Class War and Debt Law

June 6, 2018

Class War – How it Applies to Debt Law

There is a class war going on, but is an “undeclared war,” where the wealthy and politically connected are being allowed to do anything they want andtake anything they want, and the poor and working classes are left to foot the bill. We at YourLegalLegUp believe that Debt Collection is a Social Justice Issue, both in who is targeted, and the methods used. If you are being targeted, you can and should defend yourself. Use our materials to start protecting what’s yours.

As we often say, around 90 percent of people being sued for debt do not defend themselves. Consider what that means: it means that it’s really more expensive for a debt collector to find out whether it has a good case against you – much less to build it and beat you in court if you fight – than just to bring cases and dismiss them if things get tough. And that’s exactly what most debt collectors do. Therefore, rather than look for words to scare the debt collector away, it makes sense to build a tough defense that makes them work hard to try to beat you. That’s what the our materials help you do. No magic words or secret loopholes, just intelligent defense which makes the debt collectors think they’ll lose money by chasing you and gives you a chance to win even if they do.

You may know that the value of time worked has gone down quite a bit in the past forty years, while the value of things – stocks, bonds, collectibles, etc., has gone up. As has the cost of living. What that means in plain English is that the rich have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer. This is not some sort of weird accident or fluke of nature. Rather, it is the result of deliberate policies by the government and banks.

Don’t let them rip you off in court.

Blaming the Victims

June 6, 2018

Blaming the Victims – Defending Banks by Ridiculing Consumers

Debt collectors often ridicule consumers who got in over their heads, but the banks themselves have set up their business models to encourage debt and debt troubles. Don’t fall for debt collector false morality – fight back.

Blaming the Banks for the Problems they Caused

Has it occurred to you that all or most of your problems were caused by the very bank that is now suing you or that the debt collector purchased the debt from and is now suing you for? Would that work as a defense against their claims?

My feeling about saying the banks caused all the problems with their various practices -either by lending to you when you were a bad credit risk or by crashing the economy in general – is that it will not work. It’s a kind of “unclean hands” argument, but I believe the concept of “proximate cause” will prevent the argument from working. The people who argue that this argument will work in court have my sympathy, and everybody knows that I do believe the banks caused many of the difficulties people have in paying their bills. The argument has or may have some effect as a social-movement type force, but legally… very iffy. In my opinion it should not work – which is not to say that it never will, of course, so you must make your own judgment.

Proximate Cause

The problem with arguing that “the banks” caused your problems is “proximate cause.” Proximate cause means the “specific problem” must be linked to specific actions by a specific entity. Viewed in that light, how can you argue that, say, Capital One, by extending credit cards and maintaining their policies, has really “caused” anything to happen in society? Many people may believe that the banks, collectively, caused big problems that resulted in raising taxes and sucking resources away from regular people, but how can you assign a specific role in that to Capital One?

Likewise, how do you prove that Capital One caused you problems that you could not have, and should not have, overcome? If we were truly in a capitalistic society the argument simply could not be made: the fact that you did not overcome the problem would be proof that you should not have done so. But we live in an age of bailouts and government interference, of course.

Tell that to the judge, a life-time public employee wielding far-reaching government power every day of his or her professional life.

And then the final zinger: how do you prove what specific action by your specific bank caused some specific injury to you?

Cigarette Litigation

This whole complex of proximate cause issues prevented anyone from winning cigarette litigation for decades. What finally allowed people to get through and win some of the cases was very strong evidence of conspiracy to hide specific facts that the companies knew and had a duty to disclose. There may be evidence of banking conspiracy – there is in some cases – but unlike a cigarette plaintiff who died of lung cancer, you will be hard pressed to show how your injury came from the banks’ action unless there are more specific grounds for applying the doctrine of unclean hands.

Cutting Edge Arguments and a Warning

As I say, I have my sympathies for the position that banks should not be permitted to profit from disasters they themselves caused. And many arguments that end up winning started out as sounding a little far-fetched. So you could consider it. On the other hand, the courts sometimes punish what they consider to be “frivolous” arguments and disputes. Arguments talking about banks and banking, like arguments claiming that our monetary system is completely corrupt live on the edge of “frivolousness” from the point of view of the courts. It would be possible that they could make you pay for taking that position.

Practical Defense

If you are actually defending yourself from a debt collector or defending against a foreclosure, there are weapons available for you to use against the banks, but you will probably not win by arguing the broader social issues or “justice.” You will need to take the practical steps you can.

Things you Should Know before you Settle

June 6, 2018

Things You Should Know before You Settle with the Debt Collector

If you’re being sued by a debt collector, you’re probably worried–of course you are–but think twice before settling the case just to make it go away. Sometimes that can be a very bad idea, and if you will hang in there and fight a little bit, you’ll be in much better shape.

A Few Basic Facts about Settling Debt Cases

The lawyers for the debt collector never worry about losing a suit – they always assume they will win. And has nothing to do with the evidence, because they rarely have any idea of what the evidence is or what they could prove if they have to. Their confidence comes from two things: they don’t worry about losing a case because they have many of them and they’re cheap. And they don’t think you – a non-lawyer – have much of a chance against them anyway. So going to court and claiming they’ll win (if you try to negotiate) is nothing to them at all – and it should mean nothing to you, either.

So what do the lawyers for the debt collector fear? They fear wasting time – or spending it at all. That’s why they never do more than glance at your case before you show up. They have the business down to spending just a very few minutes per case.

They can do this because they do lots of cases at the same time and because most people give up or default.

So in Order to Settle in Any Meaningful Way

In order for you to get them to take you seriously, you will need to do a little work – and you will need to make them do a little work. Before that happens, they might knock off 20-30% of what the case is seeking if you ask (or they might not), but they won’t do serious negotiation. To settle, you have to file an answer and begin to defend yourself. Once you file an Answer and serve them some discovery, they start noticing you, and after that the chances of settling just get better and better.

And so do your chances of winning outright.

So hang tough for a bit and do a few things – they’re easy to do and not really scary. And if you want to settle eventually you can be sure that you will have made that easier and better. Or keep fighting and see if you can make them give up.

Tip 1 Uncommon Common Sense

June 6, 2018

Tip 1: Standing up for yourself isn’t hard – it’s just different

And it gets easier

You probably wouldn’t believe how often I get asked the question: “is it hard to defend yourself from the debt collectors?”

Or maybe you would.

If you’re being sued or harassed by a debt collector, one of the very first decisions you face is whether or not to defend yourself. And it is tempting to walk away, no doubt. So what you want to know is, how hard is it not to run away, but to stay and fight?

And luckily, it isn’t really hard.

One Step at a Time

I’ve started a lot of things in my time that if I’d had any idea how much work they would involve I probably never would have started in the first place. Fighting debt collectors is probably not going to be one of these things for you. But what makes it possible even to do the truly difficult things in life is simply to concentrate on the one step in front of you. As a debt defendant you will have a series of these steps. That’s what lawsuits are – a series of things to do, like steps. How many steps it will actually take, no one can say. What I can say, with certainty, is that if you are reasonably smart and willing to work a little bit, you can do every single step. One at a time.

Debt law isn’t rocket science.

You’re going to need to file an Answer or Motion to Dismiss. Could you do that if you set aside ten hours to do it? Yes. Using our litigation materials, it will take you half an hour to draft an answer, and you can do it yourself without our litigation materials in a somewhat longer time.

You’re going to need to draft “discovery,” which is the formal way you ask the other side what they have to use against you – what could hurt or help you. Could you do that? Yes, you could. Our materials make it relatively easy, but again you can do this on your own.

You may need to file or respond to a motion. Or more than one motion. Can you do it? Certainly you can.

And so it goes. You need to develop a broad strategic plan and then take a series of very manageable steps to get there. You may or may not need to take them all – again, only the debt collector really knows how far it will take things – but you can take every necessary step from being served with the suit through trial if necessary. Each step is relatively simple.

The Difficulty is in your Mind

What is “hard” about standing up for yourself is not the actual standing up or doing what needs to be done. What is hard is to do something different than you have done. Debt troubles are usually not an accident. They are usually the result of certain actions that you or someone took (or failed to take). They are often the result of certain habits. And these habits often accompany a habit of not “taking charge.”

Habits can be hard to break, but anyone can do it if they’re determined enough, right?

Standing up for yourself is “taking charge.” It’s just a different mind-set. Easy as pie – and hard as the devil! I won’t kid you – if you are going to defend yourself you must be willing to start to make the shift from “letting things happen to you” to “taking charge.” It isn’t “hard,” in the sense of physical labor or even intellectual challenge, but it does require paying attention to things you haven’t paid attention to before. And it requires looking at something you’d probably rather not look at, right?

It does require “growth.”

This growth is why people who do stand up for themselves and beat the debt collectors feel so good about doing it. Even more than the money, maybe, standing up for yourself and growing into that sort of person is deeply satisfying and – yes – liberating. You will never be sorry if you take on the debt collectors. Any work you do on it will be “good” work. You’ll know that right from the very beginning, and you’ll get to like it more and more, probably.

The difficulty is just in changing. It’s like stepping through a wall that isn’t really there. So if you’re going to do this, start today to look out for yourself. And watch for the next tip tomorrow.

Understanding Opportunity Costs in Debt Litigation

June 6, 2018

Tip 3 of Uncommon Common Sense

June 6, 2018

Tip 3: Time is Always of the Essence

Everything in law is tied to a due date – a deadline. The rules provide very specific amounts of time for everything you must do, and missing those deadlines, while not always fatal in itself, will usually lead to dire consequences.

On the other hand, the deadlines can seem so far away as to be unlike deadlines at all, so that you are tempted to hang around doing nothing without any regard to time at all.

Time is ALWAYS Limited – You’re Either Gaining Ground or Losing it – All the Time

It is tempting to believe in litigation, as in life, that time is unlimited – that there will always be time to do the things you need to do. And the truth in law, at least, is that if you know how to do things and you are willing to take extreme action at some given points in time, it is possible to stave off disaster most of the time.

Rising to the serious occasions that come up while ignoring developing problems most of the rest of the time is very stressful, and you are likely to try to rely on someone else to do something for you on very short notice. If you are defending yourself pro se – that is, without a lawyer – you simply do not know enough about the law to be able to afford to operate “by the seat of the pants” in this way. You don’t know what it takes to do most of the tasks set before you, and you don’t know how long it will take. Therefore, you have to start long before you feel like you’re running out of time.

I often receive messages from people with a court date a day or two away, or a response to a significant motion due in a day or two. I cannot respond to many of these messages. If you had money you could hire a lawyer and trade money for time, to an extent. For most of the people reading this, however, that is simply not going to be an option. You’re trying to trade your time for money.

So what do you do? What do you do in order to stay on top of the deadlines?

First, of course, you must know how much time you are allowed by the rules to do each step. We are going to discuss that tomorrow. Today, however, I just want to emphasize something we all know all the time, and yet we ignore most of the time: time passes. If you want to win your case, you have to use the time you’ve got carefully – even when it appears that you have more than you need.

Staying On Track

The main trick of having “enough” time in litigation is knowing exactly how much time you have to do any given task. And then you must give yourself that time to do what it takes. Since you won’t be experienced in the law, you won’t be able to predict very accurately how much time things will take. Therefore you must start immediately when things come up and not stop until you’re finished.

The Time Allowed for Tasks will be Revealed in One of Two Places

There are two sources of time limits for the things that come up in your case: the Rules of Civil Procedure, and the court itself (your judge).

Time in the Rules of Civil Procedure

The Rules of Civil Procedure give you a certain amount of time for everything that happens in a case. You’ll either find this in the specific rule applying to whatever you’re doing, or in more general rules. Discovery – interrogatories, requests for documents, and requests for admissions – and Motions for Summary Judgment all have their own specific rules, and these rules will include how much time there is for response. For other motions, more generally, there’s usually a “notice” rule which will require that you give (or be given) a certain amount of time after a motion is filed before the motion can be argued. This is the time for response.

Court Scheduling Orders

Another main way time is determined is simply by the judge, usually by means of a “Scheduling Order.” This order will give the parties a certain amount of time to complete some phase of a case – to conduct discovery, for example, or to file a “dispositive” motion (a motion that could end the case). These orders DO NOT NORMALLY alter the amount of time you have for a specific task. If you’ve been given a set of interrogatories, you’ll have the amount of time allowed by the rule to answer, not the end point of the scheduling order. However, if you submit discovery to the other side without enough time for them to answer before the scheduling order ends the discovery process, they may not have to answer at all. Thus you must make sure your answers will be due before the discovery cut-off in the scheduling order.

Leave for Additional Time

Whether you have a iscovery cut-off or need more time for discovery (or need them to answer quicker), the solution is to ask the court for a special order that does what you need. Remember that you’re asking for something special, and such a motion would need to be justified.

Your Problem is Not Someone Else’s Crisis

I often receive messages from people with a court date a day or two away, or a response to a significant motion due in a day or two. I cannot respond to many of these messages. If you had money you could hire a lawyer and trade money for time, to an extent. For most of the people reading this, however, that is simply not going to be an option. Remember the saying, “your deadline is not my crisis.” Most people already have too much to do to take on some massive problem of yours on short notice. You must remember this.

So what do you do? You have to stay on track as much as possible every step of the way.

Tomorrow we’ll discuss the “other side” of time – the way you can use time pressure to weaken the debt collector’s resolve to keep suing you. Do that enough, and they’ll drop the case.

See you then.

Never Make Part Payments

June 6, 2018

Never Make a Partial Payment

For a free copy of this article in pdf form, click here: Never Make a Partial Payment

The Set-Up

Suppose you get called by a debt collector about a debt that you might want to pay. That is, you think it’s legitimate, you think the company calling you may be legitimate (subject, always, to proof!), and for other reasons you’re inclined to pay. But you don’t have enough money. “Not a problem!” says the debt collector. “You owe us $2,500, but why don’t you just make a payment of $75 tonight? Then you can pay the rest whenever you can afford it.”

Should you do it?

What you should do

This is a made-up situation, of course, but some variation of it occurs many times every day all over the country. The collector is either nice, and you want to help him out by chipping in “just a little” to help his statistics, or the debt collector is mean, and you think that making a payment will be the fastest way to get her off the line.

Of course you know they’re paid to make you feel the way you do, but that doesn’t really matter. There are times when the way you feel trumps whatever you know – and the debt collectors are paid to know about that, too.

The question is, should you make that little payment?

To Pay or Not to Pay

The question you need to answer first is NOT whether you want to pay. The first question you must ask yourself is whether you can see exactly how you will be able to pay – and not just the payment you’re being asked to make, but all the rest of it. The debt is $2,500. Can you see how you would pay all of that? Can you think of terms that would actually work – as you can see at the moment and without hoping for something surprising and unusual happening?

To be frank, most people being contacted by a debt collector on a bill they thought they should pay can’t see a way to pay it. If that’s you, you should not pay any part of it.

If you can see a way to pay the debt and believe you should, and if the debt collector will agree – in writing – to the terms you think are necessary, THEN you can ask whether you think it’s the right thing for you to do. Often people may conclude it is, for a variety of reasons, and if this is you, then make the deal and whatever payments you agree to. We’re not here to tell you not to pay legitimate debts – only to make sure the debt collectors don’t crucify you.

Why Should You Act as we Suggest?

You should ask the questions in the way we suggest, and act according to the answers you come up with because making a payment is not a legally neutral act. It has major legal consequences.

Making Payment CAN Admit the Debt

We tell people all the time that one of the biggest difficulties debt collectors have is establishing by legitimate evidence that you owe them the debt. Can you see how making a payment seems like admitting you do? The debt collectors will argue that it is an admission, and some courts will buy that argument. Your argument that you only made the payment to make the debt collector feel better or to get them off the phone will cut no legal mustard because that is not a rational thing to do. The courts will hold you to a standard of reasonability, often, that ignores either your compassion or fear or desire for peace and quiet. Paying someone you don’t owe isn’t rational, and there’s a good chance the court will view your payment as admitting you do owe.

Making Payments WILL Restart the Statute of Limitations

One thing most courts agree is that making any payment at all will restart the statute of limitations. That is, if the debt is four years old and the statute of limitations is set to run out next month, your payment of any amount will give them four more years to harass and possibly sue you. And the fact that you paid them will almost guarantee that they’ll use the opportunity since they know you’ll roll over.

I have argued that making a partial payment that does not “cure the breach” (isn’t enough to say you haven’t broken the contract) should not restart the statute of limitations because the breach still dates back to the time you failed to make payment. I think that makes sense, but as far as I know, no court has ever agreed. Every decision I’ve seen on the issue has held that any payment starts the clock running from the very beginning again.

And this is a large part of why debt collectors are so eager to get you to make a payment. It’s also why I emphasize that in asking whether you can afford to pay, I refer to the entire debt. Making a partial payment is a commitment to paying the whole thing whether you mean it that way or not.

Never Make a Partial Payment

All the above factors suggest that, for almost every person being contacted by a debt collector, making a partial payment is a terrible idea. If you are that rare “other person” and can afford to pay the whole thing – and want to – then it’s fine if you do. Most people should steer far clear of the temptation. You can hang up on an angry caller and even make them stop calling. And the nice caller will find her victim somewhere else. Don’t let it be you.

Should I talk to a Debt Collector and What Should I Say

June 6, 2018

If you are being called or harassed by a debt collector, one of the purposes of that debt collector is to get you to talk. Should you? This is going to depend on whether you have anything to say.

Debt Collectors Target Struggling People

As I have mentioned before, the debt collection business is targeted at distressed people. The debt collectors already know you don’t have much money, and they know you probably have other people trying to get money from you. Their job is not to force you to pay somebody—it’s to force you to pay them. Another way to put that is that they are not competing with you—they’re competing with other debt collectors. You are the football in a game between the debt collectors, the string in a game of tug of war. Does that make sense?

Silence Can Be Golden when Dealing with Collections

The job of the debt collector is to get you to pay them instead of someone else. They can do this either by annoying you so much that you pay them to get them off the phone or by establishing a sympathetic connection to you so you gladly do it for the voice on the other end of the line. Both of these methods involve keeping you on the phone and the connection open, and neither of these methods is directed at your well-being. Also, if they can get you to reveal information about your job or bank, or any kind of assets you have, they can improve their chances of making you pay against your will. So unless you have your own purpose for communicating, you shouldn’t do it.

Sometimes it Makes Sense to Talk to Collectors

What might be a good reason for you to communicate? Well, because you want something tangible from the debt collector to whom you are speaking. You could want them to reduce interest rates, waive penalties, agree not to give information on your debt to the credit reporting agencies, or any number of actual, materially beneficial things. If you’re hoping to get a friendly voice or understanding, a debt collector is the wrong person to talk to: they already understand everything they want to know about your situation. Talk to someone else for that.

Negotiate—And Get It in Writing

Don’t be afraid to negotiate. You can ask for anything from them, and in most cases the debt collector could give you anything you might request. So be bold. If you want to settle for ten cents on the dollar, you can ask. They may laugh—but laughter is just a part of the negotiation and doesn’t mean they won’t do it. And if they agree to do anything, you must get the agreement in writing. In a practical sense, it doesn’t count if you don’t get it in writing. You won’t be able to prove it, and in some cases an oral “modification” would not even be legally recognizable even if you could prove it. It must be in writing.

They’ll want something in return. An immediate payment, an agreement to pay by a certain date, something. You can agree to this if you can do it, but you’re spinning your wheels if you cannot, so it makes sense to limit your promises to things you’re sure you can perform. Don’t over-commit, as this may negate the agreement you reach and will almost certainly increase the number and hostility of the phone calls you are receiving. Remember that the debt collector is keeping records of everything you say (so don’t tell them where you work or bank).

Stop Talking to Collectors When You’ve Said What You Need to Say

And when you run out of reasons to keep talking to the debt collector, make sure that you actually stop talking to them. There is always a price for anything you say – you’re giving them free information that they will use to decide to sue you. Sometimes talking to them is worth that price, but if that changes, you should feel no obligation to keep talking.

What about Partial Payments?

We think partial payments are bad unless you know exactly how you will pay the whole debt and unless you understand what making the payment will do to you. To read more on this issue – and you really should if you’re even thinking about making a partial payment, click here: Never Make Partial Payments.

Don’t Talk to Debt Collectors

June 6, 2018

When should you talk to a debt collector? And why shouldn’t you talk with them otherwise?

You Should Only Talk to them If you Have a Good, and Immediate, Reason to Do so

As a recent commenter pointed out, debt collectors are often “not nice.” But whether they are nice or not, their job is to take your money away and give it to their company. That means that, personality aside, their interests are against yours, and you should never mistake politeness with being on the same side. Likewise, you shouldn’t polite discourtesy for power or anything other than what it is. In this video we review the basic rule of communications with debt collectors: it is rarely a good idea.

Hang up when you’ve said what you need to say

Once you have said what you need to say to the debt collector, if anything, you should hang up.

There are too many bad things that can happen for you to stay on without a good reason. You could make admissions that damage your case (if they get around to suing you), you could give them information they could use to take your money if they sue you and win.

Remember that what lawyers usually hate more than anything is a lack of definite information. Every time you open your mouth and speak to a debt collector, you’re giving some lawyer what he or she needs to decide to sue you. And even telling them you don’t have any money may not be helpful because that could tell them it would be easy to beat you in court.

Less is definitely more when it comes to talking with debt collectors.

Reviving Expired Debt through Trickery

June 6, 2018

Reviving Expired Debt through Trickery

The banks are always trying to revive debt, through fair means or foul. Here’s a trick you need to be alert for: issuing you a new card with an old balance on it.

The Scam

Here’s how the scam works. I’m sure you know all about statutes of limitations and the way they eventually operate to make old debts uncollectable through lawsuits. But this legal inability does not stretch to a practical prohibition. In other words, just because the debt collectors (or banks, in this case) can’t sue you, they can keep trying to get you to pay the debt back “voluntarily.” And they know that people who have had trouble paying off their debts in the past also have trouble getting credit now – after all, they do their best to make that so.

So here’s what they do: they send credit card offers to the people they can no longer sue, offering them credit cards with reasonable rates and no annual fees – but the only problem is that the cards carry the balance of the old debt. Accepting and applying for the card simply requires accepting responsibility for the debt. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/bringing-expired-debt-back-to-life.html.

What they Don’t Tell You

What the banks don’t tell you is that once you accept renewed responsibility for the debt, you have created an entirely new obligation to the old debt with an entirely new statute of limitations. If anything happens to prevent you from paying the whole amount – at any time – they’ll be free to sue you for the whole amount – at any time within the next several years.

Is it Really a Scam?

There are certainly deceptive features of the program – and a lot of opportunism. People are not generally told or reminded that the debt that is being revived is out of the statute of limitations and couldn’t be collected by lawsuit. And in my opinion, that essential deception suggests that the bankers regard their actions as a scam. Why hide the information if they’re offering such a good deal? Still, it does offer people with troubled debt history access to some credit, and it may be the only opportunity they have. Whether the bank will continue to extend credit after the credit balance is restored to zero (paid off) is a question I have, although it would seem to be in their interest to do so.

Warning

If you get one of these offers, think very carefully before you accept. Doing so will revive a potentially crippling debt that you had escaped and will probably not have any impact on your actual credit score, but it might bring you access to credit that would be otherwise unavailable. Before accepting such an offer, you should certainly make sure you do not, in fact, have other access to credit. Would your credit union, for example, lend you money if you kept a balance with them? How large would the payments on the new card be? How many such payments would it take to equal the amount of credit the card would extend? (i.e., suppose they offer you a card carrying a balance of $5,000, giving you minimum payments of $250 per month, and offering you a credit limit of $300 over that. After a little over a month, if you just saved the money, you would have more money than you would be able to borrow on the card.)

Conclusion

There might be better ways to restore your prosperity than paying a lot of money to someone you don’t owe anything.