collection defense

Portfolio Recovery Associates Credit Card Lawsuit Defeated – Alabama Collection Defense Lawyer Judson E. Crump

October 14, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump 2 Comments

This was a Mobile County circuit court collection case where Portfolio Recovery Associates sought over $6,000 from my client for an old US Bank credit card. We won on the merits at trial.

This case represents a trend I’ve noticed among the circuit judges here in Alabama: allowing sketchy debt buyer evidence into the record, but finding in the defendant’s favor anyway.

My client was a good and honest woman who was working hard to claw her way out of debt. She had recently received a promotion at work that boosted her income just above the threshold for garnishment. So when she got served with lawsuit papers from Portfolio Recovery Associates, she was very afraid. Losing 25% of her paycheck to a garnishment would destroy her financially. They were suing her for $6,100, alleging that she owed that balance from a credit card she had once had with U.S. Bank.

She attempted to conduct some basic discovery on her own, and though it did help her delay the trial of the matter, it did not ultimately help her case. The collector didn’t back down and insisted on taking her to trial. Luckily, she hired me in time to analyze her case for all possible defenses. At trial, I objected to their evidence on several grounds, and while the judge considered it a close decision, he ultimately let the evidence be admitted, but took my objections into consideration as to the weight of the evidence. What does that mean? Basically, it means “We agree that the evidence is sketchy, but not so sketchy that we’re going to completely exclude it. Instead, we’ll take a look at it and consider the sketchiness of the evidence as we make a decision.”

This was a bench trial, and experienced judges can do that. I suspect that in a jury trial, where ordinary people cannot realistically be expected to ignore admissibility issues when judging the reliability of a piece of paper they’ve been given, the judge would have sustained my objection.

In the end, the judge found that the evidence just wasn’t strong enough to issue a judgment against my client. While it is a bit more difficult to win like this, it ultimately is better for the consumer because the decision is virtually immune to appeal. Decisions on admissibility are thumbs-up or down decisions that an appellate court can overturn for any good reason. Decisions as to the credibility of witnesses and the finding of facts are the purpose of the trial court, and could only be reversed if the court of appeals found that the trial court’s decision was so wrong that no reasonable person could possibly reach that decision.

Here, the judge made the right decision, and another Alabama consumer was saved from financial ruin by a debt collector.

Midland Funding Lawsuit Defeated – Mobile, Alabama Attorney Judson E. Crump

October 8, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump Leave a Comment

My client was sued by Midland Funding for a credit card account they said he once had with HSBC Bank Nevada, NA. I answered the complaint for him and the case was set for trial. The collection lawyer was there with a stack of documents they said proved their case. I objected to them, and normally I succeed in getting their evidence kicked out. But the judge let them into the record anyway. It didn’t matter.

Went to Trial against Midland Funding and won, again.

The judge considered their evidence, but found that it just wasn’t enough, so we won. I’ve represented consumers sued by Midland Funding 4 times this year and beaten them 4 times. Hopefully I can keep up this streak.

No lawyer can ever promise a victory in court or any result, for that matter. But if you live in Alabama and you have received notice of a lawsuit by Midland Funding or Midland Credit Management, then you may want to give me a call. 251.272.9148.

Cavalry SPV I, LLC collection lawsuit dismissed – Alabama Collection Defense Lawyer Judson E Crump

August 7, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump Leave a Comment

One of my clients was sued by Cavalry SPV I, LLC for a Capital One Best Buy credit card. They claimed that he owed about $5,000 and that they were the assignees of the debt. That means that Capital One/Best Buy gave up on trying to collect from him directly, and sold the account to Cavalry SPV I, LLC. Cavalry is a debt buyer, which means that their entire business revolves around purchasing old charged off accounts from creditors who either cannot or will not (because they don’t want their name associated with the negative PR) take legal action on their own.

"Mr. T" was sued for a Capital One / Best Buy credit card that was allegedly assigned to Cavalry. We convinced the collectors to dismiss the suit rather than go to trial. — “Mr. T” was sued for a Capital One / Best Buy credit card that was allegedly assigned to Cavalry. We convinced the collectors to dismiss the suit rather than go to trial.

I entered the case after my client had answered pro se and received a trial date notice. I contacted the opposing counsel about their evidence and we agreed to have the case dismissed with prejudice. This means that the debt, if it ever existed, is gone forever. My client can send that court order to the credit bureaus and demand that they remove the account from his credit report.

Cavalry SPV I, LLC Collection Lawsuit Defeated- Alabama Collection Defense Attorney Judson E Crump

August 1, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump 3 Comments

Our client was sued twice by Cavalry SPV I, LLC for $2598.80 on a credit card he once had with HSBC. The card had, allegedly, been transferred to Capital One Bank, N.A. at some point, and then to Cavalry SPV I, LLC. Cavalry SPV I, LLC then sued my client. He answered the complaint pro se (after having read my book) and then hired me to come to trial for him. I notified the collection attorneys of my appearance in the case and requested copies of their evidence. We were able to convince the judge to exclude their evidence from the record and rule in our favor.

Our client was sued by Cavalry SPV I, LLC for an HSBC credit card. We won.

The case was heard in the District Court of Mobile County, Alabama. The debt, if it ever existed, must now be permanently removed from my client’s credit reports. Another victory for Alabama working folks!

Who is Ferry & Nicholas? Why you should not hire them. – Alabama Consumer Credit Attorney Judson E Crump

July 28, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump Leave a Comment

If you have received a letter from a “firm” called “Ferry & Nicholas,” it means that you have been sued by a credit card company or debt collector. Ferry & Nicholas runs a clever little scheme. See, they’re not lawyers, which means that they don’t have to comply with the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. Why does this matter? Because the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct forbid lawyers from sending people letters until 7 days have passed since you were served with the lawsuit.

Now, I know full well that most bankruptcy lawyers don’t bother to comply with this rule – they just print the list of lawsuits from the court in their county and have their secretaries blast letters to every lawsuit debtor. And these letters tell you how great and easy and cheap and perfect-for-every-situation bankruptcy is, and that if you don’t file bankruptcy, you’re pretty much doomed to a life of decrepitude. Of course, that’s total bullshit, but that’s another issue for another day.

Ferry & Nicholas is a company that preys on people who don't know the legal system. You can hire a real lawyer to get you a better deal for less money. — Ferry & Nicholas is a company that preys on people who don’t know the legal system. You can hire a real lawyer to get you a better deal for less money.

Ferry & Nicholas, however, doesn’t even have to pretend to comply. So all of these people — who have no idea they’ve even been sued, and that they’re about to enter a precarious situation where it is very important to protect their legal rights, and who really need access to real legal advice about their situation — these people get introduced to the legal debt collection system by someone who is utterly unqualified to represent debtors and their interests.

Now, some may say “what’s the harm?” At least you’re getting an advance warning that the lawsuit is coming, right? Well, to the extent that some debtors are sophisticated people who understand how the court system works and know the risks of hiring a debt settlement factory to do a lawyer’s job, yes, there is no harm. But unfortunately, most people don’t know the legal system. And most people don’t know that Ferry & Nicholas cannot do a thing to stop Midland Funding or Portfolio Recovery Associates or LVNV Funding or whoever it is from taking a judgment against you.

So they don’t know that when they hire Ferry & Nicholas, the clock is still ticking on the deadline to answer the lawsuit. And in District or Small Claims Court, that deadline is only 14 days. In Circuit Court, the deadline is 30 days. And what happens if the deadline passes while Ferry & Nicholas is negotiating, or, as they call it, “mediating” your debt?

A default is entered against you. Which means that you’ve lost your lawsuit, which means that the creditor has utterly no motivation to settle with you. By contrast, you could spend the same amount of money hiring a real attorney, and either settle for a deep discount or beat the lawsuit completely.

I had a client who hired Ferry & Nicholas and they “successfully” settles a collection case for her. But unfortunately, Ferry & Nicholas didn’t do anything to make sure the collector stuck to the deal. And here’s the craziest part: they didn’t even get the deal in writing! Their ‘mediation’ was a telephone call they made with the collection lawyer – and the deal they struck? A 0% discount! They agreed to a judgment of the FULL AMOUNT OF THE LAWSUIT. YOU CAN DO BETTER THAN THAT WITHOUT HIRING ANYONE. With a decent lawyer, you can do wayyy better than that.

So if you get a letter from Ferry & Nicholas, throw it in the trash and get some real help.

$19,000 Default Judgment Vacated – Alabama Collection Defense Attorney Judson E. Crump

July 11, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump 3 Comments

If you are not served with the Summons and Complaint in a collection lawsuit, then a default judgment entered against you in that lawsuit is void. That was the point I made to the Mobile County Circuit Court at a hearing on my Motion for Relief from a default judgment on July 11th. My client had apparently been sued by Credit Acceptance Corp. back in 2010. They were unable to serve process (meaning deliver a copy of the lawsuit papers) upon her directly, so they sent a copy by certified mail to the address they had on file for her. The U.S. Postal Service delivered it and someone signed for delivery.

The collection attorneys filed a copy of the signed return receipt with the court and moved for a default judgment. It was granted without opposition. There was one problem, though: my client didn’t live at that address. She had lived there briefly back in 2006, but had long since moved away. So the person who signed for it was not capable of receiving service for her.

It is possible to "undo" a default judgment after it has been entered, but only if you can show that you never had a chance to see the Complaint. — It is possible to “undo” a default judgment after it has been entered, but only if you can show that you never had a chance to see the Complaint.

She didn’t even know about the judgment until one day out of the blue, her paycheck was missing some of its dollars. She found out that she’d been garnished on a judgment she never knew existed. So she came to me for help. I filed a motion for relief from the judgment. It was granted and now my client will have her chance to defend herself from this suit.

Normally, default judgments are permanent. They are only reversed in specific circumstances, and if the complaint was received by an adult at your address, or someone who is your agent (like a spouse), you’re stuck with it. But when you can show that you’ve never been served with the complaint in the first place, your constitutional right to due process of law provides that you can reverse the default judgment and get your day in court.

Who’s suing you, Part IV: Who is Cavalry SPV I, LLC? – Alabama Consumer Credit Attorney Judson E Crump

June 13, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump 7 Comments

Cavalry SPV I, LLC is a fairly standard debt buyer. They purchase old accounts that have been charged off to loss by the original creditor. I have fought Cavalry SPV I, LLC in court before. On August 27, 2013, I tried the case “Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Andry” in the District Court of Mobile County, Alabama, and won a judgment for the defendant. That lawsuit was brought on an account allegedly owed to CitiFinancial for about $3,000. Now it is gone forever.

I have defeated or dismissed several cases Cavalry SPV I has brought against Alabama citizens since then, so I can assure you: with the right lawyer on your side, you do have a fighting chance!

If you have received a summons from Cavalry SPV I, LLC, be sure to answer the lawsuit. Cavalry SPV I often doesn’t send collection letters or make phone calls before suing you, so some people assume that the summons is bogus or a scam. Whatever else they might be, Cavalry SPV I, LLC is not a scam! If you read my articles, you know that I will tell you if an outfit is a scam or not, and Cavalry SPV I is not. They are a real debt buyer and if you get a summons from them, it is a real lawsuit and if you don’t answer, they will get a default judgment against you and that will enable them to place liens on your property and garnish your wages and bank accounts. Trust me: you don’t want a default judgment against you.

Fortunately, Cavalry SPV I, LLC is not hard to beat in court if you have the right lawyer on your side.

Why I defend People From Credit Card Lawsuits – Alabama Consumer Credit Attorney Judson E Crump

May 15, 2014 by Attorney Judson E Crump Leave a Comment

I regularly go to court to fight lawsuits against people who legitimately do owe some money to the people suing them. Is that morally acceptable? Is it ethical for me as an attorney? Yes, because being in financial trouble is not a crime. The people I represent have already tried to pay their bills, but their creditors have chosen to sue them instead of make affordable settlement arrangements. By fighting these suits, I send a message that you should consider working with your delinquent customers before taking them to court. Because if you go to court against a well-defended debtor, you may end up with nothing at all.

Moreover, the banks I fight are all based in big cities far away from my community. I consider it a duty to do what I can to keep as much of the hard-earned money of the people of South Alabama as possible right here. Our local businesses need customers whose wages aren’t being shipped out to Delaware or New York. Everyone wins if the justice system isn’t twisted into some giant collection machine.