66
B- 3.33
C+ 3
C 2.66
C- 2.33
D+ 2
D 1.66
D- 1.33
F 1
NR -----
Star Rating scale

  Average Score
5 stars 5.00
4.5 stars 4.50-4.99
4 stars 4.00-4.49
3.5 stars 3.50-3.99
3 stars 3.00-3.49
2.5 stars 2.50-2.99
2 stars 2.00-2.49
1.5 stars 1.50-1.99
1 star 0-1.49

BBB Customer Review Rating plus BBB Rating is not a guarantee of a business' reliability or performance, and BBB recommends that consumers consider a business' BBB Rating and Customer Review Rating in addition to all other available information about the business. If the BBB Rating is NR then only Customer Reviews are used for the Star Rating.

Complaint Detail(s)

4/18/2016 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: All this company does is lie. They had me served two days before Christmas and said that if I made a payment that day and started a payment plan they wouldn't take me to court or tack on legal fees. That was a lie because a few weeks later they went to court, a court hearing I was told wouldn't happen and then they went ahead and tacked on legal fees. They went from taking small payments from me and because I missed one payment they are taken close to half of my paycheck. They are unethical and unmoral. I called into pay my garnishment in full and every time I tried to pay over the phone, they would put me on hold for forever and then tell me their system isn't working. Then I would ask to speak to the legal manager ***** ****** and they would tell me she was out all day. I paid everything online and had my employer's tax specialist call in to talk to the legal manager to get paperwork started to release the garnishment and would be transferred to her. Turns out she was in, she just made sure to avoid my calls. They tried to keep from taking my payment and wouldn't allow me to make one and wouldn't allow me to speak to the person handling my account regarding paying in full. And now the tax specialist is informing me that the legal manager ***** ****** is just as awful as I explained to her. She snaps, yells and hangs up on the tax specialist whenever she calls to simply get information regarding the release documents. It's one thing to have a credit agency hold you accountable for a debt you owe, but it's another thing to have them treat you like trash.

Desired Settlement: The desired outcome would be to have whoever is in charge of this company to give everyone, especially ***** ****** , an attitude adjustment. The way she handled herself was completely inappropriate. The way she conducted herself over the phone with not only me, but with my employer's tax specialist was appalling. I believe her actions need to be addressed with consequences. I would also like to see a written apology sent to not only me, but my tax specialist, apologizing for the way we were treated. It's one thing to have a credit agency hold us accountable for a debt we owe, but it's another thing for them to treat us like trash through the whole process.

Business Response:

We received the attached complaint and responds as follows:

Agency of Credit Control, Inc. (ACC) denies the Claimant’s statements as they are factually incorrect.  A Summons and Complaint were served to the Claimant on December 21, 2015.  ACC received a call from the Claimant the same day who wanted to set up a payment arrangement.  The Claimant was fully aware that the suit had to be filed with the Court and that judgment would be sought as the complaint described unless the balance in full was paid prior to the court date.  However, despite the entry of judgment, ACC agreed not to execute on the judgment provided the Claimant make payments on timely basis.  The first two payments were made as agreed.  After the court date we received a call from the Claimant stating she was confused about the proceeding.  She was reminded that a judgment would enter however we would not execute on the judgment provided her payments were made timely.  The Claimant acknowledged the distinction as her wages were not yet being garnisheed.  In an effort to further accommodate the Claimant, ACC agreed to yet another payment plan and offered to stipulate that the judgment would be vacated once it was paid in full.  The stipulation was sent to the address provided by the Claimant the same day.  The Claimant never signed the stipulation nor was it ever returned.  As a result, the stipulation could not be filed as it was never executed by the Claimant.  Thus, the status quo remained. Multiple phone calls were made by ACC in an attempt to ascertain the status of the stipulation, however those calls and messages were ignored by the Claimant.

Subsequently, the Claimant ceased making payments of any kind and therefore defaulted any agreement signed or otherwise.  As a function of the Claimant’s default, a garnishment was issued in accordance with the Rules of Simplified Civil Procedure of Colorado.  Once the Claimant’s wages were garnisheed, only then did she reach out to discuss the matter.  She expressed her displeasure with having her wages garnisheed, ACC acknowledged the Claimant’s position but explained that had the Claimant returned the stipulation and made the payments as agreed, the wage assignment would not have been necessary, or had she responded to the follow up calls garnishment could have been avoided.  Such was not the case and the Claimant’s actions, or lack thereof, resulted in the garnishment of her wages.  The balance in full was ultimately paid by the Claimant on April 6, 2016, and a release of garnishment was faxed to the employer’s payroll processor that same day and the judgment was satisfied as well. 

In conclusion, ACC denies the Claimant’s disputes as they are factually inaccurate.  ACC followed all guidelines required by law in collecting this debt and offered the Claimant multiple opportunities to pay the debt voluntarily, all of which were ignored.  ACC even stipulated to a special accommodation to vacate the judgement once the account was paid, but that too was ignored.

Consumer Response:

 
Complaint: 11359530

I am rejecting this response because:

As I have already apologized for not making the payments, I accepted the fact that they weren't going to make right the lies they were going to tell me, I made the payment in full to ACC. Yes, I missed a payment, that is something that I never once denied. But the main issue here is the lies that were told to me and the complete attitude from the company, specifically the legal manager. Again, I state, they tried to avoid taking my payment in full when I called in. They'd leave me on hold for a long time and then tell me their system was down. I tried to speak with the legal manager about giving her my payment in full specifically but she did well to ignore my calls. This is unprofessional, especially when I am calling in to make the payment in full. I do have my tax specialist on stand-by regarding this complaint that is more than willing to submit a complaint regarding the attitude she received as well. To call in regarding paperwork needed for this garnishment only to be snapped at and hung up on is (again) unprofessional. 

Again, the only way this is resolved is for ACC, specifically the legal manager, to write a letter of apology addressed to both myself and my tax specialist. I understand that it is hard for someone to admit when they are in the wrong but it isn't impossible. I was quick to admit where I was wrong in this situation and so I would appreciate an apology admitting that their attitude was unprofessional and wrong. I will continue to request this apology letter unless they can come up with some factual proof that they were always professional to myself and my tax specialist over the phone. I know it's my word against theirs, but I've admitted my wrong doing in this matter, it's time they admit theirs as well.

Thank you for your time,

******* ********

Business Response: As previously stated, every effort was made by ACC, specifically by its legal staff, to afford the Claimant an opportunity to avoid legal ramifications.  ACC is empathetic to the Claimants feelings and it is regrettable that the Claimant ignored all such opportunities. ACC performed it's functions professionally, effectively and efficiently with regard to the Claimant.   

10/23/2015 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Illegal/Unfair Debt Collection Practices as spelt out under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA.)Rude, Harassing & Threatening phone calls. We got some calls from the Agency of Credit Control *********************** around 5pm on 09/28/2015 claiming that we have a collection item in the amount of $1641.83 entailing "89" separate medical bills ranging from $13 to $96 for our son beginning in May 2013 thru March 2015! Being that this was the first time we were hearing about this, I advised ****** that I would have to call the original biller (OU Physicians) to find out what was going on here as we have never received a bill in the mail from this agency OR from OU Physicians regarding this. She proceeded to threaten me with legal action if we did not pay immediately. I was very polite and cordial with her although I was as the same time shocked about the claim. I called OU Physicians the next business day (9/28/2015) to enquire upon the matter and a very polite and understanding billing Rep by the name of ***** confirmed that there were indeed such bills that had been sent to the collection agency dating around the same time. They had sent the first bill back in December of 2013 to our current address and unfortunately it had been returned as undeliverable and as per their policy/procedure, they flagged the account for NO MAIL so no more bills were sent and hence we were not aware of such bills. We have been at our current address for the last 7 yrs. and had never had such a problem. ***** explained that it could have been a postal driver delivery error, an error/return due to weather or something of that nature. ***** was very empathetic and apologized about it and proceeded to remove the NO MAIL flag from my sons account. She stated that another billing Rep by the name of ****************** would call me back with more details. She also referred me to another department that handles collections items so they could mail us the detailed bills in question. I called ***** with the agency on 10/02/2015 after she had called and left a voicemail. I too left her a VM regarding my inquiry with OU Physicians. ***** proceeded to call my employer and when she finally was able to talk to them on Monday 10/05/2015 (during business/work hours), she harassed my HR Administrator, was very rude, proceeded to ask my HR personnel to provide information about me including my income which is illegal under the FDCP Act. When my HR Administrator declined to divulge this sensitive information especially given the rude and harassing tone, ***** stated that she would call around until they found someone at my job that would give up the information and then proceeded to HANG up on her....very rude and unprofessional! We are trying to obtain the validity of this collection item(s) and are working with OU Physicians to obtain copies of the outstanding bills sent to this agency for collection. We are asking that the Agency act in such manner as detailed under the FDCPA which protects consumers from abusive, harassing and/or unfair debt collection practices otherwise we shall file our own legal suit if they do not stop such practices. We have not "refused" to pay the bills, but we cannot pay for that we do not know of hence the reason we are doing our own investigation to find out what happened and what the bills are before we pay them, if indeed they are valid. Thank you.

Desired Settlement: We are asking that the Agency of Credit Control (Amber); 2. Cease and desist any and all rude, harassing and threatening calls to my employer with immediate effect. 3. Given it's the first time we are hearing of this, they need to give us enough time as we explained over the phone to verify the validity of their claim before we accept responsibility and then proceed to pay on it. 4. Provide a detailed description of the items as they claim. We have not received anything in the in the mail explaining or showing the amounts owed. 5. Stop contacting us at work 6. Stop contacting any third parties about us for any reason other than getting your contact information. 7. Stop harassing and/or abusing us or anyone else they contact about this 8. Stop using deceptive collection methods (threatening to sue and/or garnish wages -- unless they are permitted by law to do it and intend to do so

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/10/15) */ ****** of ****** ******* denies the consumer's claims of any violation with regard to the FDCPA. The consumer requested that ACC cease communications on October 5, 2015 and no further attempts to communicate with the consumer have been made. The consumer admits that the accounts are valid in the complaint itself and acknowledged the address to which we have sent the Federally required notices (89) was correct. The consumer has already received 89 statements for each one of their separate accounts. Moreover, consumers' claim that "this is the first they have heard of it" is simply a falsehood. On October 7 2013 (2 years ago) at 9:33 AM our agency communicated personally with the consumer at which time the consumer acknowledged the debt, verified the address and confirmed receipt of our notices. Finally, litigation is an available creditor remedy that is frequently used in the State of Oklahoma, thus informing the consumer of the potential civil action is neither deceptive nor threatening. In conclusion, ACC has already fulfilled the the requests of the consumers prior to this complaint and denies all claims made by the consumer. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2015/10/19) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Responding to the Agencies response above point by point; 1. I called on 10/2/2015 at 4:36pm CST and requested they cease all attempts to communicate to my employer regarding this NOT on 10/5/2015 as they claim. ***** with the agency of Credit Control went ahead and called my employer and left a voice mail for them the weekend of 10/3/2015 and then talked to them on Monday 10/05/2015 so saying they ceased attempts to communicate after I made the request on 10/2 is a blatant lie. I tried to contact them on 10/5/2015 after they had already violated my request to cease all communications pertaining to the collection claim. 2. We DID NOT admit that the accounts were valid when the agency contacted us (if such proof exists it should be provided to validate such a claim). I did verity the address to be correct (because it is indeed accurate) What I told them was that they needed to provide us with the statements that show the validity of the accounts, and I also told them I would launch our own investigation with the original creditor to authenticate the validity of the accounts BEFORE we admitted to them being valid and paying them. I also asked them to give us time to do this. The agency said they set the 89 notices in the mail to the said address, 89 notices! How can one ignore 89 separate notices sent to the same address over an xxx period of time? If there is proof that these notices were sent then they should provide it. Saying "the consumer has already received 89 statements for each one of their separate accounts" is another blatant lie....I have never seen a collection notice from this agency and 9/28/2015 is the FIRST time I even knew they existed when ****** their rude rep called me. Again, if they have proof that we received such notices (signed certified mail receipts or USPS tracking receipts) then they should provide it to validate their claim. 3. October 7th 2003 at 9:33am was a Monday morning and I have no recollection whatsoever of ever talking to someone regarding such an account especially from a collection agency. Again if there is proof of such a recording/time stamp, then they need to provide it. 4. The manner in which the litigation notification was made was rude, threatening and very pushy in nature which was meant to intimidate us as consumers but we are well aware of our rights under the FDCPA. These collection methods are typical amongst some agencies that use threatening and intimidating tactics against consumers hoping that consumers are not aware of their rights. 5. In our own conclusion, this matter has now been resolved with the original creditor and the Agency of Credit Control will receive notification of the same from the Creditor (OU Physicians) We need for the Agency to clear our names from their collections books and send us notification by mail to confirm the same once they receive notification that the matter has been resolved with the original Creditor. They should also cease any further pursuit to collect on this said collection accounts as the matter has been resolved now that the original biller "clearly and politely" explained what had happened and "apologized" for the way the matter was handled by their billing department back in 2013. Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/10/23) */ Our client has not recalled the account or advised that the matter is resolved with them at this point. No further response is necessary as nothing has changed with regard to the previously submitted response.

3/23/2015 Problems with Product/Service | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: I am attempting to clear up a debt collection matter. The legal supervisor, ****** has ceased to respond or assist me in this matter. On 1/23 I was served with a summons for an old debt that I had believed my exhusband had paid On 1/24 I called Agency of Credit Control and asked for an accounting - this was provided to me. On 2/14 I asked for more information - I believe they may have been trying to collect for services that were not rendered. They have never responded. On 2/27 my exhusband indicated he was paying this bill through the sale of his home. On 2/27 I asked for a pay off. ***** screamed at me for expecting her to "drop everything" to complete a payoff. I never received the payoff, though I do think my exhusband did. On 2/27 I asked for status of the account. ***** indicated to my exhusband that she has settled with him, but not with me. On 3/2 I asked once again for status on the account. My exhusband stated that ***** is speaking with him and she is refusing to respond to me. The court date is pending and I wish to take steps to protect my credit, but I am not able to do so without a response from Agency of Credit Control.

Desired Settlement: I'd like a response from someone at Agency of Credit Control with whom I can verify the status of the account.

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/03/06) */ The matter has already been resolved with the consumer. The claimant agreed to settle the account for an amount less than the original amount and the claim was dismissed in court.

5/28/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Very rude and threatening. Also Took a $** dollar charge after i paid them in full. They will not put me through to a supervisor and hang up on me. I paid these people in full and the following day i recieve another charge of $**. I have tried to make contact with a supervisor there and have had no return phone calls. I was threatend to be sued and taken to court for asking a simple question. They still have $** dollars of my mooney that is not owed to them and they will not make any contact with me. I hope they have our previous phone conversations recorded to prove how rude and threatening they are. What they are doing here can't be legal colletion actions.

Desired Settlement: I believe this comopany operates illeagaly and needs to be called out. I'm seeking the $** dollars that is not owed to them along with the refund of $****** that i was threatened into paying. Thanks, ************

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2014/03/10) */ *** has read the complaint and responds as follows: The 3 accounts in question originated nearly a year ago (May 2013), and the claimant refused to pay the original creditors so they were assigned in November 2013 for collection. The claimant finally responded to numerous (12) attemtpts to contact him in December at which time he promised to pay the accounts. No payment was received. In January, the claimant had promised again to pay the collection accounts and a payment arrangement was established then. Unfortunately the payment was declined. When we attempted to discuss the matter with the claimant, he informed our agent that he was driving and couldn't talk at the moment and would call back. The claimant did call back on February 17, 2014 and he wanted to know why the accounts were sent to collection and our agent advised him the accounts were assigned to collection for non-payment. He inquired what would happen if he refused to pay the accounts and he was informed that collection efforts would continue which could possibly include litigation. The claimant was not threatened with litigation, rather he was informed of possible outcomes based on his question. The claimant became hostile and began using profanity, at which time the call was terminated by the agent as a matter of procedure. The claimant called numerous times in a matter of minutes, but the agent was not available as he was on another call. When the agent was free to take the call the claimant requested his call be transferred to a supervisor and the call was taken by the supervisor on duty. After conversing with the supervisor, the claimant acknowledged that he owed the debts and paid his accounts accordingly. The original payment of $***** that did not clear was never withdrawn from his account. The claimant was informed of this on the 17th and that if he had any problems with his bank or if the payment was cleared later by his bank, to show where the funds were deducted from his account and we would assist him with getting any overage back to him. As stated above, no additional funds were ever received from the claimant nor from his bank and to date, the claimant has not offered any documentation demonstrating that anything other than the amount owed was transacted by his bank. Supervisors and managers have been available to assist the claimant with any issues he might have, however he has never called back since that conversation of the 17th. It was and remains our understanding that the accounts in question were resolved professionally on that day despite the claimant's use of profanity and prevarication. *** is a licensed collection agency in the State of Colorado and is duly authorized to collect delinquent accounts. The accounts were legally assigned for collection by the original creditors and acknowledged as legitimate debts by the claimant himself. The amount collected was only for the amount legally owed by the claimant. In conclusion, *** denies these claims as they simply are not factual. Furthermore, it remains our postion, that if the claimant can produce documentation demonstrating that any overage is due him, we will gladly assist him in getting a refund. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2014/03/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Never once did I use profasnity with the representitive and I never talked to a supoervisor at their office. I left multiple messages with their supervisor and my calls were never returned. I was threatened with litigation and if our phone conversation was recorded it will prove this. It will also prove that i never used any profanity with the represenitive that i spoke with. The $** that was drafted from my checking account was refunded. I'm not looking for any kind of refunds but I do question the way this creditor does buisness. I would like to hear our phone conversation that day to prove to you that i was threatened with litigation and never once used any profanity. Final Business Response /* (4000, 15, 2014/05/14) */ Sorry, for not responding earlier...I did not receive any notification of the claimant's rebuttal. *** responds as follows: There is no recording of the previous conversations with the claimant. The case been resolved with regard to the collection matter. The accounts went to collection because the claimant did not pay the original creditor-Undisputed. The claimant paid the accounts after many months and attempts to contact him and had he not paid when he did we would have looked at litigation as an option to liquidate the unpaid accounts. The claimant was informed of this potential action, this wasn't a threat as we frequently must use the court system to effectively liquidate accounts that aren't paid.-Undisputed. Fortunately the claimant paid prior to litigation, perhaps because he was informed of the potential action.- Undisputed. I am pleased that the matter has been resolved for all parties concerned. The claimant has paid his obligation to the original creditor, the original credit has been made whole and we were instrumental in achieving this positive outcome.

5/20/2014 Advertising/Sales Issues | Read Complaint Details
X

Additional Notes

Complaint: Agency pursued action on unsubstantiated claim.Was never billed correct ins.-adjusted amount for service rec'd.Amount never sent to benefits provider. I rec'd a bill dated 12/9/2012 for the full amount of $125 from ************************ for an overnight oxygen monitoring procedure provided on 2/22/2012-almost a year earlier. I called ***** & was told that the claim had been submitted to*********************** TWICE, but ***** had been given incorrect group/id information & the claim would be resubmitted to our medical benefits provider, *************** (now known as **********************). Two "full amount" bills later, each with questioning verbal or email follow-ups by either me or my husband (e.g. one email receiving a reply 4/07/13 from ***** stating "Regardless, you took a test & you owe for that test. You can turn it into your insurance yourself, since you don't think that we are capable of billing correctly. It has been a year since you took test...."), on 12/24/13 I was notified that my disputed claim was sent to the Agency of Credit Control, Inc., Denver CO for collection. The collections agency said I had a month to file, in writing, a challenge of the the claim by ***** & if challenged, the claim would be investigated for validity & I would await their determination. To challenge the claim's merit, I submitted to them the Explanation of Benefits (discussed below) dated 5/1/13 (along with other ***** & *************** correspondence). This stated that we had no patient responsibility for the $125 as presented. To be clear, there never was any intent not to pay what was rightfully owed. We were never billed an insurance-adjusted amount, only the full amount, $125. The issue then, & now, is that the billing was not corrected/adjusted & a valid claim was NOT ONCE submitted to our insurance by *****. After the (above noted) email reply by *****, all correspondence was submitted by us to *************** for review/inquiry. On 5/1/13 we received the Explanation of Benefits from our provider (as noted above), stating the claim was not received within the timely filing period & patient responsibility was $0.00. We awaited a revised bill from *****. Nothing came. Following the Collections' notification, I again called our past provider, now **********************, (I enrolled in Medicare on 3/1/13) & apprised them of the situation.They contacted ***** & on 1/28/14 I received the following verbatim voice message:"....We were able to get a claim from the provider, who I understand was very, very rude to the person that called. They are not a contracted provider, of course, ************************; & you are going to owe them some money. We will be issuing them a check. But you are going to owe $55.79. I would definitely call the collection agency & let them know that we are paying the provider. We do not pay the fees for the collection agency. They should not even be billing you because the PROVIDER NEVER BILLED YOUR INSURANCE. They admitted they never billed the insurance...". I sent the above information to the collection agency on 1/31/14 anticipating the withdrawal of the collections claim & awaited a revised/corrected billing from *****. Within a day of my correspondence to the collections' agency I received from them notification of their intent to proceed with the action. Believing that the two correspondences had crossed in the mail, I continued to await communication from either agency. Hearing nothing, I called the Collections agency to find out the status based on the settlement made between ************************ & **********************. They had heard nothing from ***** & regardless of the communications I sent them, their stated priority was to "their client" & proceedings continued. I contacted ************ & was told that a check had been sent to ***** for $58.33 following their conversation in Jan.2014. I still have heard nothing. An adjusted/revised bill has not been sent to me by ***** for the agreed upon amount of $55.79. They've rec'd $58.33 from ***********. As for Collections, they accepted & validated a disputed claim with no merit.

Desired Settlement: There never was any intent not to pay what was rightfully owed to*************************. We were never billed an insurance-adjusted amount, only the full amount, $125. The issue then, & now, is that the billing was not corrected/adjusted & a valid claim was NOT ONCE submitted to our insurance by*************************. I want an adjusted/revised, corrected bill sent, to me by************************* for the agreed-upon amount ($55.79) reached between my previous medical provider (***************/************ Solutions) and************************* in January 2014. ************ Solutions has paid their part of the agreement ($58.33) to************************* and I will pay the remaining $55.79 agreed upon, as the final portion of the total amount owed, upon receipt of the bill from*************************. Any monies owed to to the Agency of Credit Control, Inc., Denver CO should be absorbed either by************************* or by the collections' agency, itself, because the claim was accepted without merit. (Note: An identical complaint is being filed against*************************, *******************, *******************)

Business Response: Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/04/14) */ I have reviewed the complaint and respond as follows: It appears Ms. ******** acknowledges the transaction with the original creditor ************* **********. As she mentioned in her complaint, her issue is that she feels her insurance should cover this claim. The original creditor billed Ms. ********'s carrier in February of 2012 and the carrier did not respond. The original creditor rebilled and finally the insurance company responded and requested a 30 day hold be placed on the account on 4/17/13. On 5/18/13 the original creditor billed Ms. ******** as the insurance company never responded after their initial request to hold the account. Ms. ******** was subsequently billed by the original creditor for an additional 90 days with no response. The original creditor finally submitted to collections in December of 2013. We have attempted to contact Ms. ******** numerous times to resolve the issue personaly, however she has yet to return any of our calls. However we did receive her written dispute and properly validated the account with documentation from the orginal creditor. Additionally, an investigation was performed to review the details of the account and confirm the validity of the debt with the original creditor. Moreover, given Ms. ********'s own admission, that she acknowledges the account, the validity of the debt was never in question. It is and always has been a question of the amount owed. Our investigation included a conversation with our client who advised they have not received any payments from either Ms. ******** nor her insurance company. The original creditor confirms that no agreement to settle the account for an additional $55.79 was ever made. While there appears to be a pending insurance payment according to Ms. ******** of $58.33 and Ms. ******** herself is acknowledging an amount due, it is clear that the Agency of Credit Control, Inc. has worked diligently to resolve the issues on a just and valid debt. That notwithstanding, given the issues with Ms. ********'s insurance carrier and her admission of owing at least $55.79, Agency of Credit Control, Inc. has cancelled the account back to the original creditor to resolve the issues directly with Ms. ******** and her insurance carrier. Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/04/26) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) On April 14, 2014, the business provided the following information. My rebuttal to the Agency of Credit Control is in parenthesis, following their response.: It appears Ms. ******** acknowledges the transaction with the original creditor ************* **********. (I do not and have not recognized any claim from ************* ********** BECAUSE MY INSURANCE WAS NEVER BILLED and I did not have an accurate amount to pay to ************* **********. Therefore, any bill sent to me was not valid without first going through my insurance.) As she mentioned in her complaint, her issue is that she feels her insurance should cover this claim. (I feel that my insurance should have been billed FIRST to determine what coverage they would pay and I would be billed the remaining amount from ************* **********.) The original creditor billed Ms. ********'s carrier in February of 2012 and the carrier did not respond. (As brought up in my complaint, ************* ********** NEVER BILLED MY INSURANCE CARRIER!! NEVER!! Therefore, there could be no response! Eventually, after continued billing for the total amount from ************* **********, and replies sent by me asking them to submit a claim to our insurance, my husband faxed a copy of the latest unsubmitted bill to our insurance on APRIL 15, 2013. That was the only communication *************** (aka **********************) had received from ************* **********. In reply to OUR inquiry, we received the Explanation of Benefits, dated May 01, 2013 in which *************** stated that the claim (the copy of the bill faxed to them) was not received within the timely filing period. Patient Responsibility was listed as $0.00.) The original creditor rebilled and finally the insurance company responded and requested a 30 day hold be placed on the account on 4/17/13. (I have no idea where The Agency of Credit Contrtol came up with the above scenario. There was never a billing, nor a rebilling from ************* ********** to our insurance carrier. As for a requested 30 day hold being placed on the account, I would like to see your evidence of that.) On 5/18/13 the original creditor billed Ms. ******** as the insurance company never responded after their initial request to hold the account. Ms. ******** was subsequently billed by the original creditor for an additional 90 days with no response. (I made another call to Mt. ****** on May 10th, 2013 and no claim had been submitted from *****.) The original creditor finally submitted to collections in December of 2013. (When I received notice of collection from The Agency of Credit Control, December 24, 2013, I once again contacted *************** and delivered a copy of the collection's letter. The individual I talked with on the phone said that she would be contacting *************** regarding this matter. She was out sick and the matter was turned over to another. As I stated in my complaint, the following is a verbaim message left on my voice mail on Jan. 28, 2014. I sent a copy of this to the Agency of Credit Control, along with numerous other supporting documents. Written in a letter to the Agency of Credit Control on January 31, 2014: "At any rate, below is the main text of the message recorded on my voice mail on Jan. 28, 2014 by a ********************** representative. Hopefully this should be the end of the matter (at least with the Agency of Credit Control, Inc.) as I assume I will be receiving a bill FROM ************* ********** for the $55.79. I can only hope.... (the following was quoted from a voice mail message, Tues., Jan.28, 2014, from one of the personnel at ********************** insurance provider for *********, *************** Power. She was the original individual whom I worked with regarding this matter but when she became ill and was away from the office, an associate was called in to continue the task)) "...someone else has handled this and gotten some information. We were able to get a claim from the provider, who I understand, was VERY, very rude to the person that called. They are not a contracted provider, of course, ************* **********, and you are going to owe some money. We will be issuing them a check. But you are going to owe $55.79. I just wanted to let you know that you are going to owe $55.79. I would definitely call the collection agency and let them know that we are paying the provider. We do not pay the fees for the collection agency. They should not be even billing you fees because the PROVIDER NEVER BILLED YOUR INSURANCE. They admitted they never billed the insurance. So I would definitely give the collection agency a call and tell them know that all you are responsible for is $55.79. Hopefully that will take of it...."") We have attempted to contact Ms. ******** numerous times to resolve the issue personaly, however she has yet to return any of our calls. (I have not received any noticeable phone calls or messages from the Agency of Credit Control. When I am home, I do not answer my phone unless the caller id is displayed, or there is a message left.) However we did receive her written dispute and properly validated the account with documentation from the orginal creditor. (The information you used to "validate the account" was paperwork submitted to ***** and you, showing the EOB that states patient responsibility is $0.00. That hardly suffices as validation.) Additionally, an investigation was performed to review the details of the account and confirm the validity of the debt with the original creditor. (I have questioned the validity of your investigation, especially based on the paperwork -my paperwork--that validates only that my husband submitted communications between ************* ********** and us to our insurance carrier. Where is your proof/paperwork of validity?) Moreover, given Ms. ********'s own admission, that she acknowledges the account, the validity of the debt was never in question. (I have always acknowledged the account. I did not acknowledge the validity of the debt. MY debt, or part of the whole, was never communicated to me by ************* **********. MY debt would be that amount payable after my insurance carrier was billed. THEY NEVER WERE!) It is and always has been a question of the amount owed. (Agreed. Amount rightfully owed and billed, following submission to the authorized insurance carrier.) Our investigation included a conversation with our client who advised they have not received any payments from either Ms. ******** nor her insurance company. The original creditor confirms that no agreement to settle the account for an additional $55.79 was ever made. (Basically, what you are saying here, even though I have a voice recording from my insurance carrier to the contrary -as noted above--is that my insurance carrier never talked with ************* ********** in January of 2014 following the questionable involvement of the Agency of Credit Control and that no agreement was reached (once a valid claim was finally made by ************* ********** during that communication) and an amount of $58.33 was not agreed upon for the insurance carrier to pay and that the payment of $55.79 would not be paid by me -once I received a bill from ************* **********?) While there appears to be a pending insurance payment according to Ms. ******** of $58.33 and Ms. ******** herself is acknowledging an amount due, it is clear that the Agency of Credit Control, Inc. has worked diligently to resolve the issues on a just and valid debt. (The above rebuttal refutes the issues of your just and valid debt claim...) That notwithstanding, given the issues with Ms. ********'s insurance carrier and her admission of owing at least $55.79, Agency of Credit Control, Inc. has cancelled the account back to the original creditor to resolve the issues directly with Ms. ******** and her insurance carrier. (I have not received a BILL from ************* ********** for the $55.79 -the amount arrived at between communications between ************* ********** and my insurance carrier. If, however, as has been stated previously by the Agency of Credit Control, there was no communication, then I still do not have an accurate amount owed and therefore no amount to be collected from me by your agency.) ******************************************************* 4/25/14 I would like from the Agency of Credit Control, an admission that the claim made by the original creditor was unsubstiated and therefore not valid. Nothing regarding this unfortunate situation should be reflected on my credit record. Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2014/04/30) */ I'm pleased to report that after investigating the claim with the original creditor, they confirmed that the account has been paid in full and the matter is closed. Nothing has been reported to the credit bureaus. Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2014/05/17) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) There should be NO ACCOUNT on file as there was no valid account to be filed! As for the "original creditor", I have still not received ANYTHING in writing as to the corrected/valid claim amount, including any notification or acknowledgment of my insurance carrier's payment. This matter should not be swept under the rug. It is NOT okay for this company or the "original creditor" do do business this way.


Customer Review(s)

The customer review(s) below are un-filtered. These positive and negative reviews are not used in the calculation of the BBB Rating. If you wish to file a complaint and request a resolution to your issue please click here. This customer review section is not BBBs complaint resolution system. Customer Reviews are the subjective opinion of the individual who posted the review and not of Better Business Bureau. A customer review is not posted on a business if a BBB complaint on the same issue(s) is also filed. BBB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any customer review and is not responsible for the content of any customer review. Public comments are not customer reviews.

Customer Reviews Summary

0 Customer Reviews on Agency of Credit Control
Positive Experience (0 reviews)
Neutral Experience (0 reviews)
Negative Experience (0 reviews)