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.
Michigan Debt Collection Laws
Federal FDCPA protections apply. Some states have additional laws, contact the Michigan Attorney General for state-specific information.
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.
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 Michigan is Encore Capital Group Inc., but national-scale buyers and servicers typically dominate complaint volume in every state. For the practical Michigan-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 24
Sorted by most complaintsNational Budget Planners of South Florida, Inc
ANational Business Factors
CNational Consumer Telecom & Utilities Exchange, Inc.
CNational Debt Holdings, LLC
DNational Recovery Solutions, LLC
CNations Recovery Center
DNationwide Financial Group
DNationwide Intermediary Services llc
CNelson, Watson & Associates, LLC
DNew Century Auto Sales, Inc.
BNexum Group Inc
DNiagara Capital Recovery LLC
FNiagara Central Revenue
DNiagara Portfolio Solutions LLC
CNiagara Restitution Service Inc
CNortheast Recovery Solutions, LLC
FNorthern Credit Bureau
COLD National Bancorp
AOUT Tech, Inc.
COakridge Direct Solutions Inc.
FOklahoma Student Loan Authority
COliver Adjustment Company of Kenosha & Racine, Inc
BOmnipoint Capital
FOptimum Outcomes, Inc.
FOrion Portfolio Services, LLC
CPerdue Brandon Fielder Collins & Mott LLP
FPHH Mortgage Services Corporation
CPike Creek Mortgage Services
FPinnacle Financial Partners, Inc.
DPlanet Home Lending, LLC
CPreferred Credit Inc
CPropel Financial Services LLC
FPalmar, Inc.
FPartners for Payment Relief
CPatientFi, Inc.
DPatrick K Willis Company Inc
CPendleton Capital Management
FPerformance Settlement, LLC
FPerpay, Inc.
DPioneer Capital Solutions Inc
DPittenger Law Group, LLC.
DPorania, LLC
FPraxis Financial Solutions, Incorporated
CPremier Portfolio Group
FPrime Recovery LLC
DPriority Recovery Law PLC
AProfessional Credit Analysts of MN, Inc.
BProfessional Placement Services, LLC
CProperty Collection Lawyers, LLC
AProperty Receivables, Corp
FIf a collector is contacting you in Michigan
Federal FDCPA rights apply everywhere; some state protections go further.
- 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
- File with the CFPB, your Michigan attorney general, or the state finance regulator, the three channels run in parallel. Your rights
Per-capita rate reflects where consumers file, not collector misconduct. Not legal advice, for your situation, consult a licensed attorney.
Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.
Related
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.
| Publisher | PlainCollector |
| Sources | the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database |