Security Credit Services. Security never contacted me after I asked XXXX to validate within 30 days. Neither company validated or contacted me per FDCPA. Security Credit Services has put derogatory marks on all three of my credit reports even after and XXXX failed to validate. After Security hit all of my credit reports I asked them to validate. I got no response. This is reporting illegally.

What the CFPB Record Shows About Security Credit Services. Security never contacted me after I asked XXXX to validate within 30 days. Neither company validated or contacted me per FDCPA. Security Credit Services has put derogatory marks on all three of my credit reports even after and XXXX failed to validate. After Security hit all of my credit reports I asked them to validate. I got no response. This is reporting illegally.

Security Credit Services. Security never contacted me after I asked XXXX to validate within 30 days. Neither company validated or contacted me per FDCPA. Security Credit Services has put derogatory marks on all three of my credit reports even after and XXXX failed to validate. After Security hit all of my credit reports I asked them to validate. I got no response. This is reporting illegally. has accumulated 1 consumer complaint in the CFPB public database, with filings active across 0 U.S. states. Of those submissions, 0 include a consumer narrative — the verbatim description of the reported problem that the CFPB collects alongside each filing. The earliest complaint on file dates back to Befo, and the most recent logged activity is Before and, giving this record a multi-year window of observable consumer sentiment.

Looking at response behavior, Security Credit Services. Security never contacted me after I asked XXXX to validate within 30 days. Neither company validated or contacted me per FDCPA. Security Credit Services has put derogatory marks on all three of my credit reports even after and XXXX failed to validate. After Security hit all of my credit reports I asked them to validate. I got no response. This is reporting illegally. reports a 0% timely-response rate and has closed 0% of cases with a written explanation to the consumer. 0% of complaints were closed with monetary or non-monetary relief — an outcome signal that tracks how often consumers walked away with some form of remediation. A further 0% of responses were formally disputed by the consumer after the company replied, a useful marker of resolution quality independent of sheer volume. The most-reported product category for this record is "my parent 's phone was contacted once a day for months. I have phone records. I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX and asked them to verify whatever the debt was. In that letter", and the single most common underlying issue is "I am going by their soft credit pull as I wouldn't have known about it if I didn't have credit monitoring".

Complaint volume is heavily influenced by company size, customer base, and market footprint — larger financial institutions routinely carry more filings purely because they serve more consumers. A complaint is a consumer-reported allegation, not proven wrongdoing, and a timely or relief-flagged closure does not by itself confirm fault. Use this page as one input among many when evaluating Security Credit Services. Security never contacted me after I asked XXXX to validate within 30 days. Neither company validated or contacted me per FDCPA. Security Credit Services has put derogatory marks on all three of my credit reports even after and XXXX failed to validate. After Security hit all of my credit reports I asked them to validate. I got no response. This is reporting illegally.: cross-check against the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database directly, review your own contract terms, and consult a licensed professional for financial, legal, or regulatory advice. This page is informational only.