Click Here
Riddle & Associates
Cases Against Riddle & Associates
Gervais v. Riddle & Assoc., P.C.
363 F. Supp. 2d 345 (D.Conn. 2005). Initial debt collection notice contained a settlement offer with a deadline of 30 days. This was a violation because the consumer is entitled to 30 days from receipt of first letter to dispute and request validation. A debt collector can attempt to collect on a debt that is past the statue of limitations if they refrain from threatening a law suit.
Riddle & Assocs., P.C. v. Kelley
2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS15712 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 28, 2001). Debt collection notice was not found to be deceptive or misleading to consumer.
Shapiro v. Riddle & Assocs., P.C.
351 F.3d 63 (2d Cir.2003). Creditor's fee to the consumer for having to hire a collection agency was found to be reasonable. Debt collection notice allowed consumer 30 days to dispute and request validation. This 30 day time period would suspend any law suit or further action.
Share your experience or comments about this company.
Francis & Mailman, P.C. is not responsible for the creation or development of the below comments and does not endorse the views or opinions expressed therein.- NCO Financial Systems
- OSI - Outsourcing Solutions
- Asset Acceptance Corp
- NES - National Enterprise Systems
- LVNV
- Aurora Gold
- Fred Hanna
- Mann Bracken
- Meridian
- Marauder
- Midland
- United Recovery Systems
- Collect America
- Capital Recovery
- C. Barry & Associates
- Consumer Recovery Associates
- CMC Recovery
- Bay Area Credit
- Litigation Consulting Service
- Falzone



I contacted Direct TV (the creditor) and they have no info of me having any past due history on my account.