State complaint profile

Debt collection complaints in Minnesota

8,502 CFPB complaints filed against 835 debt collectors active in Minnesota.

Complaints
8,502
Collectors
835
Top collector
Encore Capital Group Inc.

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

Minnesota at a glance

Minnesota consumers have filed 8,502 CFPB debt-collection complaints against 835 collectors.

8,502
CFPB complaints filed
835
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.

Minnesota Debt Collection Laws

Federal FDCPA protections apply. Some states have additional laws, contact the Minnesota Attorney General for state-specific information.

Insights: Debt Collection in Minnesota

Consumers in Minnesota have filed 8,502 CFPB debt collection complaints against 835 different collectors. Complaint volume reflects both the size of the collection industry operating in Minnesota 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 Minnesota is Encore Capital Group Inc., but national-scale buyers and servicers typically dominate complaint volume in every state. For the practical Minnesota-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 17

Sorted by most complaints

The Leviton Law Firm, Ltd.

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

The Sayer Law Group, P.C.

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

The Thomas Agency, Inc.

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Thomas George Associates, Ltd.

D
1 total complaints → stable

TimeMark Solutions, Inc

A
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Todd, Bremer & Lawson, Inc.

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Torres Credit Services, Inc.

C
1 total complaints → stable

Total Customer Service, Inc.

B
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Trademark Management Solutions, LLC.

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Trust Financial LLC

D
1 total complaints → stable

UMB Financial Corporation

B
1 total complaints ↑ rising

United Check Recovery Bureau, Inc.

C
1 total complaints → stable

United Collection Service Inc (Closed)

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

United Compliance Services, LLC

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

United PanAm Financial Corp.

C
1 total complaints ↑ rising

United Revenue Corporation

F
1 total complaints → stable

United Student Aid (USA) Funds

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Universal Fidelity LP

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Vanderheyden LAW Office, P.a.

A
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Valley Collection Service, LLC

C
1 total complaints ↑ rising

Van Ru Credit Corporation

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Vengroff Williams, Inc

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Victor, Inc.

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Vital Solutions, Inc.

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

W.J. Bradley Mortgage Capital

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Western Control Services, Inc.

C
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Weststar Mortgage Corporation

B
1 total complaints ↓ falling

WLCC

C
1 total complaints → stable

Weinstein & Riley, P.S.

B
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Western Management Consultants

C
1 total complaints ↑ rising

Wilson, Riley & Associates

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Zebit, Inc.

F
1 total complaints ↓ falling

Zeller & Associates, LLC

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

ZuntaFi Corp

D
1 total complaints ↓ falling

If a collector is contacting you in Minnesota

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 Minnesota 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.

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 Minnesota 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 Minnesota 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 Minnesota 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 Minnesota 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 Minnesota). 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 Minnesota-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 Minnesota 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 Minnesota'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.