Which place’s debt rules apply—and who can help?

SettleADebt S_WI PASS-02

Wisconsin collection-agency/debt-buyer licensing, original-creditor coverage, and state-specific collection conduct

Actual fresh source-access date: October 26, 2026, Pacific time Research mode/model: Regular Chat public-web research using GPT-5.6 Sol Pro, the model actually available in this conversation; no Deep Research, Work, Codex research, Chrome control, API, other Chat, account change, filing, purchase, contact, or private record. Independence: This is an original PASS-02 investigation. No PASS-01 legal finding is adopted as an accepted premise. Component boundary: Collection-agency licensing and classification; Wisconsin Consumer Act registration as necessarily related; and substantive Wisconsin collection conduct. Validation/documentation procedure, account-level proof, reporting procedure, limitations/revival, litigation/service/default/judgments/garnishment, full security/bond claims, sector-specific law, local/tribal law, and full remedies remain open.

Important access limitation

The Wisconsin Legislature’s official integrated pages for Wis. Stat. §218.04, Wis. Stat. §224.35, chs. 421, 426, and 427, and ch. DFI-Bkg 74 repeatedly timed out through the public browsing route. Current statutory and rule wording was therefore read from 2025 Wisconsin reproductions and current rule reproductions, then cross-checked against current Wisconsin DFI pages, current official rule-history/search records, official forms, and official Wisconsin appellate PDFs. The failed official routes are preserved in the source register rather than silently replaced.

Executive disposition

Wisconsin has three separate classification layers that cannot be collapsed into one label:

1. Collection-agency licensure under Wis. Stat. §218.04 principally turns on whether a person is in the business of collecting or receiving payment “for others”. It is not facially limited to personal debts; DFI describes licensed agencies as collecting debts of individuals and companies.
2. Wisconsin Consumer Act registration under Wis. Stat. §426.201 is a distinct filing regime for persons making, soliciting, purchasing under DFI’s stated interpretation, directly collecting payments from, or enforcing rights against customers in Wisconsin consumer-credit transactions.
3. Wisconsin collection conduct under ch. 427 is broader as to actors but narrower as to transactions. It covers original creditors as well as third parties when they collect a qualifying consumer-credit or other consumer transaction—including a primarily agricultural transaction—with an agreement to defer payment. Justia Law+4

The central practical results are:

• An original creditor collecting its own account in its own legal identity ordinarily is not a §218.04 collection agency because it is not collecting “for others.” It may nevertheless be a ch. 427 “debt collector,” and may be subject to WCA registration.
• A third-party contingency agency or servicer collecting for the owner generally falls within §218.04 unless an express exclusion or the nonresident interstate-communications exemption applies.
• A genuine debt buyer collecting accounts it actually owns has a strong textual argument that it is not collecting “for others.” But no controlling Wisconsin appellate decision or current formal DFI interpretation was located establishing a categorical debt-buyer exemption. Wisconsin also expressly reaches a pretended purchase or assignment used to evade §218.04. The current answer is therefore probable textual noncoverage for a genuine owner, not a verified categorical exemption.
• A debt buyer may remain subject to WCA registration and ch. 427 conduct rules even if §218.04 collection-agency licensure does not apply.
• The nonresident exemption is narrow: the person’s collection-agency activity with Wisconsin residents must be conducted solely through interstate telecommunications or interstate mail. DFI says physical collection activity in Wisconsin defeats that route. No current Wisconsin authority was located conclusively classifying app-only, portal-only, email-only, or SMS-only activity for this exemption.
• Wisconsin has no enacted state counterpart to the federal Regulation F “seven calls in seven days” presumptions. Wisconsin’s state rules use a qualitative frequency, unusual-hours, manner, threat, and harassment standard. DFI’s 8:00 a.m.–9:00 p.m. Central guidance is helpful agency guidance, not the text of a Wisconsin bright-line statute or rule.
• Wisconsin’s licensed-agency rules add material requirements beyond ch. 427: a telephone-contact stop rule, a five-day Wisconsin license notice, license identity in collection notices, special third-party callback restrictions, limits on fees and interest, payment-history and receipt obligations, and overpayment rules. Justia Law+4

A. Substantive answers

1. Governing classification architecture

1.1 The three Wisconsin layers

The licensing definition uses the relationship between collector and owner of the debt. Chapter 427 instead asks who is collecting and whether the underlying transaction falls within its consumer/agricultural/deferred-payment scope. Thus, “not a federally defined debt collector” and “not a Wisconsin-licensed collection agency” do not answer whether ch. 427 applies. Justia Law+3

1.2 Section 218.04 definition and exclusions

A §218.04 “collection agency” is any person engaged in collecting or receiving payment for others of any account, bill, or other indebtedness. “Person” includes individuals, partnerships, associations, corporations, and LLCs. A “collector or solicitor” is a person acting on behalf of a licensed collection agency to collect, receive, or solicit accounts for collection. S_WI-P02-C001–C003.

The express exclusions are:

• attorneys authorized to practice in Wisconsin and resident in Wisconsin;
• banks;
• credit unions;
• narrowly defined healthcare billing companies;
• state savings banks;
• state savings and loan associations;
• insurers and their agents;
• trust companies;
• mortgage bankers licensed and operating under subchapter III of ch. 224;
• district attorneys acting under Wis. Stat. §971.41;
• persons contracting with district attorneys under §971.41(5); and
• real-estate brokers and salespersons. Justia Law

Those exclusions are exclusions from the collection-agency definition. They do not, by themselves, establish exemptions from ch. 427, other Wisconsin sector statutes, or federal law.

Healthcare billing company exclusion

The administrative definition is substantially narrower than “medical billing vendor.” The company must be under contract with a healthcare provider; the account must not be in default when forwarded; the company may use only the provider’s name in communications; and payments must go directly to the provider or to a provider-established account. A post-default medical collector using its own identity should not assume the exclusion merely because the debt is medical. S_WI-P02-C018.

1.3 Territorial nexus

A person may not operate as a collection agency “in this state” without a license. A nonresident need not obtain one only when its collection-agency activity with Wisconsin residents is conducted solely by interstate telecommunications or interstate mail. DFI’s current FAQ states that a nonresident entering Wisconsin to solicit accounts or conduct collection activity does not remain within that exemption. S_WI-P02-C005–C006. Justia Law+1

Chapter 427’s territorial reach is separately governed by Wis. Stat. §421.201. The Wisconsin Consumer Act applies to transactions made in Wisconsin, and ch. 427 applies to debt-collection activity in Wisconsin, expressly including mail or telephone communications directed to a Wisconsin customer. That rule does not make the §218.04 nonresident license exemption and ch. 427 coverage coterminous: an out-of-state agency can be license-exempt yet still subject to Wisconsin substantive collection law. S_WI-P02-C022.

No controlling source located in this pass expressly determines whether:

• email is “interstate telecommunications” under §218.04(2)(b);
• SMS, an app message, or a web portal is “interstate telecommunications”;
• automated digital contacts unaccompanied by mail or telephone are sufficient Wisconsin activity for §421.201; or
• use of a Wisconsin-based vendor, field agent, law firm, process server, or payment location destroys the exemption.

Those questions remain held for a focused nexus/remote-operations pass.

1.4 Model-by-license, registration, and conduct matrix

The true-debt-buyer result is intentionally not reduced to “no license.” The statutory phrase “for others” supports noncoverage where the buyer genuinely owns the account, but §218.04(11) applies the chapter to pretended purchases or assignments used to evade the statute. No Wisconsin appellate decision or formal current DFI letter located in this pass draws the precise line for modern debt buyers. S_WI-P02-C007–C009. Justia Law+3

2. Market entry, continuity, security, and public verification

2.1 Issuing regulator and application

The issuing regulator is the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions, Division of Banking. DFI requires collection-agency company and branch applications through NMLS. Applicants and licensees must register with NMLS, maintain a valid unique identifier, and keep material information current with DFI and NMLS. S_WI-P02-C024. Justia Law+1

The statutory issuance test includes the character, general fitness, and financial responsibility of the applicant and, depending on entity type, its members, officers, and directors. DFI’s current public page says licensees must maintain:

• tangible net worth of at least $15,000; and
• net working capital of at least $7,500.

DFI discounts intangibles, related-party receivables, employee advances, receivables more than 90 days old, and questionable-value assets when evaluating those thresholds. S_WI-P02-C027. Justia Law+1

The live NMLS Wisconsin checklist did not produce usable text through the public route. Consequently, this pass does not claim that Wisconsin presently requires—or does not require—a separately titled “qualifying individual,” examination, fingerprint, or particular control-person affidavit beyond the statutory fitness test, NMLS ownership/control disclosures, and current DFI instructions.

2.2 Offices, branches, and remote employees

The statute requires a separate license for each place of business that must be separately licensed. The current DFI/NMLS structure uses a company license and branch licenses for additional licensed locations.

A home from which an employee works is not treated as a separately licensed place when:

• it is not held out to the public as an agency location; and
• no physical agency records are maintained there.

That exception does not automatically cover a public-facing home office, a location receiving consumers, or a site holding physical records. S_WI-P02-C017.

2.3 Initial and recurring government charges

These are government/provider charges, not amounts that may be imposed on a debtor. S_WI-P02-C025. Justia Law+1

2.4 License period, renewal, reporting, and changes

The recurring sequence established in the current materials is:

• renewal window generally runs from November 1 through December 31;
• reinstatement runs from January 1 through the last day of February;
• a license not renewed or reinstated is treated as expired on the preceding December 31, subject to the special initial-license rule for a license issued November 1–December 31;
• annual collection-agency report is due March 31;
• fiscal-year-end financial statements and DFI supplemental information are due through NMLS within 90 days after fiscal year-end;
• a collection agency must notify DFI of a location change at least 30 days before relocation; and
• other material information must be maintained accurately under §224.35/NMLS procedures.

S_WI-P02-C026. Justia Law+2

2.5 Bond and financial security

Wis. Stat. §218.04 authorizes DFI to require a bond in the form and amount it considers reasonably necessary to protect the public. DFI’s November 2025 annual-report form, for the year ending December 31, 2025, provides the operational schedule used to calculate the next bond amount:

The form then adds:

• outstanding prepaid client collection transmittals; and
• $10,000 when records concerning Wisconsin operations are maintained outside Wisconsin.

“Client collection transmittals” refers to the agency’s clients/creditors, not automatically to consumer remittances. The form also says DFI can require a higher amount under §218.04(3)(d). This pass establishes the current calculation evidence only; bond form, obligee, cancellation, claimants, claim priority, and recovery procedure remain for a separate collector-security pass. S_WI-P02-C028. Department of Financial Institutions+2

2.6 Material licensing discipline conditions

At the market-access level, material conditions include:

• maintaining required financial responsibility;
• maintaining any required bond;
• proper handling/remittance of collected funds;
• truthful application and NMLS information;
• compliance with §218.04, applicable administrative rules, and orders;
• supervision of collectors, solicitors, and others acting for the agency;
• required annual reporting and financial statements; and
• returning Wisconsin client accounts and papers and proving remittance before discontinuing operations.

The statute provides agency investigation, hearing, suspension/revocation, reporting, and criminal-enforcement mechanisms. No inference is made here that every violation produces a private action or any particular consumer recovery. Full enforcement, remedy, standing, limitation, liquidation, and bond-claim analysis remains open. Justia Law+2

2.7 Public verification

DFI’s current collection-agency page directs the public to NMLS Consumer Access for license searches. DFI’s separate legacy financial-services roster route returned an unhandled error during this session. A public search result is dated evidence only; it does not establish that a provider was licensed on another date, licensed for every relevant location, exempt from another registration, or operating within the scope of its authority.

No named provider was searched, cleared, approved, or certified in this pass. S_WI-P02-C029, C060. Department of Financial Institutions

2.8 Complaint route

DFI provides an online and written complaint route for licensed financial-services providers. DFI cautions that it does not act as private counsel and may be unable to resolve contractual disputes or order every form of individual relief. A complaint route is not proof of a violation, adjudication, license status, or entitlement to recovery. S_WI-P02-C030.

2.9 Consumer-facing Wisconsin license identity

A licensed agency must send the following Wisconsin licensing notice within five days after the initial communication, unless:

• the initial communication was written and already contained it; or
• the debt has been paid:

“This collection agency is licensed by the Division of Banking in the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions, www.dfi.wi.gov.”

The notice must be at least eight-point type. If printed on the reverse side, the front must carry the specified reverse-side notice. The rule says “within 5 days,” not “five business days”; no state counting or holiday rule specific to this requirement was established in this pass. S_WI-P02-C031. Justia Regulations

Collection notices sent in the agency’s name generally must display its licensed name, mailing address, and telephone number in the letterhead and remittance portion. The rule contains exceptions for a notice mailed in the creditor’s name and for a notice directing contact to the creditor’s telephone number. A licensee may use only names on its license, and a trade name requires prior DFI approval. Collectors may use one first-and-last-name alias, subject to statutory restrictions and DFI notification for a change. S_WI-P02-C032. Justia Regulations+1

3. State-specific substantive collection conduct

3.1 Coverage must be tested actor by actor

Two principal state conduct sources overlap but are not identical:

• Wis. Stat. §427.104 applies to a broad “debt collector,” including an original creditor, but only for qualifying consumer/agricultural deferred-payment transactions.
• Wis. Admin. Code §DFI-Bkg 74.16 applies to a §218.04 licensee collecting an alleged account, bill, or other indebtedness and therefore can reach business debt handled by a licensed agency.

A licensee collecting a consumer debt can be subject to both. An original creditor can be subject to ch. 427 while not being subject to ch. DFI-Bkg 74. A licensed commercial collector can be subject to ch. 74 even though ch. 427 and the FDCPA do not cover the business-purpose debt. Justia Law+2

3.2 State-conduct matrix

The controlling state text appears at §427.104(1)(a)–(m) and DFI-Bkg 74.16(1)–(16). Justia Law+3

3.3 Calls, times, and harassment

Wisconsin’s enacted state standard is qualitative. It asks whether frequency, unusual hours, manner, or other conduct can reasonably be expected to threaten or harass. Neither §427.104 nor §DFI-Bkg 74.16 establishes a Wisconsin “seven calls” rule. S_WI-P02-C042.

DFI’s public guidance says calls before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. Central Time are considered unusual/harassing. That is an agency guidance position; it should not be described as the literal text of §427.104 or ch. 74. Regulation F has a separate federal presumptive 8:00 a.m.–9:00 p.m. local-time rule. Department of Financial Institutions+2

In Associates Financial Services Co. v. Hornik, the court affirmed a finding that 69 calls over 19 months—generally four or five calls in months when an installment was late—were not harassment on the record presented. The debtor had not demanded that calls stop, and the contacts were not at unusual times. That outcome is not a 69-call safe harbor. A different density, content, stop request, timing, third-party contact pattern, or purpose can change the result. S_WI-P02-C055.

DFI’s April 13, 2020 interpretive letter addressed nearly two dozen contacts to friends, relatives, and other third parties. DFI emphasized that there is no numerical safe harbor and that the totality, actual purpose, repeated contacts, disclosures, and privacy effects matter. The letter is agency guidance, not an adjudicated final order. S_WI-P02-C059.

3.4 Workplace contacts

Before final judgment, ch. 427 and ch. 74 generally prohibit initiating or threatening employer communication, except:

• as otherwise permitted by statute;
• solely to verify employment status;
• solely to verify earnings; or
• where the employer has an established debt-counseling service or procedure.

A ch. 74 licensee may leave a workplace callback message as an exception to the third-party-callback prohibition only when it is limited to the agency’s telephone number and the collector’s name. That narrow message exception is not permission to tell the employer or coworker that the call concerns a debt. S_WI-P02-C039–C040. Justia Law+1

3.5 Third-party contacts and privacy

Chapter 427 protects against reputation-affecting disclosures to persons who lack a legitimate business need, subject to statutory disclosure authority. Ch. 74 adds a rule against recruiting a neighbor or other third party to ask the debtor to call, except for:

• someone residing with the debtor;
• a person whom the debtor authorized; or
• the narrow workplace message.

DFI’s guidance allows a genuinely limited attempt to locate a consumer but warns against revealing the debt, collecting through social pressure, or repeatedly calling third parties after location information has been obtained. S_WI-P02-C040. Justia Regulations+1

3.6 Cease requests

Wisconsin provides a specific rule for a licensed collection agency: it may not contact the debtor by telephone after a request or demand that such collection efforts cease. The text does not say that a telephone request automatically bars letters, emails, litigation, or every other contact method. Those methods may nevertheless violate another provision depending on frequency, manner, deception, privacy, representation, bankruptcy, or federal status.

DFI’s consumer page states that Wisconsin law does not create a specific universal cease-communication right against an original creditor comparable to the federal FDCPA rule. Continued original-creditor contacts after a request can still become harassment on the facts. S_WI-P02-C043. Justia Regulations+1

3.7 Threats, false process, and legal status

Both state regimes prohibit:

• threatening criminal prosecution;
• knowingly claiming or threatening a right that does not exist;
• simulated legal or judicial process;
• communications falsely appearing to have government or attorney authorization; and
• threatening action unless it is regularly taken or actually intended for the particular debt.

For a third-party agency, DFI explains that the creditor controls whether to sue. An agency may recommend legal action but should not represent suit as intended unless the creditor has authorized it. S_WI-P02-C038, C044. Justia Law+2

A licensed agency may cause an action to be brought only after creditor authorization; pleadings must be prepared by or at the direction of an attorney, name the creditors as real parties, and omit the agency from the caption and pleadings. Nonattorney agency staff generally may not practice law. Detailed litigation authorization, pleading, service, venue, proof, and default procedures remain later-pass subjects. Justia Law+1

3.8 Fees and interest

DFI-Bkg 74.11 generally bars a licensee from charging a debtor:

• a collection fee;
• a handling charge;
• mileage;
• or collection out-of-pocket expenses,

except for the rule’s stated exceptions. A licensee also may not divide a payment to increase fees. S_WI-P02-C033. Justia Regulations

The established exceptions include:

1. the actual financial-institution charge for a returned check, unless caused by prematurely depositing a postdated check;
2. the actual financial-institution charge for a reversed ACH, unless caused by premature debit, wrong amount, or lack of authorization;
3. a credit/debit-card fee no more than the lesser of $25 or 3% of the payment amount excluding the fee, provided it is disclosed before processing and the debtor is not required to use that payment method; and
4. service-of-process cost no greater than the sheriff’s charge for the county where service occurs.

The existence of one exception does not authorize a separate convenience, platform, processing, legal-review, contingency, or collection surcharge. S_WI-P02-C034–C035. Justia Regulations

3.9 Disputes and credit reporting boundary

Wisconsin prohibits disclosure or threatened disclosure of a debt known to be reasonably disputed without also disclosing the dispute. The statutory annotation identifies Turner v. Gene Dencker Buick-Pontiac, Inc. as requiring disputed status each time the debt is reported, not just the first time. This pass establishes the substantive state conduct boundary only. Notice timing, verification, investigation, furnisher duties, account-level documentation, FCRA/Reg F reporting procedure, and evidentiary standards remain later work. S_WI-P02-C041. Justia Law

A state dispute does not automatically impose the FDCPA’s federal validation halt on an original creditor. Federal validation procedure applies only when federal actor, debt, communication, and timing predicates are present.

3.10 Electronic contacts

No Wisconsin enactment located in this pass contains Regulation F’s specific email/text opt-out architecture. Wisconsin’s general harassment, privacy, false-representation, identity, and stop-telephone rules can still apply according to their text.

For an actor covered by Regulation F, federal rules separately govern:

• procedures for email and text communications;
• clear and simple opt-out instructions;
• inconvenient-place or inconvenient-time knowledge;
• employer-provided addresses;
• public social-media communications; and
• communications after use of a medium is stopped.

Those are federal requirements, not independently enacted Wisconsin rules. S_WI-P02-C047, C054. eCFR+2

4. Necessary FDCPA and Regulation F gateways

4.1 Scope comparison

The current FDCPA definition recognizes both a principal-purpose branch and a branch covering a person who regularly collects debts owed or due another. It also has the false-name creditor provision and a limited-purpose security-interest-enforcer provision. S_WI-P02-C049. USCode

4.2 Debt buyers — Henson v. Santander

Henson held that a company collecting debts it purchased for itself was not covered by the FDCPA’s “regularly collects debts owed or due another” branch merely because the debts were in default when acquired. The Court expressly noted that it was not deciding related questions outside that branch, including the principal-purpose route. It therefore cannot be cited for the proposition that every debt buyer is outside the FDCPA, much less as an interpretation of Wisconsin §218.04. S_WI-P02-C050. Supreme Court of the United States

4.3 Collection lawyers — Heintz v. Jenkins

Heintz held that the FDCPA applies to attorneys who regularly engage in consumer-debt collection activity, including litigation. Wisconsin’s resident-attorney licensing exclusion does not erase the federal rule, and the federal rule does not decide the Wisconsin licensing status of a nonresident attorney or law firm. S_WI-P02-C051.

4.4 Security-interest enforcement — Obduskey v. McCarthy

Obduskey held that an actor engaged in no more than nonjudicial security-interest enforcement is generally a limited-purpose debt collector subject principally to §1692f(6), rather than all FDCPA provisions. The Court left room for a different result when the actor also undertakes ordinary collection activity. This is a federal boundary only; it does not displace Wisconsin’s treatment of replevin, repossession, or collection activity. S_WI-P02-C052. Supreme Court of the United States

4.5 Preservation of state law

15 U.S.C. §1692n preserves state laws unless inconsistent with the FDCPA and says greater consumer protection is not inconsistent. A Wisconsin original creditor may therefore be outside the federal actor definition yet within ch. 427, while a licensed Wisconsin agency may have to satisfy ch. 74, ch. 427, the FDCPA, and Regulation F simultaneously. S_WI-P02-C053.

5. Controlling cases and regulator interpretations actually reviewed

Hornik

The result depended on the pattern and circumstances. Calls were tied to recurring delinquencies, no stop demand was made, and the court did not find unusual-hour or abusive content. Using the raw total “69” as an approved threshold would invert the holding. S_WI-P02-C055.

Security Finance

At paragraphs 28–31, the court distinguished Kett: Kett involved use of improperly venued replevin judgments and repossession, while Security Finance involved a defective cure notice that did not eliminate the creditor’s underlying contract right. This prevents a mechanical claim that every predicate or procedure defect becomes an attempt to enforce a nonexistent right. S_WI-P02-C056. Wisconsin Court System+1

Koble

The Wisconsin Supreme Court held in 2026 that the residential lease at issue was not an agreement to defer payment: the tenant purchased monthly occupancy and paid for each month rather than incurring the entire lease amount upfront and receiving permission to defer it. The 2025 statutory annotation reproducing the now-reversed 2024 Court of Appeals outcome is stale on this point. S_WI-P02-C057. Wisconsin Court System+1

Plaza

The court read §427.104(1)(k) according to its own terms—whether a communication falsely appeared officially or formally approved, issued, or consented to by an attorney. It declined to import the federal meaningful-involvement doctrine wholesale because the FDCPA and WCA use different wording. S_WI-P02-C058. Wisconsin Court System+1

Debt-buyer licensing search result

Targeted searches of current DFI guidance, Wisconsin appellate opinions, the official code/register domain, and current collection-agency materials did not locate a controlling Wisconsin decision or formal current DFI interpretation squarely holding that a genuine purchaser collecting purchased accounts for itself either must or need not hold a §218.04 collection-agency license.

This is a bounded search result, not proof that no unpublished order, historical agency letter, trial ruling, or nonindexed administrative decision exists. A complete citator, administrative-order archive, trial-docket, and historical opinion-letter search remains open. S_WI-P02-C059.

6. Bounded workflows and worked examples

Example 1 — Original creditor versus purchased debt

Scenario A: Original creditor

A Wisconsin retailer directly collects its own deferred-payment consumer account using its legal name.

Predicates

• Same legal entity owns and originated the debt.
• Collection is for itself.
• Underlying transaction is personal and payment was deferred.

Result

• §218.04: ordinarily no collection-agency license because it is not collecting for another.
• §426.201: WCA registration may be required because the creditor directly collects payments/enforces rights arising from a consumer-credit transaction in Wisconsin.
• Ch. 427: applies to collection conduct.
• Ch. DFI-Bkg 74: not applicable merely because it is a creditor.

Evidence to retain

• original contract;
• entity identity;
• account ownership;
• WCA registration evidence;
• communication records;
• creditor name used.

Scenario B: Genuine debt buyer

A separate company acquires complete ownership of the account and collects for itself.

Result

• §218.04: literal “for others” language supports noncoverage, but the result remains held short of a categorical Wisconsin ruling.
• §426.201: registration may apply, particularly under DFI’s purchaser/direct-collection guidance.
• Ch. 427: applies if the underlying transaction qualifies.
• Federal: Henson resolves only the “owed another” branch; principal-purpose status remains a separate inquiry.

Additional evidence

• executed assignment;
• schedule identifying the account;
• purchase date;
• economic ownership;
• repurchase/recourse terms;
• servicing/control rights;
• payment destination;
• collection identity;
• absence of a pretended purchase.

A marketing statement that the company “owns” the debt is not enough. C003, C007–C010, C049–C050.

Example 2 — Sham purchase

Agency A receives accounts from Creditor B under a document called a “sale,” but B keeps all economic risk, can demand return at will, directs all settlements, and receives all collections less a contingency fee.

Result

The label “sale” does not establish owner collection. The facts could support:

• collection for another;
• a pretended purchase or assignment under §218.04(11);
• required collection-agency licensure; and
• applicable ch. 74 rules.

The exact result requires the full agreement and payment/control facts. No license conclusion should be issued from the document title alone. C007.

Example 3 — Remote agency

A Minnesota agency has no Wisconsin office and contacts Wisconsin residents only by interstate telephone and U.S. mail.

Assumptions

• no Wisconsin field visits;
• no Wisconsin solicitation;
• no Wisconsin payment office;
• no local collector;
• no non-telephone digital channel requiring separate classification.

Result

The §218.04(2)(b) nonresident exemption is facially available. That does not exempt the agency from:

• ch. 427 for qualifying Wisconsin collection activity;
• federal law when applicable;
• WCA registration if its conduct separately triggers registration; or
• another sector rule.

Changed fact: collector travels to Wisconsin

If an employee visits Wisconsin debtors or creditors to collect or solicit accounts, DFI’s stated position is that the remote exemption no longer supplies the licensing answer.

Changed fact: email/SMS only

Exact exemption status is held because no Wisconsin authority read defines those channels for the phrase “interstate telecommunications.” C005, C006, C022.

Example 4 — Attorney collector

A Wisconsin-resident attorney authorized to practice in Wisconsin regularly files consumer-debt suits.

State licensing

The attorney satisfies the literal individual-attorney exclusion from §218.04.

State conduct

There is no categorical attorney exclusion from ch. 427. The underlying transaction and collection conduct must be tested.

Federal

Under Heintz, regular consumer-debt litigation can be FDCPA collection activity.

Changed fact: nonresident attorney

The literal §218.04 resident-attorney exclusion is not satisfied. Whether litigation-only work by that attorney or the attorney’s firm requires a Wisconsin collection-agency license remains unresolved in this pass. C013, C014, C051.

Example 5 — Workplace callback

A licensed agency calls the debtor’s workplace before judgment. A coworker answers.

Permissible bounded workflow

• Do not disclose that a debt exists.
• A callback message under DFI-Bkg 74.16(15) is limited to:the licensee’s telephone number; andthe collector’s name.
• A separate employer inquiry must be solely for permitted employment/earnings verification or an employer counseling procedure.

Missing facts that can change result

• whether the number is the consumer’s direct line;
• whether the employer prohibits such calls;
• whether the collector knows the consumer is represented;
• whether the message reveals the agency’s debt-collection identity;
• whether the consumer previously demanded telephone calls stop;
• whether federal law applies.

Consequence

A licensee cannot use the callback exception to evade the employer-contact or privacy rules. C039, C040, C043.

Example 6 — Prohibited threats

A collector says:

“Pay by Friday or we will have you arrested.”

State result

Threatening criminal prosecution is expressly prohibited under both §427.104 and DFI-Bkg 74.16.

A different statement—

“We will sue tomorrow.”

—is permissible only if:

• the actor has authority to make that representation;
• the creditor actually authorized or intends suit for that debt;
• like action is regularly taken or action is intended;
• litigation is legally available; and
• the communication does not simulate process or falsely imply attorney/government authorization.

No prediction about actual suit or recovery is made without the account, contract, limitation, standing, venue, and authorization facts. C038, C044.

Example 7 — Credit/debit-card fee

A licensed collection agency offers an optional card payment and makes the required advance disclosure.

Payment of $400

• Payment base, excluding fee: $400
• Three percent: 0.03 × $400 = $12
• Fixed ceiling: $25
• Permitted maximum: min($12, $25) = $12

Payment of $1,200

• Payment base: $1,200
• Three percent: 0.03 × $1,200 = $36
• Fixed ceiling: $25
• Permitted maximum: min($36, $25) = $25

Conditions

• licensee status;
• prior disclosure;
• card method optional;
• no payment splitting to increase charges;
• no extra platform or convenience fee under this provision.

Calculations use dollars and cents and round only at the final cent; no Wisconsin-specific alternative rounding rule was located. C033, C034.

Example 8 — Current operational bond calculation

Assumptions

• Annual collections received by agency, net of amounts paid directly to creditors: $600,000
• Applicable scheduled band: $500,000–$749,999
• Outstanding prepaid client collection transmittals: $5,000
• Wisconsin operation records maintained outside Wisconsin: yes
• Current form applies and no higher discretionary amount is imposed.

Calculation

1. Scheduled bond: $65,000
2. Add prepaid client transmittals: $5,000
3. Add out-of-state-records amount: $10,000
4. Total: $65,000 + $5,000 + $10,000 = $80,000

This is an illustration of the November 2025 LFS-420 form, not a determination for an actual agency. It does not establish bond claim eligibility or coverage. C028.

Example 9 — Call frequency

A creditor makes 69 calls over 19 months.

Incorrect result: “Wisconsin allows 69 calls.”

Correct analysis

Evaluate:

• number per day and per week;
• whether calls followed monthly delinquencies;
• hours;
• answered versus unanswered calls;
• content;
• unusual channels;
• stop request;
• representation;
• third-party calls;
• threats;
• intent and actual purpose;
• whether Regulation F applies.

Hornik upheld no harassment on its particular record. It did not establish a number that is lawful in every case. C042, C055.

Example 10 — Initial Wisconsin license notice

A licensed agency’s first communication is an oral call. The debt is not paid.

Rule

The Wisconsin license notice must be sent within five days after that initial communication unless an initial written communication already included it.

Held calendar point

The rule does not say “business days,” but this pass did not establish:

• whether the initial date is day zero or day one;
• weekend/holiday extension;
• electronic delivery sufficiency; or
• a separate receipt-versus-send rule.

Accordingly, no exact calendar due date is invented. C031.

Example 11 — Overpayment

$4 overpayment, no other account listed

• Overpayment: $4
• Threshold: $5
• No other listed account
• Ch. 74 does not require a refund under this specific provision.

$4 overpayment, another account listed

The licensee must either refund the $4 or apply it to the other listed account.

$7 overpayment, no other account listed

Refund is required and must be made within 30 days from the close of the month in which payment was received.

This is a licensed-agency rule. It does not resolve unclaimed-property, bankruptcy, probate, or contract issues. C037.

Example 12 — Electronic opt-out

A federally covered collection agency texts a Wisconsin consumer. The consumer uses the provided opt-out.

Federal branch

Regulation F can require honoring the clear and simple opt-out for that electronic address or number.

Wisconsin branch

No independently enacted Wisconsin email/text opt-out was located. Wisconsin harassment, privacy, deception, licensing-identity, and other generally applicable rules still apply.

Evidence to retain

• method used to acquire the number;
• consent or prior-use basis;
• message;
• date and content of opt-out;
• suppression log;
• any later contact;
• actor and debt classification.

The federal protocol should not be labeled a Wisconsin rule. C047, C054.

B. Source register

S_WI-P02-S001 through S_WI-P02-S028

C. Claim register

D. Component coverage and exact remaining investigations

E. Researcher self-check

Actually read or visually inspected

• Current DFI collection-agency licensing, fees, FAQ, financial-condition, lookup-link, and complaint pages.
• Current DFI WCA registration and fee materials.
• Current DFI consumer guidance on original creditors, third-party collectors, prohibited conduct, cease requests, workplace contact, and third parties.
• Wis. Stat. §218.04 current 2025 reproduction, including definitions, exclusions, licensing, NMLS, fees, bond authority, issuance, renewal, supervision, litigation authorization, records, anti-evasion, and enforcement.
• Wis. Stat. §§421.201, 421.301, 426.201, and 427.102–427.105 current reproductions.
• Current reproductions of DFI-Bkg 74.01, 74.11, 74.13, 74.15, and 74.16.
• DFI Form LFS-420 revised November 2025; printed pages 1, 2, and 4 and zero-based PDF pages 0, 1, and 3 were visually inspected.
• DFI’s April 13, 2020 third-party-contact interpretive letter.
• The actual opinion text in Hornik.
• Official Wisconsin appellate PDFs in Security Finance, 2026 Koble, and Plaza, plus the 2026 Plaza review-denial order.
• Current official U.S. Code provisions defining federal debt, debt collector, communications, harassment, deception, unfairness, and preservation of state law.
• Current eCFR Regulation F provisions on communications, call frequency, identity, unfair practices, and electronic media.
• Official or official-reporter sources for Henson, Heintz, and Obduskey.

Sources not successfully read in their preferred form

• The Wisconsin Legislature’s official integrated statute and administrative-code pages repeatedly timed out.
• The official integrated current ch. DFI-Bkg 74 PDF could not be retrieved.
• The dynamic current Wisconsin NMLS company/branch checklist did not return usable text.
• DFI’s legacy public license roster returned an error.
• No comprehensive public DFI contested-case order archive, nonindexed historical opinion archive, trial-docket collection, or commercial citator was available in this pass.

Those failures were not converted into claims that no authority exists.

Findings deliberately not made

• No named provider’s license, registration, exemption, bond, branch authority, ownership, or compliance status was checked or approved.
• No actual borrower, creditor, debt buyer, law firm, collection agency, account, contract, assignment, call log, report, payment record, or litigation file was reviewed.
• No application, renewal, complaint, filing, records request, provider contact, regulator contact, or NMLS transaction was made.
• No Wisconsin debt buyer was declared categorically exempt from §218.04.
• No state rule was invented for app, email, SMS, or portal-only remote collection.
• Regulation F’s seven-call presumptions, 8:00–9:00 local-time rule, represented-consumer rule, or electronic opt-out requirements were not mislabeled as independently enacted Wisconsin provisions.
• No automatic private remedy was inferred from a licensing, rule, or conduct violation.
• No exact five-day notice deadline was calculated without an established counting rule.
• No bond recovery, creditor priority, consumer claim, or security sufficiency conclusion was made.
• No PASS-01 conclusion was reused as an accepted premise.
• No local file was written, no publication-readiness claim is made, and this is not an operations approval.

This is the original researcher’s self-check, not an independent review.

END S_WI PASS-02.