State complaint profile

Debt collection complaints in Texas

172,149 CFPB complaints filed against 2,473 debt collectors active in Texas.

Complaints
172,149
Collectors
2,473
Top collector
Equifax, Inc.

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

Texas at a glance

Texas consumers have filed 172,149 CFPB debt-collection complaints against 2,473 collectors.

172,149
CFPB complaints filed
2,473
collectors active here
#1
most-complained: Equifax, 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.

Texas Debt Collection Laws

Texas Finance Code Chapter 392 mirrors federal FDCPA protections and applies to both debt collectors and original creditors.

State Mini-FDCPA

Contact your state attorney general for current enforcement information.

Insights: Debt Collection in Texas

Consumers in Texas have filed 172,149 CFPB debt collection complaints against 2,473 different collectors. Complaint volume reflects both the size of the collection industry operating in Texas 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 Texas is Equifax, Inc., but national-scale buyers and servicers typically dominate complaint volume in every state. For the practical Texas-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 7

Sorted by most complaints

Valor Intelligent Processing, LLC

F
54 total complaints ↑ rising

Focus Holding Company

D
53 total complaints ↓ falling

Mr. Cooper Group Inc.

F
53 total complaints ↓ falling

Onemain Financial Holdings, LLC.

D
53 total complaints ↓ falling

Oliphant United, Inc.

F
53 total complaints ↑ rising

Adler Wallach & Associates, Inc.

D
51 total complaints ↓ falling

Credit Card Acquisitions Group

F
51 total complaints ↑ rising

Ford Motor Credit Co.

D
51 total complaints → stable

Rozlin Financial Group, Inc.

D
51 total complaints ↑ rising

Bbva Financial Corporation

C
50 total complaints ↓ falling

Professional Recovery Management

F
50 total complaints ↑ rising

Shepherd Outsourcing, LLC

F
50 total complaints ↑ rising

Investment Retrievers, Inc.

D
49 total complaints → stable

LTD Financial Services, L.P.

D
49 total complaints ↓ falling

Choice Recovery, Inc.

D
48 total complaints ↓ falling

Direct Recovery Services, LLC

F
48 total complaints ↓ falling

First National Bank of Omaha

D
48 total complaints → stable

Financial Business and Consumer Solutions.

D
48 total complaints ↓ falling

Receivable Management Group, Inc. (GA)

C
48 total complaints ↓ falling

CNG Holdings Inc

C
47 total complaints ↓ falling

Ditech Financial LLC

D
47 total complaints ↓ falling

Kingston Data & Credit International Inc.

F
47 total complaints ↑ rising

Platinum Holdings Group, LLC

F
47 total complaints ↓ falling

Revco Management, LLC

F
47 total complaints ↑ rising

2288984 Ontario Inc.

C
46 total complaints ↑ rising

Atlantic Recovery Solutions LLC

D
46 total complaints → stable

Citizens Financial Group, Inc.

C
46 total complaints → stable

Ezcorp, Inc.

D
46 total complaints ↓ falling

Ava Finance, Inc

F
45 total complaints ↑ rising

Credit Service Company

F
45 total complaints ↑ rising

International Computer Systems, Inc.

D
45 total complaints → stable

Modern Adjustment Bureau

D
45 total complaints ↑ rising

Accelerated Financial Solutions, LLC

D
44 total complaints ↓ falling

Atlas Credit Company, Inc.

D
44 total complaints ↓ falling

Grant & Weber

D
44 total complaints ↓ falling

Capital Management Services, LP

D
43 total complaints ↓ falling

Klarna AB

F
43 total complaints ↑ rising

SinglePoint GI

F
43 total complaints ↑ rising

Tower Loan of Mississippi, Inc.

D
43 total complaints → stable

Avant Holding Company, Inc.

F
42 total complaints ↑ rising

Grant Mercantile Agency

D
42 total complaints ↓ falling

Lendmark Financial Services

D
42 total complaints ↑ rising

M.A.R.S., Inc.

D
42 total complaints → stable

Regions Financial Corporation

D
42 total complaints ↑ rising

Webcollex, LLC

D
42 total complaints ↓ falling

Mountain Run Solutions, LLC

F
41 total complaints ↓ falling

Perfection Collection

D
41 total complaints ↓ falling

Torriere Holdings INC

D
41 total complaints ↑ rising

USCB Corporation

D
41 total complaints ↑ rising

Collection Bureau of the Hudson Valley, Inc.

D
40 total complaints ↓ falling

If a collector is contacting you in Texas

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 Texas 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 Texas 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 Texas 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 Texas 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 Texas 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 Texas). 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 Texas-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 Texas 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 Texas'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.