State complaint profile

Debt collection complaints in District of Columbia

3,271 CFPB complaints filed against 559 debt collectors active in District of Columbia.

Complaints
3,271
Collectors
559
Per 100k
482

This data comes from the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database and reflects consumer complaints, not proven violations.

District of Columbia Debt Collection Laws

Federal FDCPA protections apply. Some states have additional laws — contact the District of Columbia Attorney General for state-specific information.

Insights: Debt Collection in District of Columbia

Consumers in District of Columbia have filed 3,271 CFPB debt collection complaints against 559 different collectors — a rate of 481.8 complaints per 100,000 residents. Complaint volume reflects both the size of the collection industry operating in District of Columbia and the willingness of residents to escalate disputes through the federal regulatory process rather than handle them privately with the collector.

Higher per-capita complaint counts in some states correlate with a combination of stronger state-level consumer-protection statutes (which often add private rights of action on top of the federal FDCPA), more active state attorneys general, and more public outreach from the CFPB itself — not necessarily worse collector behavior. The pattern can also reflect debt-buyer concentration: states where large secondary-market buyers route accounts tend to generate elevated complaint flow regardless of the underlying account's origin.

The most-complained-about collector active in District of Columbia is TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC., but national-scale buyers and servicers typically dominate complaint volume in every state. For the practical District of Columbia-specific protections that go beyond the federal FDCPA — licensing requirements, statute-of-limitations rules, and exempt-property thresholds — see the state rights note above and our FDCPA rights guide.

Active Debt Collectors — Page 9

Sorted by most complaints

Paradigm Assets, LLC

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

High Point Asset Inc

F
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Freedom Mortgage Company

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Seterus, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

NCSPLUS INCORPORATED

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

American Recovery Service Incorporated

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Global Recovery Group

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Peter Roberts & Associates, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Texas Guaranteed

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Larry H. Miller Group of Companies

B
3 total complaints 2 last 12mo ↑ rising

Ascendium Education Group

D
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Selene Holdings LLC

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Clear Debt Solutions, LLC

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Weinberg Mediation Group LLC

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Concord Resolution Inc (Closed)

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Denefits LLC

F
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

The J. G. Wentworth Company

D
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

JNR Adjustment Company, Inc

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Action Collection Service

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Trojan Professional Services, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Orion Capital Solutions LLC

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

JP RECOVERY SERVICES, INC.

C
10 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Scheer, Green & Burke L.P.A.

D
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Servicing Solutions, LLC

D
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

Rauch-Milliken International, Inc.

D
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Professional Claims Bureau, Inc.

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Tri-State Adjustments, Inc.

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Bronstein & Weiss Arbitration

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

NAM National Arbitration and Mediation

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Miller, Stark, Klein and Associates

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Rocket Mortgage, LLC

C
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

SRA Associates, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

CONRAD CREDIT CORPORATION

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Universal Fidelity LP

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Stephens and Michaels Associates, Inc.

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Computer Credit, Inc.

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Brennan & Clark, Ltd., LLC

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Bepensa Capital, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

BWW Law Group, LLC

C
9 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Omnipoint Capital

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

CIT BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo → stable

Abrahamsen Gindin LLC

D
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

Climb Credit Inc.

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Agency of Credit Control

D
1 total complaints 1 last 12mo ↑ rising

FCI Lender Services Inc.

D
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

The Affiliated Group, Inc

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

United Check Recovery Bureau, Inc.

C
2 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Premier Portfolio Group

F
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Law Offices of Robert A. Schuerger Co., LPA

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↑ rising

Rickart Collection Systems, Inc.

C
1 total complaints 0 last 12mo ↓ falling

Related

Data sourced from the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainCollector Editorial

About These Collectors

Every collector listed for District of Columbia appears here because at least one consumer from this state filed a complaint with the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) naming that company. The page is a per-state slice of the federal Consumer Complaint Database. Most entries are credit-reporting agencies (Equifax, TransUnion, Experian) and large national debt-buyers (Encore Capital, Portfolio Recovery, Resurgent Capital). Smaller regional collectors appear only when complaint volume from District of Columbia residents passes the dataset's inclusion threshold.

What the Grade Means

Each company's letter grade combines four signals: total CFPB complaint volume normalized against fleet medians (size-adjusted), timely-response rate (the share of complaints answered within the federal 15-day window), monetary-or-non-monetary relief rate (the share of complaints resolved with corrective action versus closed with explanation only), and consumer-narrative tone (a sentiment signal extracted from the redacted public complaint text). The composite is bucketed A through F; the lowest 10% of scores fleet-wide land in F. Click any company to see the breakdown.

Filing a Complaint as a District of Columbia Resident

If you believe a collector named on this page has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) or otherwise mishandled your account, you have three parallel channels. First, the CFPB at consumerfinance.gov/complaint — the federal channel that powers this dataset. Second, the District of Columbia attorney general's consumer protection division, which enforces state-level debt-collection statutes. Third, the state banking-and-finance regulator (which may license debt collectors operating in District of Columbia). The three channels serve different purposes and can be pursued in parallel; we recommend the CFPB first because it produces a public record and a required company response within 15 days.

Methodology Note

State-of-residence in the CFPB record is the consumer's address at the time of complaint, not the collector's address. National collectors operate from a small number of corporate centers (typically Texas, Arizona, Florida, California) but appear on every state's per-state page when consumers from that state file. The state ranking and the per-state collector counts therefore reflect consumer experience, not corporate footprint. For collector headquarters and licensing detail, see the individual collector detail page.

Reading This Page Alongside the National View

Every collector listed here also appears on the national rankings page and on the recent-12-month leaderboard. The state-page slice gives you the District of Columbia-specific complaint volume and per-state collector mix; the national pages give you the full nationwide context for understanding whether a collector's behavior in District of Columbia reflects a structural pattern or a localized issue. We recommend reading both before deciding whether to file a complaint or pursue state-channel remedies — a collector with high state volume but low national volume points toward a regional portfolio acquisition or enforcement gap, while a collector with high state AND national volume points toward a structural compliance issue.

What the Per-Capita Rate Means

The complaints-per-100,000-residents rate normalizes absolute complaint volume against District of Columbia's population, which makes cross-state comparison meaningful. Populous states naturally generate higher absolute complaint counts, but per-capita rate surfaces states where consumers are disproportionately likely to file federal complaints. A high per-capita rate typically reflects some combination of (a) higher uninsured-rate medical-debt activity, (b) weaker state-level debt-collection licensing enforcement, (c) longer statute-of-limitations periods on consumer debt, or (d) active consumer-advocacy infrastructure that directs residents toward the federal complaint channel. None of these factors implies misconduct by any specific collector — they shape the volume at which consumers in a state are willing and able to file complaints with the federal government.