Colorado Supreme Court Says Debt Buyers Must Document Ownership of Specific Accounts Before Filing Suit

Case Snapshot

• Court: Colorado Supreme Court
• Case: Wright v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
• Decision Date: May 26, 2026
• Core Issue: Whether a debt buyer’s complaint included sufficient documentation to establish ownership of a debt under Colorado law
• Key Allegation: Consumer argued the debt buyer failed to attach documents proving it owned the specific account at issue
• Court Holding: Debt buyers must provide a non-affidavit writing establishing ownership of the specific debt and cannot rely on affidavits to cure missing documentation
• Outcome: Lower court rulings reversed and case remanded.
• Notable Detail: The court emphasized that generalized portfolio sale documents are insufficient unless they connect ownership to the individual account being sued upon

Colorado debt buyers face stricter guidance on documentation requirements following a unanimous Colorado Supreme Court decision that clarified what evidence must accompany a collection lawsuit under the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (CFDCPA).

In Wright v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, the court held that debt buyers must attach documentation establishing ownership of the specific account being collected and cannot rely on affidavits to fill gaps in the chain of title. The ruling reverses lower court decisions that had found Portfolio Recovery Associates’ documentation sufficient.

Court Rejects Affidavit as Substitute for Ownership Documentation

The dispute centered on a collection lawsuit filed by Portfolio Recovery Associates (PRA) seeking to collect approximately $671 in credit card debt originally owed to Comenity Bank. PRA attached a bill of sale, credit card statements, and an affidavit from its records custodian asserting that the account had been transferred to PRA.

The Colorado Supreme Court found those materials insufficient because the bill of sale demonstrated only that PRA purchased a portfolio of debt from Comenity Bank. It did not identify Wright’s specific account as part of the transaction. The asset schedule referenced in the bill of sale did not contain account information linking the transfer to the debt at issue.

The court concluded that the CFDCPA requires a debt buyer to attach a non-affidavit writing establishing ownership of the debt being sued upon. Because the complaint lacked such documentation, the affidavit could not cure the deficiency.

What Colorado Debt Buyers Must Provide

The decision provides important clarification regarding Section 5-16-111(2) of the CFDCPA.

According to the court’s interpretation, debt buyers filing suit must attach:

• A copy of the assignment or other writing establishing that the debt buyer owns the debt.
• Documentation showing each transfer of ownership if the debt has been assigned multiple times.
• Evidence establishing an unbroken chain of title from the original creditor to the plaintiff.
• Documentation linking ownership to the specific account being collected.

The court emphasized that ownership of a debt portfolio alone is not enough. The attached documents must demonstrate ownership of the individual consumer account that forms the basis of the lawsuit.

Liability Exposure for Noncompliance

The court also reinforced that failure to comply with the CFDCPA’s documentation requirements can create liability for debt buyers.

Under Section 5-16-113, consumers may recover damages, costs, and attorney fees if a debt buyer violates the statute. Because PRA failed to provide documentation satisfying the ownership requirements, the Supreme Court held that the company could be liable to the consumer and remanded the case for further proceedings regarding damages and fees.

Why It Matters

The ruling provides one of the clearest interpretations to date of Colorado’s debt buyer documentation requirements and is likely to influence collection litigation throughout the state.

Debt buyers and collection attorneys operating in Colorado may want to review their complaint filing procedures to ensure ownership documentation identifies the specific account being sued upon and establishes a complete chain of title. The decision makes clear that affidavits alone cannot bridge gaps in ownership records, even when other transfer documents are attached.

For consumers, the ruling reinforces statutory protections intended to ensure that entities pursuing collection lawsuits can demonstrate they legally own the debt before seeking judicial relief.