State complaint profile

Debt collection complaints in Michigan

26,445 CFPB complaints filed against 1,317 debt collectors active in Michigan.

Complaints
26,445
Collectors
1,317
Top collector
Encore Capital Group Inc.

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

Michigan at a glance

Michigan consumers have filed 26,445 CFPB debt-collection complaints against 1,317 collectors.

26,445
CFPB complaints filed
1,317
collectors active here
#1
most-complained: Encore Capital Group Inc.

State-of-residence is the consumer's address at filing, not the collector's. A complaint is a consumer filing, not a proven violation.

Insights: Debt Collection in Michigan

Consumers in Michigan have filed 26,445 CFPB debt collection complaints against 1,317 different collectors. Complaint volume reflects both the size of the collection industry operating in Michigan and the willingness of residents to escalate disputes through the federal regulatory process rather than handle them privately with the collector.

A per-capita complaint rate is a filing rate, not a measure of misconduct or of a state's legal protections. It can be affected by population estimates, awareness of the CFPB complaint channel, the mix of creditors and collectors, and other factors that this dataset does not measure.

The collector with the most complaints from Michigan residents in this dataset is Encore Capital Group Inc.. Use the record as one input when researching a company; it does not establish a legal violation or answer a state-law question.

Active Debt Collectors - Page 13

Sorted by most complaints

Independence Capital Recovery, LLC

D
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Kratochvil Law, P.C.

B
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Leading Edge Recovery Solutions, LLC

C
3 total complaints ↓ falling

M.A.R.S., Inc.

D
3 total complaints → stable

Med-1 Solutions, LLC

F
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Medical Financial Services, Inc.

C
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Merchants and Professional Bureau, Inc.

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Mercury Financial Intermediate LLC

D
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Michigan Legal Specialists, P.C.

A
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Modern Adjustment Bureau

D
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Mountain Run Solutions, LLC

F
3 total complaints ↓ falling

N.A.R., Inc.

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

National Capital Solutions

F
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Nationwide Credit & Collection, Inc.

D
3 total complaints → stable

Nationwide Recovery Systems, Ltd

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Northeast Collection Bureau

F
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Northwestern Mediation Services

F
3 total complaints → stable

Professional Business Bureau Inc

B
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Paramount GR Holdings, LLC

F
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Patient Accounting Service Center

D
3 total complaints → stable

Professional Recovery Management

F
3 total complaints ↑ rising

RJM Acquisition LLC

C
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Rauch-Milliken International, Inc.

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Receivables Outsourcing, Inc.

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Recovery Management Solutions LLC

F
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Revenue Recovery Corporation

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Roadrunner Account Services, LLC

D
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Security Credit Systems Inc

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Scott Fetzer Financial Group Inc.

C
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Second Alliance, Inc.

C
3 total complaints ↑ rising

State Collection Service, Inc.

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

States Recovery Systems, Inc.

D
3 total complaints → stable

TNT Financial, Inc.

C
3 total complaints → stable

Thaxton Investment Corporation

D
3 total complaints ↑ rising

Unified Global Group

B
3 total complaints ↓ falling

United Recovery Group, LLC (Closed)

C
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Uplift, Inc

D
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Virtuoso Sourcing Group, LLC.

F
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Veldos, LLC

B
3 total complaints ↓ falling

Viking Client Services

D
3 total complaints → stable

Worldwide Processing Group, LLC

F
3 total complaints ↓ falling

A & O Recovery Solutions, LLC

F
2 total complaints ↑ rising

A.R.M. Solutions, Inc.

C
2 total complaints ↓ falling

AA Recovery Solutions, Inc.

F
2 total complaints ↓ falling

Access Group Inc.

B
2 total complaints ↓ falling

Alchro Inc.

F
2 total complaints → stable

Alliant Credit Union

D
2 total complaints ↑ rising

Aaron Worldwide Collections Inc.

B
2 total complaints ↓ falling

Action Financial Services, LLC

C
2 total complaints ↓ falling

Adler Wallach & Associates, Inc.

D
2 total complaints ↓ falling

If a collector is contacting you in Michigan

Start with the federal complaint record, then verify any state-law question with an official source.

  • Check the collector's national record and grade before you respond or pay. Browse rankings
  • Demand written debt validation within 30 days of first contact. Validation letter
  • Use the CFPB complaint process and check official Michigan resources for state-specific options. Your rights

Per-capita rate reflects consumer filings, not collector misconduct or a legal conclusion. This is not legal advice.

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

According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Consumer Complaint Database, more than 1,139,000 debt collection complaints have been logged nationwide as of July 2026. See our methodology for how PlainCollector computes each company's reputation grade from this data.

About These Collectors

Every collector listed for Michigan 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 Michigan 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 company activity (size-adjusted), timely-response rate (the share of complaints answered within the federal 15-day window), consumer-dispute rate (the share of company responses consumers flagged as inadequate), and complaint trend (whether recent volume is rising, stable, or falling). The composite is bucketed A through F on a curve, each grade holds roughly a fifth of the 5,283 graded collectors, so an F reflects the weakest ~20% relative to peers, not an absolute threshold. Click any company to see the breakdown.

Filing a Complaint as a Michigan 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 Michigan 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 Michigan). 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 Michigan-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 Michigan 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 Michigan'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.

Every figure on PlainCollector is rendered directly from federal source data, no number is typed in by an editor. This page draws directly on federal source data, no figure is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error.