Mandarich Law Group

Independent Sources

Shown for context — not merged with USAComplaints' own numbers.

Contacts

• Official firm website (payment portal, FAQ, contact form): https://mandarichlaw.com/
• Main line (Mon-Fri 7 AM-7 PM CST): 855-441-5983
• General, payment and dispute email: [email protected]
• Contact Us page number (Mon-Fri 7 AM-7 PM CST): 877-285-4918
• Fax: 818-888-1260
• BBB-listed phone (Woodland Hills file): 818-428-4001
• BBB-listed other phone (Woodland Hills file): 877-414-0130

Locations

Mandarich Law Group letter or lawsuit: where to pay, dispute and complain (checked October 12, 2026)

Mandarich Law Group, LLP is a law firm that collects debts for creditor clients. Its home page says it is "focused on finding agreeable repayment solutions for our creditor clients and their borrowers." The firm describes itself as a different business from the creditor or debt buyer that owns the account; its FAQ says "Our firm represents both Original Creditors and Debt Buyers" and that the current creditor's name may not be one you recognize.

The firm's own channels (opened October 12, 2026).

• Phone: 855-441-5983, Monday through Friday 7:00 AM-7:00 PM CST (About and FAQ pages). The Contact Us page lists 877.285.4918 with the same hours.
• Email: [email protected]. The FAQ says "You can call or write to us to dispute all or part of your debt. We also accept disputes electronically at [email protected]."
• Mail: Mandarich Law Group, LLP, PO Box 109032, Chicago, IL 60610. For checks the FAQ says to make them payable to Mandarich Law Group, LLP and "include the file number assigned to your account"; the FAQ says the file number is a six- or seven-digit number printed on the letter from the firm.
• Payments: online portal, phone with a "non-attorney representative," or mail. The FAQ lists cash, checks, cashier's checks, money orders, bank wires and checks-by-phone.

Payment wording. The firm's website terms say a payment made through the site must not carry "restrictive language," and that any such language "will have no effect and will not constitute an accord and satisfaction or a compromise of your account balance." A payment plan or settlement is set up by email, phone or letter to the firm.

What the CFPB says about the first contact. The CFPB says a debt collector generally must provide validation information at first contact or within five days, including "the name of the creditor, the amount you owe, and how to dispute the debt." Its list of required items includes an itemization of the current amount and "An end date for a 30-day period when you can dispute the debt." It says that once you receive the information "you have 30 days to dispute the debt in writing," and that if you send a written verification request within that period the collector "must pause collecting the amount of the debt you are disputing until they've adequately responded." The CFPB also publishes sample letters (do not owe the debt, need more information, stop contacting me, contact me only through my lawyer) and says to keep copies of what you send.

If a lawsuit is filed. The firm's FAQ says it hires "the local Sheriff's office or a process server" to serve a lawsuit and that it is "not too late to resolve the account" afterwards. The CFPB says "Not responding to a properly served lawsuit - even if you're unsure whether you owe the debt - can result in the court issuing a judgment against you." The firm's FAQ answers "Do you offer legal advice to debtors?" with "No. We represent creditors and cannot advise you regarding your legal rights," so questions about your own defenses go to a lawyer or legal-aid office of your choosing.

Before paying anything. The CFPB says: "Never give sensitive financial information to the caller, at least not until you've confirmed they're legitimate" (Ask CFPB, "What should I do when a debt collector contacts me?", opened October 12, 2026). Checking the letter against the validation information, and asking the firm in writing for what is missing, is the CFPB's route.

Stopping contact and old debts (FTC). The FTC says to mail a letter asking the collection company to stop contacting you and to "Keep a copy for yourself"; it suggests certified mail with a return receipt, and says that once the company gets the letter it "can only contact you to confirm it will stop contacting you in the future or to tell you it plans to take a specific action, like filing a lawsuit." On old debts the FTC says: "In some states, if you make a payment or even acknowledge in writing that you owe the debt, the clock resets and a new statute of limitations period begins" (FTC, "Debt Collection FAQs," opened October 12, 2026).

Complaint routes. The CFPB says you can submit a complaint with it about debt collection (consumerfinance.gov/complaint). The FTC page above lists "your state attorney general's office, the Federal Trade Commission, [and] the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau" as places to report collection problems; USAGov publishes a directory of state consumer-protection offices (usa.gov/state-consumer). The firm's Payment Options page links to RMAi consumer resources, the CFPB and FTC consumer information under "Know Your Rights." The BBB and state consumer-protection offices also accept complaints; see the complaint record below for what the BBB and CFPB files show.

Who Mandarich Law Group is: a debt-collection law firm with a Chicago mailing address and California BBB file

Entity. The firm writes its name as Mandarich Law Group, LLP. The BBB profile for the Woodland Hills, CA file lists the entity type as Partnership, alternate name "Law Offices of Mandarich," management "Chris Mandarich, Partner," and, as BBB records, license number 220693 issued by the California State Bar. The BBB's raw page data gives a business start date of 2010-10-05.

Where it is based. The home page says "Our headquarters is in Chicago, IL" and that the firm "employs one or more attorneys admitted to practice in Illinois and 18 other states." The About page names those states as Alaska, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina and Washington, and lists branches in Woodland Hills CA, Williamsville NY, Kansas City MO, Brighton MI, Las Vegas NV, Kennesaw GA, Lake Mary FL, Newark OH, Washougal WA and Charlotte NC. The only street address found in the sources checked is the BBB-listed 6300 Canoga Ave, Suite 1700, Woodland Hills, CA 91367; the firm's own pages give a PO box in Chicago.

What it does. The About page describes three stages depending on "the age and status of your account at the time of placement": pre-litigation (demand and contact, identify assets, call and collect, negotiate and settle), litigation (file lawsuits, serve lawsuits, secure judgment, courtroom and trial work) and post-judgment (asset levy, property liens, execute and enforce judgment, wage and bank garnishment). It lists business loans and lines of credit, student loans, personal loans, credit cards, FinTech accounts and auto deficiency balances as the products it services for creditor clients.

Clients. The firm's pages do not name its clients. A 2019 Seventh Circuit opinion describes a debt buyer, CACH, LLC, whose parent SquareTwo Financial Corp. "retained Mandarich for collection services"; that is a description of one account relationship in a court record, not a current client list.

Complaint record: BBB files, CFPB database and posts on this site (as displayed October 12, 2026)

BBB, Woodland Hills file. As displayed on October 12, 2026, the BBB profile for Mandarich Law Group, LLP shows BBB Accredited, rating A+, accredited since 2014-08-12 (raw page data), 68 total complaints in the last 3 years and 24 filed in the last 12 months, and 1 out of 5 stars from an average of 6 customer reviews. BBB's notice says the complaint text shown may not represent all complaints and that the nature of complaints and a company's responses matter more than the number. The complaint and review texts are consumer statements the BBB does not verify.

BBB, separate Lake Mary file. BBB also lists a separate, non-accredited file named "Mandarich Law Group" (collections agencies, 952289 PO Box, Lake Mary, FL 32795) with rating D+, whose "Reasons for rating" include "Failure to respond to 1 complaint(s) filed against business"; it shows 1 complaint in the last 3 years and 1 in the last 12 months, and a file opened 2026-08-27 (raw page data). The firm's About page lists a Lake Mary, FL 32746 branch; BBB does not say the two files are the same business, and the figures are not combined here.

CFPB Consumer Complaint Database. Queried on October 12, 2026 under the company name "Mandarich Law Group, LLP": 573 complaints in total (first received 2013-09-07, latest 2026-09-26), of which 541 are labelled "Debt collection"; 135 were received in the 12 months since 2025-10-12. The most frequent issue labels across all 573 were "Took or threatened to take negative or legal action" (160), "Attempts to collect debt not owed" (129), "Written notification about debt" (90) and "False statements or representation" (71). The company-response field shows 565 "Closed with explanation," 3 "Closed with non-monetary relief," 2 "Closed with monetary relief," 1 "Closed" and 2 "In progress"; 566 are marked timely and 7 are not. These are consumer submissions the CFPB does not verify, and the counts are not added to the BBB figures above.

Other sources checked. A Trustpilot search for "mandarich" on October 12, 2026 returned no company page for this firm. No complaints from this site's archive are linked to this profile: the archive search for the firm's name, its phone numbers and its PO box found one 2011 post that mentions a "Mandarich Media Group" of Scottsdale, Arizona in a marketing dispute, which is not linked.

Court matters involving Mandarich Law Group

Mandarich Law Group appears as a defendant in consumer debt-collection suits in several states. A CourtListener search on the case name "Mandarich" on October 12, 2026 also returns unrelated dockets that merely contain the surname, so no total is given; the matters below are those opened and read for this page and are not a complete list. Complaints are allegations, not findings, except where a court order says otherwise. Outcomes are as shown in the cited documents.

• Abdollahzadeh v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (7th Cir. No. 18-1904, decided April 29, 2019). A consumer sued under the FDCPA over a collection letter and state-court suit on an account the state court had dismissed as outside Illinois's five-year limitations period. The district court granted the firm summary judgment on the bona fide error defense, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed, writing that "any FDCPA violations were the unintentional result of a bona fide mistake" and that the firm "had procedures in place that, while simple, were reasonably adapted to avoid late collection efforts."
• Aguilar v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (Cal. Ct. App., 6th Dist., No. H049860, filed January 17, 2023). A consumer sued the firm and Christopher Mandarich under California's Rosenthal Act over statements made in a collection action. The trial court granted the defendants' anti-SLAPP motion and the Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that materiality is a proper consideration under the Rosenthal Act where the claim rests on the listed FDCPA provisions.
• Spradlin v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (D. Nev. No. 2:25-cv-01598). Filed August 27, 2025 under the FDCPA. The clerk entered default on November 18, 2025, and on March 4, 2026 the court granted a default judgment of $1,000.00 in statutory damages plus $6,617.79 in attorney's fees and costs, declining the requested emotional-distress damages. The court's order describes the alleged conduct as serving a summary-judgment motion directly on a consumer it knew was represented by counsel.
• Bahena v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (S.D. Fla. No. 1:25-cv-25928). A putative class action filed December 16, 2025 under the FDCPA and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, alleging a collection letter sent after the plaintiff's written cease-communication request. The firm answered on May 26, 2026, and the court referred the case to a magistrate judge and to mediation on May 29, 2026. No class certification or merits ruling appears on the docket we read.
• Johnson v. Mandarich Law Group LLP (W.D. Wash. No. 2:25-cv-02142). Removed by the firm from King County Superior Court on October 30, 2025; the firm's notice describes the complaint as alleging FDCPA violations. Summary-judgment motions were briefed in June-July 2026, and the docket shows an "Order Dismissing Case" on September 14, 2026. The text of that order was not available in the sources checked, so the basis for the dismissal is not stated here.
• Johansen v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (D. Or. No. 3:25-cv-00275). Removed by the firm from Multnomah County on February 19, 2025; the firm's notice says the complaint purports to allege an FDCPA claim. The docket shows an answer on March 26, 2025 and a "Dismissal (60-day)" entry terminating the case on November 21, 2025.
• Rios v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP and Cavalry SPV I, LLC (E.D. Cal. No. 2:24-cv-01318). Filed May 8, 2024 under the FDCPA, alleging the defendants sued the plaintiff in state court after she had elected arbitration under her account agreement. A notice of settlement was filed May 31, 2024 and a notice of voluntary dismissal on August 26, 2024, when the case was terminated.
• Brown v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (M.D. Fla. No. 3:26-cv-00732) and Gallardo v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP (D. Nev. No. 2:26-cv-00270). Filed April 2026 and February 2026 respectively; the dockets read do not state the claims. In Brown the clerk entered default on July 7, 2026 and a notice of settlement was filed August 12, 2026; in Gallardo a notice of voluntary dismissal was filed September 8, 2026.

Regulators. A search of the CFPB's enforcement actions page for "Mandarich" on October 12, 2026 returned no results. This is a scoped check of that one page; state attorney general and state licensing records were not searched for this page.

Is Mandarich Law Group Legitimate?

Mandarich Law Group, LLP publishes a website with a PO box in Chicago, two toll-free phone numbers, an email address and a payment portal, and appears as a defendant and counsel of record in federal and state court dockets. The BBB's Woodland Hills file lists a California State Bar license number for the firm (as BBB records), BBB accreditation since 2014 and an A+ rating, and also shows 68 complaints in three years and a 1 out of 5 average from 6 customer reviews. The CFPB database lists 573 complaints naming the firm, mostly in debt collection.

Court records show outcomes in both directions: the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the firm in 2019 and a California appeals court affirmed an anti-SLAPP order for the firm in 2023, while a Nevada federal court entered a $1,000 statutory-damages default judgment against it in March 2026 after it did not respond. Other recent suits ended in settlement notices or voluntary dismissals. A letter from the firm is a collection communication sent on behalf of a creditor or debt buyer, according to the firm; the validation and dispute steps the CFPB describes above are the route for responding to such a letter, and whether the debt is yours and the amount is right are questions the validation information and your own records can help answer.

Court & Public Records

Company Relationships

• Collects debts for: CACH, LLC

Frequently Asked Questions