Unlawful Debt Collection Investigations, Credit One, Discover, Barclays, Synchrony & More What Consumers Need to Know 2026
Nine major credit card issuers — including Credit One, Discover, Barclays, Synchrony, Merrick Bank, American Express, Credit First (CFNA), First Premier Bank, and Landmark National Bank — face active investigations into alleged unlawful debt collection calling practices. According to a law firm investigation published February 25, 2026, consumers in 10 states report receiving calls from these companies that may violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and state consumer protection laws.
Most significantly, Credit One Bank agreed to pay $10.2 million in February 2026 to settle a civil lawsuit brought by a statewide team of California district attorneys alleging unlawful debt collection activity. Affected consumers in several states may have legal rights and, in some cases, potential compensation.
Quick Facts
- Companies under investigation: Credit One Bank, Discover, Barclays, Synchrony, Merrick Bank, American Express, Credit First (CFNA), First Premier Bank, and Landmark National Bank
- Allegations: Excessive, harassing, or wrong-number debt collection calls allegedly violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and state consumer protection laws
- Investigation status (8 companies): Active pre-litigation investigation as of February 25, 2026 — no lawsuit filed yet
- Credit One status: $10.2 million settlement entered February 19, 2026 in Riverside County Superior Court (California consumers); separate federal class action pending (filed August 2025)
- Who may be affected: Consumers in California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas who received excessive or unwanted debt collection calls from any of these nine institutions
- Claim deadline: No open claim period for the nine-company investigation yet; the Credit One California settlement paid civil penalties to the state — not individual consumers
- Official resources: CFPB complaint portal, FTC ReportFraud.ftc.gov, California DA offices (for Credit One settlement information)
Current Status & What Happens Next
The Nine-Company Investigation (Pre-Litigation)
A legal investigation is currently underway — no lawsuit has been filed yet and no settlement amounts exist. This is a pre-litigation investigation in which attorneys are collecting information from consumers to evaluate whether a viable lawsuit can be filed. Consumers in the 10 states listed below who have experienced excessive, harassing, or wrong-number calls from any of the nine named companies may be contacted by attorneys as the investigation develops.
If a lawsuit is filed and a class is certified, affected consumers would typically receive notice by mail or email and have an opportunity to file a claim. At this stage, the most important step is to document any alleged violations and, if desired, contact attorneys leading the investigation.
Credit One Bank — $10.2 Million Settlement (Final)
The judgment against Credit One was entered on February 19, 2026, in Riverside County Superior Court and signed by Judge Harold Hopp. The court ordered Credit One and its agents to implement policies and procedures to prevent unreasonable and harassing debt collection calls to California consumers.
Important note for consumers: This settlement paid $9 million in civil penalties to California district attorneys’ offices and $1.2 million in investigative costs. It was a state enforcement action — not a consumer class action settlement. Individual consumers do not file claims for payment under this judgment. A separate federal class action (Mingura v. Credit One Bank N.A.) filed in August 2025 remains pending in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
What the Investigations Allege
The core allegations across these investigations center on debt collection calling practices. The investigation focuses on whether these companies made excessive or harassing calls, calls that continued after consumers asked them to stop, and calls to wrong numbers — conduct that may violate the FDCPA and state consumer protection laws.
For Credit One specifically, the lawsuit alleged that Credit One had a policy allowing its vendors to make up to eight calls per day, plus an additional two calls per day under certain circumstances, to consumers with overdue accounts. The complaint also alleges that Credit One persisted in calling consumers after they stated they no longer wished to receive calls, and continued calling wrong numbers.
A separate class action filed in federal court in August 2025 against Credit One illustrates the personal impact. Plaintiff Rebeca Mingura alleges she received more than 578 calls from Credit One between April and July 2025, even after she informed the bank she was a disabled senior citizen experiencing financial and medical difficulties, and after her attorney sent a formal cease-and-desist letter in July 2025.
The investigations also implicate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which separately prohibits companies from using automated dialing systems to call consumers without their consent, and from continuing calls after consent is revoked.
Who Could Be Affected
Nine-Company Investigation
The current investigation focuses on consumers in these 10 states: California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas. You may qualify to participate if you:
- Have or had a credit card account with any of the nine named companies
- Received calls you believe were excessive or harassing in connection with a debt
- Continued to receive calls after asking the company to stop
- Received wrong-number calls from one of these companies regarding someone else’s debt
Because no lawsuit has been filed, there are currently no formal eligibility criteria or claim submission deadlines. Geographic scope, time periods, and eligibility definitions will be established if and when litigation proceeds.
Credit One California Settlement
The California judgment resolved a state enforcement action. It does not provide a fund for individual consumer claims. Affected California consumers who experienced similar calling practices may still have individual rights under the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or the TCPA, and should consult with a consumer protection attorney.
The Debt Collection Violations & What They Mean
The FDCPA, passed by Congress in 1977, prohibits debt collectors from using abusive, unfair, or deceptive practices to collect debts. Prohibited conduct includes calling at unreasonable hours (before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. in the consumer’s time zone), contacting consumers after a written cease-and-desist request, making repeated calls intended to harass or annoy, and using false or misleading statements.
An important legal distinction: The FDCPA technically applies to third-party debt collectors — not original creditors. However, many states have enacted broader laws that cover original creditors, including credit card issuers. California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, for example, covers original creditors and was central to the Credit One Bank enforcement action. Other states in the investigation also have consumer protection laws that may provide additional rights beyond the federal FDCPA.
The TCPA prohibits the use of automated dialing systems or prerecorded messages to call consumers’ mobile phones without prior express written consent. Once a consumer revokes consent, calls must stop. Violations carry statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 per call.
These allegations, where proven, could entitle individual consumers to actual damages, statutory damages, and attorneys’ fees. None of the current investigations against the eight companies beyond Credit One have resulted in proven violations — the allegations remain under investigation, and no court has made findings against those companies in these proceedings.
Settlement Details
Credit One Bank — California State Enforcement Settlement
- Settlement amount: $10.2 million total
- Civil penalties: $9 million (paid to California district attorneys’ offices)
- Investigative costs: $1.2 million
- Court: Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. CVRI2101654
- Judgment date: February 19, 2026
- Individual consumer claims: None — this was a state enforcement action, not a class action settlement
- Injunctive relief: Credit One was required to implement policies and procedures to prevent unreasonable and harassing debt collection calls to California consumers, including compliance with state and federal law concerning consumer debt collection calls.
- Administrator: N/A (state enforcement action)
Mingura v. Credit One Bank N.A. (Federal Class Action)
- Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
- Filed: August 8, 2025
- Status: Pending — no settlement reached as of publication
- Allegations: TCPA, Rosenthal FDCPA, California Unfair Competition Law violations
- Consumer claim period: Not yet established
Nine-Company Pre-Litigation Investigation
- Status: Investigation only — no lawsuit filed, no settlement, no claim period
- Next step: Attorneys evaluating consumer reports to determine whether to file suit
Prior Related Cases & Context
The Credit One settlement is part of a pattern of enforcement by California’s Debt Collection Task Force, a statewide team composed of the Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, and Santa Clara county district attorney’s offices. This is the fourth court-approved settlement announced by the task force, following multi-million-dollar judgments against Capital One (2022), Synchrony (2021), and Allied Interstate (2018).
The Synchrony Bank settlement, reached in November 2021, required the bank to pay $3.5 million after the lawsuit alleged the company made unreasonably frequent or harassing phone calls to debtors in California beginning in 2014, including continuing calls after consumers stated they no longer wished to receive them.
Nationally, TCPA class actions involving debt collection calls have produced some of the largest consumer settlements in history. One notable example involved Capital One, which settled a TCPA class action for $75.5 million, with payments distributed to a large nationwide class of consumers who received unauthorized automated calls to their mobile phones.
The broader pattern reflects both consumer frustration with aggressive debt collection calling practices and increasing legal risk for financial institutions that use automated or high-volume call systems without rigorous consent management.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are these debt collection investigations about?
Nine major credit card companies — Credit One, Discover, Barclays, Synchrony, Merrick Bank, American Express, Credit First (CFNA), First Premier Bank, and Landmark National Bank — are being investigated for allegedly making excessive, harassing, or wrong-number debt collection calls to consumers. The investigation is pre-litigation as of February 2026.
What debt collection violations are alleged?
The investigations allege violations of the FDCPA and state consumer protection laws, including making excessive calls, continuing calls after consumers asked them to stop, calling wrong numbers, and using automated dialing systems without consumer consent in possible violation of the TCPA.
Is this a class action lawsuit?
The nine-company investigation is not yet a lawsuit. No class action has been filed as of February 2026. The Credit One California matter was a state civil enforcement action, not a class action. A separate federal class action against Credit One was filed in August 2025 and remains pending.
Who may be eligible to participate?
Consumers in California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas who received excessive, harassing, or wrong-number debt collection calls from any of the nine named companies. Final eligibility will depend on whether a lawsuit is filed and a class is certified.
How do I report alleged debt collection violations now?
File a complaint with the CFPB at consumerfinance.gov/complaint or the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. You can also contact a consumer protection attorney. Document all calls with date, time, and phone number.
Can I sue a debt collector individually, without a class action?
Yes. Under the FDCPA and TCPA, individual consumers may sue for violations and recover actual damages, statutory damages (up to $1,000 under the FDCPA; $500–$1,500 per TCPA violation), and attorneys’ fees. Many consumer attorneys take these cases on contingency at no upfront cost to you.
Where can I find official information?
The Riverside County DA announcement is at rivcoda.org/credit_one_bank_california_settlement. The CFPB is at consumerfinance.gov. The FTC is at ftc.gov. If a class action settlement is reached in the ongoing investigation, a settlement administrator website will be established and notice will be sent to class members.
What should I do right now if I am receiving harassing calls?
Document every call: write down the date, time, phone number, and what was said. Send a written cease-and-desist letter by certified mail demanding contact stop. Contact the CFPB or FTC. Consult a consumer protection attorney — many offer free consultations. Your rights exist today, regardless of whether any class action proceeds.
Additional Context: Your FDCPA & TCPA Rights Today
Even if the ongoing nine-company investigation never results in a lawsuit, consumers have individual rights under federal and state law right now. The FDCPA allows debt collectors to be sued for harassment, false statements, and calling at improper hours. The TCPA allows consumers to sue for unauthorized automated or prerecorded calls to mobile phones.
If you have experienced any of the following, you may have an individual legal claim worth consulting a consumer protection attorney about:
- Calls before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. in your local time zone
- Continued calls after you sent a written request to stop contact
- Automated or prerecorded calls to your cell phone without your consent
- Calls about someone else’s debt (wrong-number calls)
- Threats, abusive language, or false statements during collection calls
The CFPB’s complaint database is also a public resource that tracks patterns of consumer complaints against financial institutions and shares complaints with companies for response.
Last Updated: February 28, 2026
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a particular situation, consult a qualified attorney.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah