Total complaints
1
Filed since Mazi
1 consumer complaints recorded in the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database, with breakdowns by product, state, and complaint year.
1 consumer complaints filed with the CFPB
This profile shows the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt's complaint history from CFPB public records. 1 consumers have filed complaints since Mazi. The company has a 0% timely response rate and has provided relief in 0% of cases.
Total complaints
1
Filed since Mazi
Timely response
0%
CFPB-tracked response window
Relief rate
0%
Closed with monetary or non-monetary relief
CFPB benchmark: response within 15 calendar days of filing.
Share closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.
How the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt's 1 complaints split across CFPB product categories. Resolution rate badge = % closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.
| Product | Complaints |
|---|---|
| pro se | 1 |
| State | Complaints |
|---|---|
| we reverse the circuit court 's decision.,,Resurgent Capital Services L.P.,MO,63136,,Consent provided,Web,2025-07-02,Closed with explanation,Yes,N/A,14423729 | 1 |
| Issue | Complaints |
|---|---|
| XXXX ( XXXX ) in a debt-collection action. The circuit court granted judgment to PRA in the amount of {$8900.00}. On appeal | 1 |
Source: CFPB Consumer Complaint Database CFPB Consumer Complaint Database
the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt has accumulated 1 consumer complaint in the CFPB public database, with filings active across 1 U.S. state. Of those submissions, 1 includes 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 Mazi, and the most recent logged activity is Mazie Gree, giving this record a multi-year window of observable consumer sentiment.
Looking at response behavior, the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt 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 "pro se", and the single most common underlying issue is "XXXX ( XXXX ) in a debt-collection action. The circuit court granted judgment to PRA in the amount of {$8900.00}. On appeal".
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 the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt: 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.
Learn more about your rights and how to interpret complaint data.
Explore additional financial data about companies, lenders, and institutions on our partner portals.
Disclaimer: This data is from CFPB public records. PlainComplaint does not provide financial advice. A complaint does not indicate that a company has violated any law or regulation. Complaint volumes are influenced by company size, customer base, and market presence. Use this data as one of many inputs when evaluating a company.
the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt has received 1 consumer complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt has a 0% timely response rate to CFPB complaints.
The most common issue reported against the General District Court of Alleghany County violated the Fourteenth Amendment and FDCPA by issuing a recognizance on PRA 's behalf. Finding that PRA failed to prove it owned Green 's debt is "XXXX ( XXXX ) in a debt-collection action. The circuit court granted judgment to PRA in the amount of {$8900.00}. On appeal" in the "pro se" product category.
Read our methodology — how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.