Skip to main content

If you aren’t familiar with the word “overbiffing,” there’s no need to add it to your vocabulary. But if you know what overbiffing is and engage in it, a case just filed by the FTC and the New York Attorney General suggests now would be an excellent time to cut it out.

Overbiffing is the practice of debt collectors tricking consumers into paying more than their “Balance In Full,” sometimes abbreviated as BIF. The FTC and the New York AG charge that a related group of Buffalo companies controlled by defendant Robert Heidenreich encourages their collectors to engage in overbiffing. As the complaint alleges, the payment forms the defendants’ collectors use reflect that. For example, one particular form includes fill-in-the-blanks for “Client Balance” (what the consumer actually owes) and “Balance Given” (what the debt collector told the consumer they owe). In many instances, forms completed by the collectors show that the Balance Given to consumers is hundreds of dollars higher than the Client Balance. (Some even show thousands higher.) That, in a nutshell, is overbiffing.

Overbiffing is just one example of conduct challenged in the complaint. The FTC and the AG say that when the defendants’ reps call consumers, they often don’t reveal they’re debt collectors and instead claim to be affiliated with the County Sheriff’s Office or a process server. They threaten that consumers are about to be arrested, sued, or served with legal papers unless they cough up money immediately. To keep the pressure on, the callers suggest that people can avoid arrest by speaking with someone they’re told is an attorney. Who is it really? Another one of the defendants’ debt collectors.

How persuasive is the pitch? Very, according to the FTC and the AG. For example, one consumer got a call from someone who said they work for the sheriff’s office in her Florida county. The caller claimed to be coming to her house to pick her up on a warrant for “ACH fraud, defaulting on a loan, and grand larceny.” When the frightened consumer asked how she could prevent the arrest, the person from the “sheriff’s office” referred her to one of those “attorneys,” who got her to authorize a debit card payment over the phone.

Despite express prohibitions in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the lawsuit alleges the defendants often call consumers’ employers and family members about purported debts. Then there’s the abusive language. According to the complaint, one of the defendants’ debt collectors told the father-in-law of a consumer from Pennsylvania that he was a “dumb-a** coal miner.” Another collector referred to a women as “the dumbest son of a bitch that I know.” And according to the lawsuit, watch out for flying f-bombs when the defendants’ collectors unleash their fury.

The lawsuit names Heidenreich (who also goes by “Bobby Rich”), Campbell Capital LLC; Kahl, Heidenreich, and Nemmer LLC; Urban, Heidenreich, Melendez, and Associates, LLC; J & V Receivables LLC; Rich Financial LLC; and BCH & Associates Ltd. The complaint charges multiple violations of the FDCPA, the FTC Act, and New York state law – including a specific count alleging that overbiffing is an illegal practice.

At the request of the FTC and the AG, a federal judge in Buffalo has entered a temporary restraining order and frozen the defendants’ assets.


It is your choice whether to submit a comment. If you do, you must create a user name, or we will not post your comment. The Federal Trade Commission Act authorizes this information collection for purposes of managing online comments. Comments and user names are part of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) public records system, and user names also are part of the FTC’s computer user records system. We may routinely use these records as described in the FTC’s Privacy Act system notices. For more information on how the FTC handles information that we collect, please read our privacy policy.

The purpose of this blog and its comments section is to inform readers about Federal Trade Commission activity, and share information to help them avoid, report, and recover from fraud, scams, and bad business practices. Your thoughts, ideas, and concerns are welcome, and we encourage comments. But keep in mind, this is a moderated blog. We review all comments before they are posted, and we won’t post comments that don’t comply with our commenting policy. We expect commenters to treat each other and the blog writers with respect.

  • We won’t post off-topic comments, repeated identical comments, or comments that include sales pitches or promotions.
  • We won’t post comments that include vulgar messages, personal attacks by name, or offensive terms that target specific people or groups.
  • We won’t post threats, defamatory statements, or suggestions or encouragement of illegal activity.
  • We won’t post comments that include personal information, like Social Security numbers, account numbers, home addresses, and email addresses. To file a detailed report about a scam, go to

We don't edit comments to remove objectionable content, so please ensure that your comment contains none of the above. The comments posted on this blog become part of the public domain. To protect your privacy and the privacy of other people, please do not include personal information. Opinions in comments that appear in this blog belong to the individuals who expressed them. They do not belong to or represent views of the Federal Trade Commission.

Puerto Rico
November 01, 2018
Please include also Navient a student loan collector. They want monthly payments higher than student monthly income.
Michael Sichenzia
November 01, 2018
The debt industry wonders why their reputation is so abominable! Frankly, I think the FTC and the state AG should commence with a civil RICO complaint against this group. I think such a case could be made and WON. That would send a strong message to the industry to get its collective act together...and FAST!
November 02, 2018
Fantastic FTC. Really protecting the american public.
June 05, 2020

In reply to by William

Pro Se Processing completed Thanks
Hajime Narita
November 02, 2018
De Minimis Non-Curat Lex Thanks
gary s tucker
November 06, 2018
if i were to tell someone to give me their money, which is not owed to me, or else I'll make their life miserable, or have them falsely prosecuted for a crime, i would not be sued by the state - i would be arrested and charged with theft by extortion, a class b felony. and rightly convicted and incarcerated. So why do "debt collectors" get a pass for criminal acts, even when they have clearly gone beyond collecting a debt, and are openly coercing money that they know is not owed? How does someone get to join the class of citizen that can commit felonious acts, but only face civil penalties? And when, and how, did we abandon the equal protection clause, without first repealing it?

Get Business Blog updates