Tag Archives: debt defense

Excuses in Debt Defense Will Lose Your Case

Making excuses will lose your case
Making excuses will lose your case

Sincerity vs. Integrity

Making excuses in debt law cases is a good way to lose your case.

The “iron law of cause and effect” applies to everything. What this means is that, for every action, something happens as a result. No matter why it happened, if it does happen, there are consequences. There are no free lunches. Ever.

You know that. But it’s easy to forget when things get tough.

We pretend the iron law of cause and effect does not apply to us all the time. If we’re late, we apologize, and that’s usually enough to get past the other person’s anger or hurt feelings. If we apologize sincerely enough or give enough good reasons, it seems like we get away with it. But it isn’t called the “iron law” for nothing. Even if the other person excuses us, he thinks we are less dependable. And if the other person doesn’t, we think of it ourselves. Consequences.

Sincerity means not intending to do harm. Integrity means not doing it. Know the difference.

Substantive Law of Debt

If a debt collector can prove you borrowed money and didn’t pay it back, it should get a judgment against you. And if you don’t make them prove their case, they will get their judgment. Simple as that. They call that “strict liability,” which means that WHY you didn’t pay does not matter.

On the other hand, there are events that can destroy a debt. Showing payment, that it was based on fraud, or settlement to name a few, will attack the debt. But if the debt isn’t destroyed, no amount of sincerity will get you off the hook. It doesn’t matter how much you wanted to pay. It doesn’t matter how much you tried to pay. Or whether you tried at all.

It’s surprising how often people get mad at debt collectors for trying to collect debts they (the people involved) can’t afford to pay. Just because the debt collector has a ton of money doesn’t mean they won’t or shouldn’t get a judgment against you. Don’t think that way.

Instead, fight and make them prove their case if they can. Require them to prove the debt and their right to it. Luckily, they aren’t so good at that.

Excuses in Litigation

We’ve been talking about the substantive law of debt, which is almost absolute,. It’s a little murkier when you talk about procedures such as responding to motions and the like. There, excuses CAN make a difference – sometimes. If you make a mistake in doing something, this can sometimes be excused. Likewise, if you make a mistake, you should certainly try to get it excused. The sincerity of your excuse will matter then, so make it good and say it with feeling. And you might get away with it.

But even if you do get away with it, every mistake has consequences. As a pro se defendant, you work mighty hard to get the judge to take you and your words seriously. You want the judge to apply the law fairly and consistently – that’s really all you need in most debt cases to win.

Follow the Rules – Don’t Ask for Breaks

Any time you ask the judge for something special or make some kind of excuse, you will hurt your chances of the court taking you seriously and holding the debt collector to the rules. And all too often, the court will not give you the break it probably should. Thus you should always work your hardest and do your very best to understand the law and rules of your court. As much as possible, you NEVER want to ask the judge for anything she isn’t supposed to do.

And to get your best, you must give your best. Never make excuses for yourself, and never accept them from yourself. It’s impossible to be perfect, but try not to make any mistakes you don’t have to make. That isn’t a cliche or boring old saying – it’s encouragement to you to work your @ss off. The only way to avoid making mistakes is by figuring out things ahead of time and always going the extra mile. You can get away with doing less in some parts of your life, but you often cannot in litigation.

 

 Get Help

If you would like us to take a look at your case and give you a sort of road map to what you need to do and how, take a look at our Personalized Evaluation product. If a debt collector is suing you and you already know you want to defend yourself without spending a lot of money on lawyers, then get our Debt Defense System.

Protect Your Rights

Even if you are reading this article late in the game, shortly before trial, and you are not already a member, you should consider doing so. We have materials helpful to last minute defense and trial preparation even if you are facing this rule.

If it’s a little earlier in the lawsuit, or if no has filed suit yet, you have many other options. Membership can present you many benefits and help you win your case. Or you could check out some of our e-courses.

 

Gold Debt Defense System
Gold Debt Defense System

Gold Debt Defense

 

Platinum Debt Defense System

Platinum Debt Defense System

 

Diamond Debt Defense System

Diamond Debt Defense

Pro Se Debt Defense – Easier than you Might Think

Pro Se Representation is easier than you think
Pro Se Representation is easier than you think

Should You Represent Yourself in Debt Law?


Hiring a lawyer might be the “gold standard” of defense, but lawyers are expensive. If you’re being sued by a debt collector and can’t afford a lawyer, all is not lost. You CAN represent yourself. This is not complicated law, debt collectors are not innovative or particularly energetic. And the debt collection system is a “factory” approach not designed to work against people who defend themselves intelligently. You can do it.

Okay – maybe debt defense isn’t always very fun. In fact, most of the time it isn’t exactly fun, but it is easier than you expect, And winning is great. Going from worrying about having to pay from $1,000 to $50,000 to some debt collector, to having them drop the case – or to settling with you for pennies on the dollar IS fun. It changes the way you look at debt and debt law forever.

Pro se legal means representing yourself rather than hiring a lawyer to do it for you. You have the right to do that in essentially any court proceeding, whether as defendant or plaintiff.

Pro se is a Latin phrase meaning “for oneself.” You will sometimes see it called propria persona (abbreviated to “pro per”). In England and Wales, the comparable status is called “litigant in person.” Not that it matters, right?

Some Think It’s Scary

Although many people fear the thought of representing themselves in court, pro se representation is not rare. According to National Center on State Courts in 1991-92 71% of domestic relations (family law) cases had at least one unrepresented party. In 18% of the cases both parties were pro se.  It is a growing trend in debt collection law as well .

People have long had the right to self-representation in the United States. That right predates even the ratification of the Constitution. Section 35 of the Judiciary Act of 1789—enacted by the first Congress and signed by President Washington, states that, “in all the courts of the United States, the parties may plead and manage their own causes personally or by the assistance of counsel.” Most states have a similar constitutional provision.

Will the Courts Protect You from Mistakes?

The California rules of Civil Procedure explicitly prefer resolving every case on the merits. This applies even if doing it requires excusing a mistake by a pro se litigant that would otherwise result in a dismissal. The Judicial Council says that “Judges are charged with ascertaining the truth, not just playing referee.” And the Council suggests “the court should take whatever measures may be reasonable and necessary to insure a fair trial.”

Most states and the federal courts officially share this bias in favor of hearing courts on “their merits,” (based on what is actually fair). Pro se litigants cannot rely on any special treatment, however. Some courts explicitly will not extend favorable treatment to non-professional litigants. Our position has always been that you should know the rules. Knowing the rules means you can use them. And one secret of debt law is that it is the debt collectors who rely on leniency. You need to prevent that if possible.

Pro Se Litigants Often Do Very Well

Pro se litigants usually do not need extra help. According to Erica J. Hashimoto, an assistant professor at the Georgia School of Law, criminal defendants are “not necessarily ill-served” by the decision to represent themselves. In state court, pro se defendants charged with felonies probably fared much better than represented defendants.

Of the 234 pro se defendants studied by Ms. Hashimoto, “just under 50 percent of them were convicted on any charge….for represented state court defendants, by contrast, a total of 75 percent were convicted of some charge.” And just 26 percent of the pro se defendants ended up with felony convictions, whereas 63 percent of represented defendants in Ms. Hashimoto’s study did. In federal court…the acquittal rate for pro se defendants is virtually identical to the acquittal rate for represented defendants.

Of course there could well be other important variables that the Hashimoto study did not include, but it seems clear that there is not an “automatic penalty” for daring to represent yourself.

There are certain types of cases and situations where pro se representation may actually be an advantage. In debt collection cases, for example, the economic factors often outweigh legal issues. A vigorous pro se defendant can gain a significant advantage by taking energetic steps that a lawyer—always on the clock—would pragmatically be unable to take.

Courts are not always favorable to self-represented people for various reasons. But even with that bias, pro se plaintiffs have recorded some significant victories in civil courts.

Pro Se Representation in Debt Collection Cases

Defendants in debt collection cases have some significant economic advantages in conducting their cases. They also have fewer of the disadvantages that many other types of cases have. Debt collection cases tend to be document-intensive rather than witness-intensive. In the unusual case which actually goes to trial, there are not many things to prove or disprove, and the evidentiary issues are basic. Pro se defendants can argue whether the debt collector produces enough evidence. And whether that evidence is “admissible” in court for the court’s consideration. You won’t need much finesse.

This basic legal simplicity, and the fact that debt collectors drag defendants before the court against their wishes often seem to create a favorable impression on the judges.

Get Help

If you would like us to take a look at your case and give you a sort of road map to what you need to do and how, take a look at our Personalized Evaluation product. If you’re in a lawsuit and already know you want to defend yourself without spending a lot of money on lawyers, then get out Debt Defense System.

Protect Your Rights

Even if you are reading this article late in the game, shortly before trial, and you are not already a member, you should consider doing so. We have materials helpful to last minute defense and trial preparation even if you are facing this rule.

If it’s a little earlier in the lawsuit, or if the debt collector has not filed suit, you have many other options. Membership can present you many benefits and help you win your case. Or you could check out some of our e-courses.

 

Gold Debt Defense System
Gold Debt Defense System

Gold Debt Defense

 

Platinum Debt Defense System

Platinum Debt Defense System

 

Diamond Debt Defense System

Diamond Debt Defense

 

Judgment Proof – Letting Debt Collector Know Helpful Facts

Letting debt collector know you're judgment proof
If you’re judgment proof

What if there is something you actually want the debt collector to know because you think it will cause it to decide to leave you alone?  How do you tell them so they’ll believe you when you say you’re judgment proof? And how do you keep the judge from hearing it and deciding not to take your case seriously? This article discusses the fine art of negotiating when you think you have “nothing to lose.”

How do you Tell the Debt Collector You’re Judgment Proof?

You’ve heard the saying, “you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip.” If you don’t have money a debt collector could reach or a job they could garnish your wages from, or any other assets they could reach, you are what is called “judgment proof.” How do you let them know so they believe you and go away?

If you’re Judgment Proof if Makes No Sense to Sue You

If you’re judgment proof, you almost certainly want the debt collector to know it because it makes all their work more or less pointless. At a minimum, if you don’t have anything for them to collect, they will have to wait – possibly a long time – to get anything back from the lawsuit, and debt collectors know well that time is money. There are generally better things for them to do than chase after people who really are judgment proof and have nothing to give them.

But it isn’t enough for you just to “tell” them you’re judgment proof.  It’s too “convenient” for you, and they won’t believe it if you tell it to them too easily. Plus – if you make it too easy, they’ll just get the judgment and sit on it. They’ve already spent something to buy the debt and bring suit. They have to know it will cost them more to chase you – and that it will keep costing even though they’ll never collect anything back from it.

In this article we discuss one of the fine points of negotiation: how to let someone find out something you want them to know – in a way that will make them respond the way you want them to respond.

Here’s a little warning: Unlike a lot of what we say, this will be more the “art” of negotiation than the “science” (so to speak) of law. You might have a different feeling about it, in which case you should think about it for yourself. Put some thought into it and come up with what you consider your best strategy – you’re the one who’s going to live with whatever happens, right?

The Situation: You’re Judgment Proof

You don’t have any money and don’t think you’re going to get any for a while. You want the debt collector to know that you’re judgment proof because you want them to go away.

But there is a “hidden” problem.

Being Judgment Proof Can Mean to the Judge that You Shouldn’t Defend Yourself

The law is much more practical than a lot of people give it credit for being. If you say you have “nothing to lose,” and the judge believes it, you may find yourself losing very quickly and without real fairness or equality. After all, the judge thinks, you have nothing to lose, so why bother? Really. That’s eminently practical, isn’t it? It is the way many of them think.

Most judges won’t say that, although some will. But who wants to waste his or her time on technical fairness when there’s nothing really at stake? The law is not designed or supposed to do that.

You Won’t Be Down Forever

But the fact is, you DO have something to lose. A lot. The worm turns – you may be down now, but however far you’re down now, it only takes a few good breaks, a couple things turning around, for you to be much better. Good luck often happens to people who keep trying their hardest and looking for it, and if it happens for you, let the good luck be for you and not the debt collector. You need to keep fighting even if it looks like you have nothing to lose. You MIGHT, and that’s enough.

Judgments last a long, long time, and do you want the break that could turn things around for you to enrich the debt collectors?

Losing May Hurt you in Ways you Haven’t Considered

The other thing is that the cost of losing may be greater than you suppose. It will hurt your credit report and raise all your costs of living in invisible ways, and… there are other costs, psychologically and socially.

Play to Win

Play to win. If you’re here, you’re already doing that. Don’t blow it now by casually telling anybody you have nothing to lose.  But you still want them to know you’re judgment proof. So how do you let them know?

You make them bleed for it.

Make them Pay for Any Information they Get – Even if it’s What you Want them to Know

Letting them know that they won’t gain anything from their efforts is really just half of your goal. The other half is that they must know that they will have to use a LOT of effort, and that it will cost them a lot of money (money they’ll probably never get back). Make sure they know that you will never give them anything without a fight – a fight that’s going to cost more than they could ever hope to win.

Can’t you just tell them that?

It’s better to show them how much effort will be required first. And that’s because talk is cheap. Lawyers should know, right? And they do. Telling them it will take effort is far, far different than requiring them to spend that effort. Of course, it takes far more effort on your part, too. It means you fight everything tooth and nail – don’t give them any information they aren’t entitled to, even when it’s what you want them to know. And if you watch them, you’ll see they don’t plan to give you even information you are entitled to. Fight hard.

How Much you Have, Where you Earn it, and Where you Keep it are “Irrelevant” to the Debt Collector’s Lawsuit

As we have often pointed out, contract cases involve what’s called “strict liability.” Almost. That is, there is only the question of whether you owe the money. No one cares WHY you owe the money or why you haven’t paid it off. No one even cares, legally, whether you can pay it off. The only legal issues for the court to decide on a debt case are: do you owe it to them? And, how much do you owe? That makes the amount of money you have (what you own), where you earn it (your job), how much you earn (your income), or where you keep it (your bank) all irrelevant. You should object and force the debt collectors to go to the judge (motion to compel) to force you to give it to them if they can.

Make them work to get it. Make them work hard and spend money. And then, if you have to answer, you will. It is, after all, what you wanted them to know in the first place. And if the judge denies their motion to compel and does not make you reveal the information about not having money or a job, you can just “drop it” into a conversation with the lawyer for the other side afterward (“Well, I don’t have any money anyway…”). But then you don’t give them proof – you just say it.

If you tell the other side you’re judgment proof too easily, the judge will find out. She will be tempted to find an excuse to rule against you as we said above. Fighting hard from the beginning – especially against divulging financial information – puts the lie to that more effectively than anything you could say. It proves you are taking the case seriously.

Watch out for Laziness

So now, consider your motives here. Isn’t a main reason you want to tell them you’re judgment proof just that you want them to go away without bugging you anymore? You’re tired of your troubles and the suit?

That’s the attitude you must beware of.

Yes, getting them to believe you are judgment proof might cause them to drop the case and reduce your overall effort and inconvenience, but your main weapon in debt litigation is the willingness to spend extraordinary efforts – and to make them do so.  And this is true whether the underlying debt was ever yours or not – it takes extraordinary efforts to defend any case. Don’t give up that weapon in the search for a short cut.

Make sure the things you do increase your chances of winning without hurting your underlying case.

Get a Copy of this Article for Yourself

Click here if you’d like a PDF copy of this article: Make them Bleed article. No sign-up required.

About Your Legal Leg Up

Your Legal Leg Up is a business dedicated to helping people fight debt collectors without having to hire expensive lawyers to do it. We offer you everything you need to defend your rights – with special help through our membership services to help make the process smoother, easier, and less worrisome. YourLegalLegUp.com has been in operation since 2007. Before that, Ken Gibert practiced law representing people being sued for debt among other types of consumer law.

If you would like to get a personalized evaluation of your situation, follow this link: https://yourlegallegup.com/pages/evaluation.

For further help, consider our Manuals and Memberships. We have materials on debt negotiations and settlement, forcing debt collectors to leave you alone, credit repair, and many other issues that arise when you are facing debt trouble.

Click here to sign up for our free newsletter, Fightdebt.

Help Evaluating Your Situation

Get Some Help Dealing with Debt Collectors
Get Some Help Dealing with Debt Collectors

Many visitors to our site are facing dramatic new situations:

  1. You may have just found out you’re being sued; or
  2. You have either received a debt collection letter or some other “threat.”

We can help. We can take a look at your situation and the material you were sent – whether it’s a letter or a lawsuit – and give you a roadmap of what to do. It isn’t legal advice, but think of it as a sort of “guided tour” of where you need to go and what you need to do. It will save you a lot of time, wasted energy, and anxiety. And you’ll come out of it with a good idea of what you’ll need to do to set things straight.

Being Sued?

If you are being sued, we can help you get oriented to the case. People ask us all the time whether they should file a motion to dismiss or Answer, and whether or not there are any potential counterclaims to the lawsuit. If those are the sorts of questions YOU have, this is a way to get a head start on figuring out the answers.

Being Harassed or Called or “Dunned”

But what if you aren’t being sued and have just received a phone call or two, or letter?  We do have a lot of information on the site to help you evaluate your situation yourself and figure out how to protect your rights, but if you’d like something a little more specific, you can now use this service, too.

Get Help

We have products and information you will need in the earlier stages of debt problems. The most important thing to remember is this: anything you do that makes it easier for them to sue and win also makes it more likely that they WILL sue you. What does that mean? It means that if you admit owing the debt, having made payments or anything like that, and if you tell them where you work or bank, you make it more likely you will be sued. You might think you are being “responsible” and appropriately cooperative, but it works differently in law and debt.

You will find materials on site that will help you navigate this stage of the problem, but if you want some more specific guidance on what to do given the things they are telling and send you, this product is for you.

If You Need Help

If you need one of these services, just click on this link and select the service you need. Note that clicking on the link will take you to our “home” site, Your Legal Leg Up. If you need a “rush” job (service in under 72 hours), be sure to go to the products page and order that as well. You will be given instructions with your receipt on what to send and how to do it – we will need images of the documents you have received as well as answers to certain questions. After you give us that information, we will have an analysis back to you within 72 hours (three days). If you need faster than that, you can order the “rush” service, although we do ask that you NOT do this unless you need it.

Verification or Validation – Using Both FDCPA and FCRA to Protect Your Rights

A smart person disputes and requires verification
A smart person disputes and requires verification

Verification under the FDCPA and FCRA – Use Both to Protect Your Rights

The information in this article and video is designed to help people being bothered or sued by debt collectors, or who are concerned about their credit reports and wish to take action to protect their rights.

Two Kinds of Verification and How to Use them to Protect Your Rights

We have spent much of our time talking about “verification” on our site and videos, and what we have meant in most of that has been the “verification” process provided by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). But there is another kind of validation you can use – validation as permitted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

We talk about that below and discuss how you can use both forms of validation, together or separately, to your advantage in defending yourself from the debt collectors and in repairing your credit.

The two kinds of verification are different rights. They apply in different circumstances, to possibly different “persons” under different circumstances, give different rights, and have different time requirements.

You can use them both, but they are completely separate. It is important to keep them straight.

Make sure you keep track of everything you do under either statute, and make sure that the response you get is appropriate for the statute you used for the specific right you invoke.

Rights under the FDCPA

Under the FDCPA, when a debt collector first contacts you on a debt, it is required by law to notify you of your right to dispute the debt and require “validation” or “verification.” The two words are used interchangeably, and the requirement is quite simple in general:

  • First, the debt collector must notify you of the right to dispute within 30 days (along with giving you the “mini-Miranda” warning – that anything you say may be used for collection of a debt) within five days of first contacting you.
  • And then, the debt collector must “verify” the debt if you ask within the thirty days provided.

Just to make clear, it is YOU who have 30 days to dispute after getting the notice of your rights. The debt collector does not literally even have to do anything at all and also has no time limit. It’s just that, if you dispute and request verification, it cannot make further attempts to collect on the debt until it has verified it.

Exactly what verifying it is, is not exactly clear.

It would appear that contacting the original creditor and “establishing” that the debt is yours would be enough. That’s because the purpose of the requirement is not to require a separate lawsuit, but just to protect consumers from harassment based on typos or mistaken identities. The debt collector has to take some action to connect you to the debt if you dispute it under the FDCPA.

Even this low burden often seems to be too much, and possibly that is because the second owner of the debt (if there is one) has no relationship to the original creditor and simply cannot get the debt verified.  Whatever the reason, asking for verification is often enough to make them go away. If they try to collect without having verified, that violates the FDCPA. And that in turn might allow you to stop a lawsuit brought against you.

Remember, however, that when the debt collector immediately files suit against you, this is not a “first contact” which triggers your right to notice and dispute. If you get served, you have to answer (or move to dismiss). It is not enough to request verification.

Disputing under the Fair Credit Reporting Act

There is another kind of validation, and it is completely different from the FDCPA, although you can use it to fight debt collectors, too. It is the validation provided for by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

This is your right to “dispute” an item on your credit report.

You do this after looking at your credit report and seeing something that is not positive. Let’s say you see a debt collector reporting that you owe a debt. Remember your right to verification under the FDCPA comes when the debt collector first contacts you to try to collect the debt. You can dispute a line item on your credit report at any time.

There are rules, and there are better and worse ways to do it. But it does not depend on the other side being a debt collector or having tried to collect the debt. It simply requires that they have put some bad information on your credit report.

When you seek verification under the FDCPA, the debt collector has to verify the debt before making further attempts to collect. When you “dispute” the debt under the FCRA, it doesn’t affect collection. Instead, you are forcing the company to “investigate” the debt and show that what it is saying to the credit reporting agencies is true.

If the company reporting you cannot validate the debt, it is just required to withdraw the offending credit reference. But it could still try to collect the debt.

If it does keep trying to collect the debt after withdrawing a bad credit reference, that might be a type of admission that it can’t prove the debt if the case goes to a lawsuit.

But it probably isn’t controlling on the case because “validation” of a credit report is not

the same thing as proving that the debt is valid.

A Helpful Strategy

Here’s a strategy that might be helpful. If you receive a bill from a junk debt buyer – a company that bought your debt from the original creditor, in other words – you should

send a request for verification under the FDCPA right away. Then you should and get your credit report and look at it.

If the debt collector is reporting your debt on your credit report, you will want to dispute the credit report and seek validation under the FCRA. Separately.

Remember these are completely different rights. Your sending two different disputes may confuse the debt collector, but remember that under the FDCPA it must provide proof as to your identity and its right to bug you, while under the FCRA it must explain why the information it put on your credit report was correct. The debt collector may not verify under the FCRA, in which case you can clear your credit report.

If it DOES try to validate, it will probably give you information that it would object to having to provide if it were suing you for the debt – so it’s a shortcut to some discovery in that situation.

You should not try to do the FCRA verification first because it takes too much time.

To do the credit dispute right you have to get your credit report and dispute it with the credit bureau before you dispute it with the debt collector under the FCRA if you want to protect all your rights. You don’t have time to work your way through the FCRA before asserting your FDCPA rights.

On the other hand, if the company does not verify under the FDCPA, that would be worth mentioning as a basis for your credit dispute.

We should add that when you get the first letter from the debt collector you may not even know whether it is reporting you on your credit report. They often do not, so you won’t know whether or not you will have anything under the FCRA. But if they are contacting you, you have the right under the FDCPA. Since it only lasts for 30 days, you need not to delay in disputing.

We always recommend sending your disputes by certified mail (and keep all the proof). You don’t have to do this legally, but these things often come down to a question of what you can prove, and having proof from the postal service is a very good investment.

If you would like a free copy of this article, click here to download: Two Kinds of verification article.

If you would like to get a personalized evaluation of your situation, follow this link: https://yourlegallegup.com/pages/evaluation. (Note that this link takes you to our “home” site, YourLegalLegUp.com, which has many more resources on these issues.

For further help, consider our Manuals and Memberships. We have materials on debt negotiations and settlement, forcing debt collectors to leave you alone, credit repair, and many other issues that arise when you are facing debt trouble.

Click here to sign up for our free newsletter, Fightdebt.

 

Jurisdiction – Why it Matters in FDCPA and Foreclosure

jurisdiction could mean difference between losing home or not
jurisdiction could mean difference between losing home or not

If someone is trying to take away your house for nonpayment of some debt, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) may – or may not – be useful to you. The law differs according to jurisdiction, and you will want to choose the one that gives you your best chance.

This article is a very basic primer on the interaction of state and federal jurisdiction when it comes to debt collection generally, and foreclosure more specifically. Wherever you live, you will want to consider both federal and state cases on applying the FDCPA to foreclosure if you want to sue a debt collector for its acts in taking, or trying to take, away your house.

Most Debtor-Creditor and Property Law is “State” Law

In theory, federal law only applies to areas of the law designated by the constitution, whereas everything else is controlled by state law. That can lead to confusing results where those interests overlap. In general, the laws creating and enforcing property rights (e.g., contract rights, debt, or property ownership rights) are state law. If you get sued for a debt, the action will almost certainly occur in a state (as opposed to federal) court. Foreclosure rights are also determined by state law.

Debt Collection Is a Special Situation

Claims under the FDCPA can be brought in either state or federal court. While property rights are creatures of state law, debt collection was considered so extensive a problem that it was a national (i.e., federal) problem. Thus Congress carved out a piece of debtor-creditor law for itself when it enacted the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which makes certain actions taken by debt collectors (primarily) illegal. The FDCPA is federal law, in other words, but as it happens it provides that it can be enforced in either federal or state courts.

Because of the way the federal and state law systems mesh, you could conceivably defend a collection action or foreclosure in state court by filing a counterclaim and seeking an injunction, by filing a separate action in state court under the FDCPA, or by filing a federal claim under the FDCPA and seeking an injunction in federal court. Likewise you could defend or settle a state collection action and then bring suit under the FDCPA in federal court (although remember that the FDCPA has a one-year statute of limitations). All of these variations occur quite often.

States are Independent of Each Other

The state law of the court in which the suit is brought will always determine some the procedures in the case and usually the actual “substantive” rights. Under certain circumstances other state laws might also apply (this comes up most frequently where there is a contract that specifies the state’s law that will apply). State laws and procedures can be different from state to state. If you live in Tennessee, you will be subject to the state laws of Tennessee, and these may (or may not) be very different in some important way than the laws of Pennsylvania, for example, or any other state.

If you are pro se (representing yourself), therefore, your first action must be to determine which state laws (and of which states) apply to which parts of your case at the basic debtor-creditor level. In other words, if you are being sued on a credit card debt, is the company suing you under the law of your home state? Or is it suing you under the laws of some other state? In foreclosure law, it will almost always be suing you (or foreclosing without suit) under the law of your own state.

The courts of one state are not bound in any way by the courts of any other state when they are dealing with their own laws, but they are subject to state courts of appeals and the state supreme courts (and sometimes in certain areas of the law, the U.S. Supreme Court).

State Courts are Independent of Federal Courts, too

Things get a little more complicated when it comes to state courts applying other states’ laws or federal law. In a general sense, they “should” determine what the appropriate court applying its own law would do. In reality, there is usually no appeal to those courts, and so the decisions can vary widely.

The Federal Law

The federal system is similar to the state system, except that eventually they all answer to the Supreme Court. That is, when the Supreme Court has spoken, all the federal courts are supposed to make decisions which are consistent with what the Supreme Court says. Because cases are always decided on the narrowest set of facts possible, and because there are so many laws and cases, however, the Supreme Court often will take many years before deciding a given issue. That leaves the lower courts to guess what the Supreme Court would say. One area where that is happening right now regards whether the FDCPA applies to foreclosure. Eventually the Supreme Court will decide one way or another, but until that time, the lower courts apply the law as they see fit. Sort of.

Each Federal Circuit Controls the District Courts below it

The federal (civil) judicial system is divided into three levels: district courts (where lawsuits are filed and tried); courts of appeal (“circuit courts of appeal”) and the Supreme Court. As described above, all courts answer to the Supreme Court. Below that, the federal circuit courts of appeal control all the district courts below them. Appeals are expensive, specially to the Supreme Court, and they are hard to win. Therefore it is vitally important to win, if at all possible, at the trial court level.

How the Different Jurisdictions Interact

Because the federal circuits are independent of one another, and the states are independent of one another and the federal courts, different places develop different rules arising out of the same law. A perfect example of that would be the way the 3rd, 4th and 9th federal circuits (and all the district courts below them) allow FDCPA claims against foreclosers, whereas the 7th and 11th federal circuits limit those rights. The states also vary from each other and the federal circuits.

Forum Shopping

What all those different decisions mean is that if you are being foreclosed on and think the FDCPA applies to your case, you need to “forum shop.” That is, after determining the state laws that apply to the foreclosure itself, your second task is to determine whether or not your state applies the FDCPA to foreclosure. If not, then does your federal circuit? You will need to look at the law for each and decide where to bring your claim. You can bring it in either federal or state law – you should bring it in the jurisdiction that seems most likely to apply the FDCPA to your foreclosure. Although this isn’t necessarily easy to tell, it can make or break your case, and you need to consider the question as a part of your initial strategy.

About Your Legal Leg Up

Your Legal Leg Up is a business dedicated to helping people fight debt collectors without having to hire expensive lawyers to do it. We offer you everything you need to defend your rights – with special help through our membership services to help make the process smoother, easier, and less worrisome. YourLegalLegUp.com has been in operation since 2007. Before that, Ken Gibert practiced law representing people being sued for debt among other types of consumer law.

If you would like to get a personalized evaluation of your situation, follow this link: https://yourlegallegup.com/pages/evaluation.

For further help, consider our Manuals and Memberships. We have materials on debt negotiations and settlement, forcing debt collectors to leave you alone, credit repair, and many other issues that arise when you are facing debt trouble.

Click here to sign up for our free newsletter, Fightdebt.

Foreclosure: A Debt Collection Method in Ordinary Life

Foreclosure is a form of collection
Foreclosure is collection

Foreclosure is Debt Collection

Foreclosure is a form of debt collection in the real world. Debt Collectors threaten to repossess and auction off property that secures a loan unless that loan is paid, or else they actually repossess and sell off the property, in order to pay the debt. This video and article discuss the way the process works.

What Foreclosure Does

Foreclosure is designed to allow for possession (or repossession) of property that was used to secure a debt that was subsequently unpaid. Most people simply think of foreclosure as “getting kicked out of your house,” and in many situations that is an appropriate understanding. In reality foreclosure addresses ownership rights rather than possession, however. It involves the termination of at least one person’s rights of ownership in favor of another person, and this can, but does not always, lead to eviction.

English Law and the History of Foreclosure and Property Rights

We don’t think of it very often, but one of the great inventions of English law was the division of property into different property “interests” or rights that could co-exist in the same property. The state “owns” physical property in one way, the landowner in another, and the tenant also has certain ownership rights, for example. If the landowner is married, both spouses will have rights in the property, and it is possible to divide the rights up in many other ways, too. Another form of coexisting rights is the way the same property could be owned by you, but subject to a mortgage and also various sorts of liens.

“Foreclosable” Interests

It is with the mortgage and liens we are primarily interested here, because these can be “foreclosed.” It is worth remembering that while most people (including the courts) only think of “purchase-money mortgages” (the mortgage you take out in order to buy your house) when they analyze foreclosure, there are other ways liens can be placed on your house (by the state for taxes or judgments, to name two), and all liens can be foreclosed. Mechanically what happens is that the foreclosing party causes the property interests to be divided and paid off – and the way that is accomplished is by selling the property and splitting the money up according to the priority of interests.

There is a definite hierarchy of interests, and the higher interests must be completely satisfied before the lower interests get anything. Eventually, if every interest is satisfied and money is left over, this would go to the property “owner.” Or to put it another way, being the property owner means that you get whatever is left after all the other interests are paid off (you are entitled to the “equity”). But usually, if there is not enough to cover all the secured interests, you will owe the secured parties money personally.

Two Examples of Foreclosure

Let’s consider two examples. In the first, Owner A each own houses worth $100,000 on the open market. That’s what it sells for.

Owner A

Owner A has the following liens against the property: a purchase money mortgage of $35,000, a home equity loan of $10,000, and a mechanic’s lien of $1,000.

$100,000 Value of House

($35,000) Purchase Money Mortgage
($10,000) Home Equity Loan
($ 1,000) Mechanic’s Lien
===================

$54,000 – Equity

Owner B

Owner B has the following liens against the property (in this order – the order of liens is beyond the scope of this article): a purchase-money mortgage of $110,000 (the house is “underwater” because the loan remaining is more than the house is worth); a home-equity loan of $10,000, and a mechanic’s lien of $1,000.

$100,000 Value of House

($110,000) Purchase Money Mortgage
($ 10,000) Home Equity
($ 1,000) Mechanics lien
=============

($21,000) equity (a negative number)

If neither one can pay off the purchase money mortgage, go into default, and are foreclosed, here’s what happens.

Results of Foreclosure

A loses possession of the house, and all security interests in the property are “extinguished.” The money is enough for the mortgage, and that is subtracted and given to the bank. Because the home equity loan and mechanic’s liens was “secured” by the house, the foreclosure breaches the contract with the lender. It intervenes (legally) in the foreclosure and demands its money and gets paid before anything goes to A. Because the lien was “subject” to the other agreements, it gets paid afterward, again before A gets anything.

In B’s situation, the bank gets all the money, and the lenders are left with claims against B. Their security interests in the property are extinguished, and chances are good they’ll lose everything they had lent.

Why Debt Collectors Often Do Not Foreclose

What if, instead of not paying the bank, A and B had failed to pay the home equity loan? In that situation, the Home Equity lender could foreclose on the loan. Lower level security interests can foreclose on the loan. It would be conceivable that any other person with an interest in the property, including the mechanic, might take some action to intervene in order to protect its interests, although in B’s case, especially, this is unlikely. The bank will get all the money, and the home equity lender will get nothing even though it is the one that foreclosed.

This explains why debt collectors rarely foreclose on a house. It will cost them money but get them nothing. But that isn’t to say they couldn’t or that it would never make sense for them to do or threaten to do.

About Your Legal Leg Up

Your Legal Leg Up is a business dedicated to helping people fight debt collectors without having to hire expensive lawyers to do it. We offer you everything you need to defend your rights – with special help through our membership services to help make the process smoother, easier, and less worrisome. YourLegalLegUp.com has been in operation since 2007. Before that, Ken Gibert practiced law representing people being sued for debt among other types of consumer law.

If you would like to get a personalized evaluation of your situation, follow this link: https://yourlegallegup.com/pages/evaluation.

For further help, consider our Manuals and Memberships. We have materials on debt negotiations and settlement, forcing debt collectors to leave you alone, credit repair, and many other issues that arise when you are facing debt trouble.

Click here to sign up for our free newsletter, Fightdebt.

Counterclaims When You’re Sued for Debt: Important for Your Defense

howdoyousolve.jpg
Filing a counter claim is probably the single most important thing you can do in defending yourself from a lawsuit brought by a debt collector. There’s a great deal to say about counterclaims in debt law cases, and I suggest you look closely at the text of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act itself as you consider what, if any, counterclaims you will bring. In this article, we will just discuss the importance of filing a counterclaim in general

Counterclaim – Why So Important?

In most jurisdictions, which is a fancy way of saying most courts and places, a plaintiff (the person bringing the lawsuit) is allowed to drop the case (that’s called “dismissing”) if it want to. And usually at any time it wants to. This isn’t true of federal court, where you have to get permission, but in most state courts it seems to be true. And debt cases are pretty much always brought in state courts.

That means that the debt collector could get tired of you and just dismiss the case at any time.

That’s cool! That’s just what we want and what I’ve been saying you should go for, right?

Yes, but if the debt collector simply dismisses your case, it could also sue you again later or sell the debt to someone else who would sue you later, and that is definitely not cool! You need the case dismissed “with prejudice” to keep it from coming back.

Counterclaims Stop Them from Suing You Again!

So how do you keep them from dismissing the suit and refiling the suit later? You do this by filing a counterclaim against them. A plaintiff can dismiss its own lawsuit, but not your claim against it.

Unless you agree. So if they want to dismiss the case against you either because your claims are good or because they don’t want to spend the money chasing you, they either have to settle the case with you, or they’re still left defending against your counterclaim. They never do that, because then they’d be bound to lose money one way or another. They’d either have to pay you or their lawyers (or both), — and without the chance of collecting anything from you. The worst of all worlds. They won’t do that. Instead, they’ll settle the whole case with you.

So a counterclaim gives you power over the plaintiff and lets you keep it around till they agree to destroy the debt (or “extinguish” it, as it is called). A counterclaim means you can put the harassment to an end. And sometimes your counterclaim can be worth a lot more than their lawsuit against you was in the first place.

About Your Legal Leg Up

Your Legal Leg Up is a business dedicated to helping people fight debt collectors without having to hire expensive lawyers to do it. We offer you everything you need to defend your rights – with special help through our membership services to help make the process smoother, easier, and less worrisome. YourLegalLegUp.com has been in operation since 2007. Before that, Ken Gibert practiced law representing people being sued for debt among other types of consumer law.

If you would like to get a personalized evaluation of your situation, follow this link: https://yourlegallegup.com/pages/evaluation.

For further help, consider our Manuals and Memberships. We have materials on debt negotiations and settlement, forcing debt collectors to leave you alone, credit repair, and many other issues that arise when you are facing debt trouble.

Click here to sign up for our free newsletter, Fightdebt.

 

Is Bankruptcy the Best Option when You’re Sued for Debt?

When people are being sued for debts, they often panic and look for the quickest, easiest, or least scary way out. And bankruptcy often occurs to them as the solution. I believe there are often much more effective ways to handle old debt, especially credit card or merchant account debt that has been sold to a debt collector, than bankruptcy.You can defend yourself without hiring a lawyer, and even if that doesn’t work out – which it usually does – you could still file bankruptcy. But if you can avoid bankruptcy, you will reduce the harm the debt does to you.

Panic is not necessary, and bankruptcy—at least at first–is seldom the best solution in a real-world sense. Here’s why.

 

goodthingsoutofbad.jpg

Types of Debt

Debt is divided into two types: “unsecured,” and “secured.” Secured debt means that the debt has specific assets backing it. If you miss payments, you can have your house foreclosed or your car repossessed. These things “secured” the debt and can be repossessed and sold if you stop making payments.

Unsecured Debt

Unsecured debt is debt that is not secured-it isn’t attached to any specific assets. Just because a debt is “unsecured” does not mean that you cannot be sued for the debt. On the contrary, it means you must be sued in person for the debt collector to collect any money. And it cannot repossess the thing. The creditor then “enforces” the judgment against you by garnishing wages or attaching accounts. But this can be difficult for various reasons.

Secured Debt

Lenders on secured debts are in a much better position than those who are not secured. One of those advantages comes in bankruptcy.

In the bankruptcy law, the item securing a debt is really regarded as belonging to the creditor who lent the money if the payment is not made. Specifically, consider a mortgage on a house. The house “secures” the debt, and if you stop making payments the bank can take the house and sell it to pay the debt. In the bankruptcy law, it is considered unjust to allow someone not paying for the property to keep it from the rightful owner. So the lender typically asks for the bankruptcy “stay” to be “lifted” so that foreclosure can take place. Although this can sometimes be delayed, the courts usually “relieve” the lenders and allow them to foreclose on the house and kick the debtor out.

Unsecured Debt

With unsecured debt, on the other hand, the debts are simply added up and paid according to how much money the bankrupt person has. Usually very, very little. And only at the end of the bankruptcy procedure.

Bankruptcy May Not Help When It Applies

What all that means practically is that if you have a large secured debt (mortgage) that you cannot pay, bankruptcy will offer you very little protection. If you have a large unsecured debt, bankruptcy will probably protect you, but it is slow, time-consuming and expensive compared to defending yourself against the debt collector.

Some examples may help make it clearer.

Consider the Smiths. The Smiths have a house and make payments of $2,500 per month. Mr. Smith loses his job and they fall behind in their payments. If the family seeks bankruptcy as their house payments add up, the lender will obtain “relief from the stay” and foreclose on the house. The Smiths are out of luck, and bankruptcy usually does not help.

Now consider the Joneses. If the Joneses have credit card debt of $25,000 and Mrs. Jones loses her job so they can’t make payments, they could seek bankruptcy help. It would probably cost them at least a thousand dollars or more to file, require them to disclose most or all of their finances over the past year or two, and fill out a vast amount of paperwork. At the end of the proceeding, at least a year later, their debts would be wiped out. But so, of course, would their credit reports. The bankruptcy filing will remain a mark against them for ten years.

not-alone600x150[1].jpg

An Alternative: Defense

The Jones could, however, simply defend themselves against the lawsuits brought by the debt collectors. For reasons I’ve made clear elsewhere, their chances of winning the suit would be excellent, and if the Jones do it right, they can simply get the debt eliminated. This does not usually mean completely cleaning their credit reports, but it can often mean canceling the debt and removal of the recent credit report damage. And it usually will happen in less than six months from the date the debt collector brings suit. They won’t have the bankruptcy on their credit report. They can do it themselves for almost no money at all, and if by chance it doesn’t work, then they could declare bankruptcy.

In addition, if you are facing debt troubles, chances are good the debt collectors have made some mistakes that violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and give rise to a counterclaim, which increases your chance of fighting the debt.

Conclusion

Better results, less cost. That’s why it’s often better to defend yourself against credit card debt than to seek bankruptcy protection. It’s also true that if for any reason the Jones lost their case against the debt collectors, they could still file for bankruptcy without having lost its protection.

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is the centerpiece of legal protections for debtors against debt collectors. The law was passed in its essential form in 1977, and its goal was to protect debtors against the abuses of debt collectors. This article discusses what makes this law great, and some of its limitations.

Doyoutrust

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)  was enacted to put an end to some of the worst practices of the debt collection industry. It’s been a very good law, but the debt collectors are still doing many of the things the law was designed to present. You may be able to sue them or prevent them from suing you.

The Debt Collection Industry

Before the act, the debt collection industry was routinely engaging in the most abusive sorts of behavior imaginable, from calling debtors at all hours of the day or night and subjecting them to streams of cursing and name-calling, to discussing their debt with children, neighbors, and employers. Debt collectors frequently misrepresented themselves as attorneys and often threatened legal action which they were powerless to initiate. And they often attempted to, and did, collect debts that either never existed or were long unenforceable because of statutes of limitation or bankruptcy.
Whatever the staid spokespeople of the debt collection industry may say, this is the background of their industry. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1692, et seq., was enacted to put a stop to these extreme behaviors in 1977. Because the people intended to be protected by the act are underrepresented by lawyers, and because of the explosion of debt litigation over the past decade, many of the old abuses still continue, and as people increasingly defend themselves from the debt collectors, they develop new tricks all the time.

The FDCPA: A Pretty Good Law

Nevertheless, the FDCPA is in many ways a model piece of legislation. What makes the law so powerful is that, in addition to making certain enumerated acts illegal, the Act also more generally makes acts that are “oppressive,” “false or misleading representations,” or “unfair practices” illegal. This means that, whereas in most laws, the would-be wrongdoer is free to craft his actions around the specific language of the law and find “loopholes,” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, at least, the consumer may argue that these actions are still unfair or oppressive. The Supreme Court has ruled that an “unfair” act can be shown by demonstrating that it is “at least within the penumbra” of some common law, statutory “or other established concept” of unfairness.

That’s pretty broad. The price for this flexibility, however, is that the remedies—what you get if you prove the case—are less powerful. And this may be why the practices are still occurring today.

As mentioned above, there are specific actions enumerated in the FDCPA, and these include most notably, suing on expired debts, filing suit in distant jurisdictions, publishing certain types of information regarding the debtor, calling outside of specified hours. And the list goes on. If the debt collector is acting in some highly offensive way, chances are he’s within the specific provisions of the Act. These can be found at 15 U.S.C. 1692c, d, e and f. You can find the specifics by Googling the Act or provision and determining whether the specific action you’re concerned about is within one of these provisions.