I’ve discussed some of the background realities of talking with the judge and the attorney for the other side when you’re representing yourself as a defendant in a suit for debt in “Real Words about Talking to Judges and Lawyers.” I mentioned that neither judges nor the lawyers will start off respecting you if you’re pro se. That means you’re going to need to do certain things.
When speaking as a pro se defendant in a debt case, your first rule, always, is to speak normally. That means, use plain English – don’t try to impress anybody with you or what you know. Impress them with the facts. Speak in a normal tone of voice and with respect but not fear. Don’t kiss up to them, but treat them the way you’d treat somebody you like or can work with. Keep your cool. You’re in a situation where disagreements always come up – they’re not personal, or at least you should never make your words personal.
With those things in mind, there are some specifics to remember with judges and the lawyer for the other side.
Talking with the Judge
You’re going to have to be better than the lawyer for the other side. There are reasons this is possible, but it’s primarily because of the business model of the debt collectors. They take a factory approach, and their lawyer won’t work on your case much at all. It just isn’t profitable for them to do that. Nor is it profitable for them to hire the smartest lawyers in the business. Their whole approach is to bug you into paying without suing you and then to file huge numbers of suits knowing most people won’t defend themselves at all and will allow a default judgment. This isn’t to say their lawyers aren’t any good and can’t win, but it gives you a good chance if you’re willing to work.
Defending yourself takes you way out of the “ordinary” kinds of cases the deal with, and it’s a start, but you also still have to put in enough work to be better than the other side, and that’s what we discuss here.
Because of the general lack of respect for pro se defendants, when you say something, you will be more likely to need to cite controlling authority than a lawyer would. They can make references to “black letter law” (which is just legalese for “generally obvious”), but you will do better, if the issue is important at all, by citing a case that supports it. That means research is going to be important to you. (We have a product that can help with this.)
One thing non-lawyers seem to have trouble with is keeping things “relevant.” If you’re arguing about whether the debt collector has proof they own the debt, some things will shine a light on the issue, but the fact that the company has been sued by the federal government for collection abuses will not be, for example. Because of the way the court sees you, it will have very little tolerance for any straying off topic – the judge will think you’re wasting time and often tune out. Therefore, make sure everything you say relates to exactly the issue you’re discussing.
A related issue is keeping things brief. Again, the court will quickly sense that you’re wasting time if you veer away from the most important things at all. The judge doesn’t need to know why you thought something or planned something, it needs to know what the law requires. Pro se defendants seem to have a tremendous difficulty with this – you want to tell your story, but let me tell you that the court could not give one damn about your story. Legal talk is very different in this respect than regular human talk. Do NOT waste the court’s time.
Don’t whine. This is probably self-explanatory, but it’s part of the other things I’ve mentioned. Because the court does not care about your feelings, it will regard anything you say or insinuate about your feelings as a waste of time.
Know when to hold and when to fold. This is part of maintaining self-discipline and paying attention to the judge. When the judge says they’ve ruled, you are on extremely borrowed time. Ordinarily you should shut up and sit down. As I point out in “Real Talk,” you do that by saying, “Thank you, your honor.” But sometimes you don’t think you’ve had a chance to raise a crucial point. In that situation, you say something like, “I hear that, your honor, but I wanted to make sure you knew that they caught the defendant red-handed holding the knife with blood all over him…”
What I’m saying here is that if you want to say something after the judge has already ruled, it had better be damn good, and even then you’re on thin ice, but sometimes you have to say something to preserve the record. Judges can be hasty, and specially so with pro se debt defendants, so sometimes you may feel you have to point something out, but make sure it’s good – otherwise you’re just going to make the judge mad.
And speaking of anger, you must ALWAYS keep your feelings in check when you’re talking to the judge. If you raise your voice you could get thrown in jail for contempt of court, but of course it’s much more likely that the judge will just stop listening to you for the rest of the case. Baseball coaches seem to think it helps sometimes to get kicked out of a game, but this is never going to be a good strategy for you. Shut up, collect your thoughts, and be ready for the next thing.
Talking with the Lawyer
And now just a few words about the lawyers. First, keeping your cool is just as important with them as it is with judges. They can’t throw you in jail, but they can certainly tune you out in lots of ways. It won’t be good for you if they do.
Because you’ll be negotiating in various ways with the other lawyer, you need to remember one thing: threats are cheap. Because they don’t have a lot of respect for you, if you tell them “we should settle this thing now, or I’m going to file a motion for summary judgment next week…” they’re just going to ignore that. They don’t think you’ll do it. Any similar threats are pointless and more harmful than good. Instead, do the work first and let your actions speak for you.
In other words, don’t tell them you’re going to file a motion – file it and then talk. That would be more work, no doubt, if they ever would listen to threats and save you the trouble, but they never do. Threatening will lose ground for you. Doing without threatening (or warning, or negotiating to try not to have to file something) will gain ground for you.
Incidentally, a lot of lawyers try the same trick with the same results (nothing), but whereas I could probably draft a motion for summary judgment and send it to the other side saying that if they don’t settle I’m going to file the motion, you probably couldn’t even do that. There’s a chance they’d read it if a lawyer wrote it, but they probably won’t read anything you send until you file it. So go ahead and file what you’re going to file. Let your actions do your talking.
Don’t be afraid of the work. As long as the case continues, nothing you do will be wasted – everything you do will teach things you’re going to need to know.
On Being Nasty or Difficult
I hesitate to address this topic, but think I must. The lawyer for the other side does not take you seriously most of the time, and getting personal will normally not do any good. However, he or she is a person, and in a rare case, especially where there are complicated legal issues or where you’ve already done some winning, being personally difficult or unpleasant can work to your advantage. They already don’t want to work on your case, and if you can make them feel worse about that you might hasten their willingness to settle. This is rarelya good strategy, however. If you’re good at it (and you will know if you are), and the situation develops correctly, you might consider it. This is obviously only relating to the other side’s lawyer, never the judge.
[This article updated 3/26/25]
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/fax-1889056__340.jpg340340Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-03-02 17:27:482025-03-26 16:10:51Talking with the Judge and the other Lawyer
Real Words about Talking to Judges and the Other Side
If you are being sued for debt and representing yourself – that’s called “pro se” – you’re going to be talking to judges and also to the lawyer for the other side. That presents special challenges for pro se defendants, and particularly pro se debt defendants.
The first thing you must remember is that any FACTUAL thing you say to anybody can be taken as an “admission.” That means, any fact you say that could hurt you will be regarded as proven. That can be huge in debt cases where debt buyers often cannot prove things with legitimate evidence. If you say “I know I owe…” or “I know I did…” or “You told me…” or anything else that leads to a factual statement, that fact will be regarded as proven. Not BY you, incidentally, but AGAINST you. So don’t try to get cute and say, for example, “I know you can’t prove your case.” The rule only applies to what are called “admissions against interest” and it’s a one-way street: you can’t make admissions for the other side. Is that clear?
Talking to Judges
When you’re talking to judges, they may simply ask you, for example, whether you used or had a credit card or something along those lines. You may be disputing, primarily, whether the debt collector has a right to collect from you, which could be a completely different issue, but if you admit you got the credit card you will lose the case 99% of the time. You must resist the temptation to answer such a question with an admission. You can say, instead, “that’s one of the things the other side has to prove, and I’m not admitting it.”
You are not a witness under oath when you’re talking to the judge in open court unless you are, in fact, testifying, and you should not feel required to make admissions. If the judge presses you very hard, simply say you don’t think so.
Talking to the Other Lawyer
If the lawyer for the other side asks you point blank for some similar admission while you’re negotiating or haggling over discovery or at any other time than while you are under oath, you should simply say you “deny” it. That’s what you’re doing by your denial of the allegation in your answer.
Some Hard Facts about Judges and Lawyers
Now let’s go to some “unwritten” facts, you might say. And they’re frankly not going to be pleasant to hear, but you need to know them. Both judges and the other side – lawyers and their minions – regard you as socially inferior. You may feel it and feel intimidated, or you may not even feel it, but most of the time it is a simple fact. They do not respect you in a fundamental way.
With judges that can never be remedied. They can respect your intelligence and your willingness to compete, shall we say, and they like fighters, but they are in a position of power over you that is virtually absolute, and they’ve been in that position or some similar position for a long, long time. This gives you kind of a delicate task which we’ll come back to in a minute, but first we’ll talk about the lawyers and the other side generally.
Lawyers don’t respect you, either, and neither, most especially, do their owners the debt buyers. Again, you cannot fix that, but you must treat them, as much as you possibly can, as your equals. They’re not your parents and will never, under any circumstances, do anything in your interests that doesn’t help their interests, so do not ask them for guidance in any way. Ask me. Or ask a trusted friend. And then do your research. But when you’re talking to the lawyer you should be aware of the power dynamic and resist it. I’m not saying to be rude or overbearing; I’m saying to keep your cool and treat the lawyer the way you’d treat anyone else you’re in a professional relationship with. Because that’s what you are.
Believe me, though, they usually start with contempt for you, and that will never change unless you fight and win. You fight and win by standing up for your legitimate rights, keeping your cool, not making admissions, and forcing their hand where possible. Eventually, if you do these things, they’re likely to develop a sort of grudging admiration for you – fighters like fighters, in a way. They respect that about each other. But they’re never going to invite you to the boathouse, if you know what I mean. Know that fact.
Back to Judges
Now let’s get back to judges, because your relationship to them is much more complicated.
Your job, as an advocate, is to instruct the judge on what the law requires, as you understand it. If the other side is suing you for a debt they cannot prove they own, you have to tell the judge that that failure to prove ownership requires they lose the case. When you object at trial or in motions, for another example, you have to tell the judge why legal precedent in your state requires that your objection be sustained.
Lawyers do this all the time, although even lawyers handle judges they don’t know extremely well, with kid gloves. And your job is much much harder because the judges regard you as socially inferior. You still have to tell the judge what the law requires, and you can’t mince your words about that. But never, ever, interrupt a judge, raise your voice, or lose your cool. Don’t forget that judges can make mistakes (and so can you, of course), so work with that. It doesn’t mean they’re against you – it doesn’t usually mean much of anything. It’s usually impersonal, and even if it isn’t you have to act like it is.
Remember that judges are in a god-like position over you, and a lot of them seem to think they are god, too. If they tell you to shut up or it’s over, they’ve ruled on a question, they expect you to thank them! They do, and it’s standard. The judge says, “I’ve overruled your objection,” and you say, in response, “Thank you your honor.”
It could seem disgusting, but it’s tradition as much as anything else, and you are respecting their position when you say that more than their person.
So you have a challenging balancing act with judges. You have to tell them what the law requires and what makes you think so – and they actually may not know or remember. But you must keep in mind that their power is nearly absolute, so you should usually treat your arguments as “reminders” to them of what you expect they already know. And yet you are their intellectual equals, too, so you should stand up for the right of your position even if the judge is questioning it.
With all that said, a lot of judges are intelligent, nice people. ALL of them are, at least some of the time to some people. Recognize that fact and understand that they play a role in this case, and that role is to make judgments, some of which you aren’t going to like. Don’t personalize their rulings, and don’t think that because they disagree with you on some point that they’re against you on all of them. Unless you’re a competitive athlete or a lawyer, this is probably way out of your experience, but referees in football are required to look at every play and make their best judgment regardless of who they like better. They try to do that, and so do judges, most of the time. Understand that fact – it’s just their job.
When you’re talking to the other side, but especially when you’re talking to a judge, remember to listen carefully. So often people just listen to what others are saying primarily as a way of marking time – you have something to say, and you’re just waiting for them to finish so you can say it. Don’t do this in the law. Listen to what they’re saying – it’s usually important.
And make sure the things you say are important, too. Stay on point and remember that anything you say that seems to go off-point will cost you respect and attention. No one wants to hear your feelings or difficulties. They want to hear what the law is and what it requires. If you’re representing yourself, you’re going to have strong feelings, but keep them in check and keep them quiet. Talk about the few things that matter to whatever you’re discussing.
Remember that above all, the case that means so much to you means very little to the other side or to the judge. It’s just a job to them, which they may take more or less seriously, but for you it is much more important. Act like the case is important to you and work steadily and hard, and stay humble. Hope the judge will take his or her responsibilities seriously enough to be fair and listen to you when it matters, and that the lawyer on the other side is as uninspired as most of them are. Keep those things in mind and you’ll have a great chance to win.
[Article updated 3/26/25]
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/gavel.jpg498685Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-02-27 16:28:202025-03-26 16:39:51Real Words about Talking to Judges and the Other Side
What to Expect as a Poor Person in a Rich Man’s Game
You may have heard that “justice is blind,” which oddly enough was meant to suggest that justice is fair in America – it’s blind to class and race, and all the rest, supposedly. But if you’re being sued for debt you’ve probably heard of another saying that’s a little more apt: “it’s a big club, but you aren’t in it.”
But don’t give up. You have a good chance anyway.
I’m afraid that second saying is probably more relevant to what you can expect in the courts. If you’re going it pro se, that is to say representing yourself, you’re going to have some trouble getting the attention of most judges. They’re not going to value what you say as much as they’d value what a lawyer would say, especially a lawyer for a corporation. Most judges are on that side of the fence, and they’re DEFINITELY from that side of the tracks, if you know what I mean.
So let’s just say there’s an institutional bias – prejudice – against you. But I am saying “most” judges, after all, and some don’t share that bias.
And as a general rule judges do have a sense of fair play as far as playing by the rules, although again this is just a “general rule.” If they care about the outcome of a case, I’d say they can be pretty results driven, never minding the rules, but in fact most of them do NOT care about the outcome of debt cases. On the whole they seem not to like them, and we’ve all heard that debt collectors are notoriously heartless and… dirty. The judges are aware of all this, and I think they do regard them, on the whole, as the vultures of the legal kingdom. Judges often come from the more high profile sort of law.
But these are generalizations, and you should observe for yourself what your judge is like.
And here’s yet another general rule of the courts: the judges regard cases involving less than a couple of million dollars as being sort of trifling and not worth their time. That’s a thing you should never forget. It’s a question of who they blame for your case wasting their time. I think they start with the sense that YOU are to blame, if you bother defending yourself, but this can change, and we want it to change. You didn’t bring the suit, after all, but you are one of the few meaningfully opposing the debt collectors, and so the judges might blame you for that. It has often seemed that way to me, anyway.
This is all hardly a ringing endorsement of the process, I know, but probably nothing new to you, either. So why do I still think you have an excellent chance of winning if you fight these cases? Because the debt collectors really don’t usually have what they need to prove the things they need under the rules, and courts do have respect for rules. They’ll forgive corporate counsel a few transgressions, but in the final analysis they want the rules to be followed, and the case can be reversed on appeal if they don’t. So you have your chance.
And judges are people. The more time you spend with them, providing you keep your goals in mind and respect their time, the more the judges will like you, the more they’ll listen to what you have to say. And you will have the law on your side. That does matter. It usually makes all the difference if you know what you’re doing.
And that’s why we’re here – to make sure you do know what you’re doing. Just be aware that whatever they say about cutting a break for non-lawyers in the justice system – and they do in certain unimportant ways – you’re probably going to be held to a higher standard than the lawyer representing the debt collector rather than a lower one. You’re going to have to know more and do a better job than the other side.
You can do that, it just takes work and a certain humility. The lawyers on the other side are not the greatest legal minds. The debt collection business draws business people, and the business they’re in means they won’t spend a lot of time on your case. They won’t have a lot of the stuff they need or the time to get it. Your job is to figure that out in your case and show it to the judge in a way he or she will listen to. It’s a challenge, but it can usually be done. We’ll be helping you.
Debt Collection Lawyers
The lawyers for the other side have a job to do, and that’s to beat you. Some of them will treat you with respect, and others with contempt (which will be controlled), but remember their job, and however they present themselves to you it will be part of their overall plan to beat you. Don’t expect to go out with them for drinks after it’s all over.
If You’re Pro Se
If you’re trying to represent yourself, we can help. The best way for us to help is through membership, but we also have products that can help along the way.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/money-2033591__340-1.png340340Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-02-25 23:06:412025-03-27 23:19:36What to Expect as a Poor Person in a Rich Man’s Game
People often ask me what they should get first from Your Legal Leg Up. To me, the answer is obvious, and it’s both the first and last thing you’ll pay for in most cases: the 20-20 membership. It’s the best thing we offer both in value and price. It’s so much better than the other options, in fact, that I almost feel guilty when people buy anything else, but there could be reasons something else would be right for you, so I’ll talk briefly about your other options at the end of this article.
Teleconferences
I’m not aware of any other program on the market that offers anything like our teleconferences.
They are is an opportunity to ask questions in real time. You can ask about what things mean, what the bad guys might be driving at or trying to accomplish with something they’re doing, and how you might respond. We’ll help direct you to sources of information or guide your research. Sometimes you might just want to know where you are in your case, what a word means, or how to say or search for something… stuff like that.
Sometimes you’ll just need some encouragement and a reminder to keep up the good work because
working steadily is important but difficult in legal work, where there are deadlines that can be months away, but you forget how much time things take even aside from doing the work itself.
And sometimes you’ll want to hear other people who in the same boat as you are. Debt defense pro se can be a lonely process, but there are a lot of people trying to defend themselves. You can talk to them, and we offer encouragement and coaching as well as more substantive help too. People who use it find it enormously helpful. We can’t offer legal advice – you’d have to pay between $150 – 250 per hour to get that – but consider it a very active form of coaching and help.
Teleconferences currently happen three times per week and members can come to any and all of them. They’re scheduled for an hour each, but often go above that amount of time because I want everyone with a question to get it answered. If need be, we’ll increase the number of teleconferences per week to make it easier to get those questions answered.
Fees and Prices – Why the 20-20 Membership is Best
Most of our memberships involve a registration fee and a monthly payment, but the 20-20 only requires one payment for a full year that will be less than the other memberships for a year. The other memberships offer discounts on our digital products, but with the 20-20 you get all the digital products for free.
In other words, for one price you get all of our digital products and access to all the materials on the website for a year in addition to the teleconferences. The digital products which are designed to make the whole process easier and more effective, and the many articles and videos should help you get a deeper understanding of specific topics as well. You don’t get any “bonuses” because you get everything with the membership.
Materials You’ll Get – You Get ALL Digital Products we Offer
Maybe that’s all you need to know, but if you like to see it all before you make a decision, I’ll say you get all the digital products on our comprehensive product page. This includes numerous reports, including among others, Got Debt, Assignment Contracts, and Three Weaknesses Almost All Debt Collectors Have, the Manuals for Debt Litigation, Debt Negotiation, and Credit Repair, and all the Motions Packets, including the Motion to Vacate Default, Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Compel, and Motion for Summary Judgment. There will be others, too. You will also get our Model Discovery Pack and, if you live in either California or Pennsylvania, products relevant to those areas.
And you’ll get access to all the hundreds of articles on our site. Many are free to the general public, but many others are restricted by level of membership. As a 20-20 member you get them all. Go here to sign up for the membership now, be sure to click on the 20-20 membership option.
Why Such a Good Deal?
I know this is going to sound like sales talk, but the 20-20 is a much better offer than we’ve ever made, and some explanation might help it make sense. There are two reasons, one selfish, and one not so selfish, for making this offer.
The selfish reason is that I’ve noticed that when people get sued they regard the law suit as a major priority and will pay what they have to (if they can) to give themselves a chance to win. That makes a lot of sense to me. But if they sign up for a monthly membership, there often comes a time when the case is less scary, or there comes a time when they need to buy a product but don’t have the money. So they cut corners and skip a product. That lowers their chance of winning, which isn’t good for Your Legal Leg Up’s reputation. It’s very important that you all win if at all possible, so making a deal which will never make you cut corners makes good business sense to me. And it’s why I’m here in the first place.
The other reason is just that I can do it. The products are here (and the work has been done, though they are sometimes revised), and I want you to be able to do your best work and get your best results without always having to sweat gallons. You’ll have plenty to do, but we can make things a lot easier. So I want to do that and am fine with making a little less than I might in to do it.
The Other Memberships
I mentioned the other types of membership a little bit above. Those are the Gold, Platinum and Diamond memberships. The main advantage with them is that if you show up and the debt collector gives up just because you do, you’ll save money because you won’t be paying for things you don’t us. Don’t laugh, that can happen. And it does happen maybe 1 percent of the time. They’re looking for an easy, automatic victory, and just by answering you make them decide to go away. Like I said, that happens about 1% of the time as far as I can tell. To be frank, nobody that’s happened to felt bad about getting the 20-20, but it’s a fact that a monthly membership would have cost less in that situation. Just about any other situation, though, and the 20-20 will save you a bunch of money and a ton of time and worry.
– What to do when the Company Suing You Won’t Answer Discovery
If you’re being sued for debt and following our system, you will serve “discovery” on the other side. That is, you will send them questions to answer called “interrogatories,” requests for documents, and requests that they admit certain things.
We do this because debt buyers usually don’t have the proof they need to establish their case, and even original creditors often don’t. We need to know exactly what they do have so we can prepare to show that it isn’t legitimate evidence. That will be important in resisting any motions they file, in filing our own motions, and preparing for and winning at trial.
You will send discovery, and no matter what you send, you will receive nothing but objections in response. This is called “stone-walling,” and it’s in every debt collector’s playbook. Do NOT just send another set of questions – it doesn’t matter what you ask, they will always object, so that would be useless. They might be stonewalling because they know they don’t have legitimate evidence, but frankly I think it’s mostly just a strategy to convince you to give up – to make you think you don’t have a chance against their lawyers and their money.
Don’t give up. Make them give you your answers.
To do that, you’re going to have to do the things that allow you to file a motion to compel, and then you will, obviously, have to file the motion, too. This whole process is what I call the Motion to Compel Cycle. So what is that?
Look at your rules of civil procedure for the rule on motions to compel. READ THAT RULE!
You will notice, in every jurisdiction I’ve ever seen, that the rule requires you to negotiate “informally” in good faith to resolve the issues raised by the other side’s objections. That is going to require you to call them up on the phone, speak to the lawyer on the other side, and discuss the objections. You will do this in good faith, but they certainly will not. And when you get through with this conversation, you will send them first a confirming letter if they’ve agreed to anything, and secondly what’s called a “good faith letter,” which outlines the items remaining in contention and states your basis for demanding the evidence.
So it goes like this:
Send discovery and wait for response
Call them to discuss objections
Write good faith letter outlining disputes and giving them a certain time to provide the information you demand
Wait for that time to expire
Write and file motion to compel.
It is possible they will respond with an argument. You should reply to that argument, but remember never to make any admissions of owing them or anyone money, of any prior relationship to the creditor, etc. NO ADMISSIONS AT ALL EVER. This is critical because they may slip a question in asking “don’t you owe __ the money?” or “don’t you already have the records? It was your credit card account!”
The only issue you should discuss is whether and why they owe you the discovery. Don’t forget.
This whole process is tedious and annoying because you know they are not in good faith. However, remember this: your efforts are requiring more attorney time spent on your case than many other cases combined would require. You are drawing blood with every minute you make them spend. And it’s the only way you will get what you need.
Remember in your first phone call to ask about EVERY SINGLE OBJECTION. I know there are dozens. Go through each one. It’s your right and responsibility, and it costs them $250/hour to talk with you.
Write a “confirming letter” if they make any concessions at all. Say “you said you would give me __ by [date]” and mention everything they agreed to. If they said they didn’t have anything responsive to a question or request, confirm that in the same way, too. You must create a written record.
You won’t get much, so you have to take the next step, the good faith letter where you say why you’re entitled to the information you request. If you’re using our model discovery, you’ll know what to say here.
They won’t give you anything even after this, in all probability, so your next step is the motion to compel. In that, you will include a statement about the phone calls you attempted, and you’ll attach your good faith letter. The court won’t hear your motion otherwise.
We have materials that could help you with all of the motion to compel cycle, from phone call to hearing.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-02-02 17:23:412023-02-02 17:23:41Motion to Compel Cycle
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-01-30 21:32:442023-01-30 21:32:44What if they are Suing me and my Business
One important thing to know is whether you’re being sued by a debt buyer, a debt collector, or an original creditor. Knowing this will help you focus your strategy.
First, some definitions.
An “original creditor” is someone who claims you borrowed money from them. It could be a loan or a credit card or anything else creating debt, but the point is that they claim THEY are the ones who originally were involved in the transaction. For example, you’re being sued by American Express, and they say you signed up for and used an American Express credit card and didn’t pay them. “But I never signed up for an American Express credit card!” – That’s good, but it doesn’t matter for the purposes of this definition. Whether or not you owe the money doesn’t matter for this. If you’re being sued by someone who claims you borrowed from them, it’s an original creditor case.
A “debt buyer” is someone who bought the debt from the original creditor. This person may also be a debt collector, but the point here is they’re claiming you owed money to someone else and the debt was assigned to them. As you probably know by now, selling old debt is big business in America and throughout the world. Look for the word “assigned.” If a debt buyer is NOT a debt collector, your rights to countersue will be limited (because the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act won’t apply to them), but they will still have most of the weaknesses in establishing their case that we usually talk about.
A “debt collector” is someone who either is acting on behalf of a debt owner (rare, these days) or a debt buyer whose primary business is the collecting of debts (i.e., they buy debts and sue people without providing any real service to the people they’re suing). These people will have weaknesses in their case AND may give you a chance to countersue.
So Who Is Suing Me?
To determine this on a preliminary basis, look at the name of the case. It will be “X Company vs. You” Normally, this means that X Company is the plaintiff. Their lawyer is NOT suing you for most purposes, and the lawyer is not, by virtue of being the lawyer on the case, a party to the action. Companies can only act through lawyers (in court), and the lawyers are generally only “mouthpieces” for them. So most of the time you can forget about them as you consider your rights.
I did say “on a preliminary basis.” What I mean is that you start with the basic assumption that the person named as plaintiff IS the plaintiff, but it turns out this isn’t always true. Sometimes debt collectors (including lawyers) buy debts and bring the lawsuit in the former owner’s name. I think this violates the FDCPA, but for now you just need to know it CAN happen and does happen sometimes, and you need to know if it’s happening in your case. The only way to find out is by conducting discovery, and our model discovery therefore includes some questions about whether the debt has ever been transferred, and to whom.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-01-30 16:06:082023-01-30 16:23:33Who is Suing Me for an old Debt?
What Should I Do if I Know a Debt Law Suit Has Been Filed but not Served?
Sometimes people find out they’re being sued before the plaintiff gets around to serving them. How does this happen? And what do you do if you find that out?
People can learn about a suit before being sued – it is public knowledge, after all, so it could happen
in a lot of different ways. Mostly though, it happens in one of two ways. Sometimes debt collectors bug you for money, and you go out of your way to check court files to see if you’re named in a suit, or you find out from a neighbor who gets curious when they see someone trying to serve you. I guess these ways are actually rare, but they can happen. The other way is more common.
There are lawyers who want to represent people in these cases, and they may send you a letter telling you you’re being sued. It may be news to you that anybody is even after you, much less actually suing you. So you check the court files and find out it’s true.
What do you do?
There have been times people brought these cases to me, back when I was practicing, and wanted to take action. In that situation they had a lawyer and a counterclaim (usually), and where that’s the case, it could make sense to waive – or let go – your right to service and just enter on the case. We were sure we’d win, and we had a counterclaim, so why wait?
If you’re pro se these days, the situation is very different. You can’t be sure you’ll win however much you think the facts are on your side, because you can’t count on the courts to see it your way. No matter how clear you think it is, you just can’t count on winning. And you’re less likely to have a counterclaim because the courts have narrowed the definition of counterclaim and debt collectors have gotten a little more careful.
So for those reasons I think it makes sense to watch the court docket (without identifying yourself to the court) to see if they ever claim to have served you. Or until they actually do serve you.
You have no obligation to make it easier for them to serve you, and if they can’t get you served they will eventually have to drop the case – or get it dropped (for “failure to prosecute”). I think it makes good sense to give them that chance. But watch to make sure they don’t claim you were served. Likewise, if they “serve by publication” (which is putting an ad in a small local paper) you’ll probably need to answer, but it’s rare, and they have to get permission to do it. Still, you should watch for it.
If they don’t serve you, you might get lucky and have them drop the case. Or you will get served and have to defend.
Obviously, if that happens, we can help.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-01-28 17:21:162023-01-28 17:33:09Sued not Served
Under the Seventh amendment you have a right to a jury trial for cases involving “damages.”
Damages is a little bit of a term of art in this sense, but it basically means “money” for claims that were traditionally brought in courts of “law” (as opposed to courts of “equity”). As it happens, breach of contract, which is what most credit card cases are, is a legal claim subject to the 7th amendment. On the other hand, claims brought under, for example, the claim of “account stated,” are equitable claims that don’t give you a right to a jury trial by themselves.
That means that if the debt collector is suing for breach of contract or “open” or “closed” account, you have a right to a jury trial under the constitution. If they are suing you EXCLUSIVELY for account stated, on the other hand, you don’t.
When you have a right to a jury trial for one claim, you have a right to jury trial for all claims, so if they bring breach of contract AND account stated, you’ll have a right to jury trial for both. Most debt defendants, therefore, do have a right to trial by jury. Should you demand a trial by jury? I usually think so.
Trials by jury force the judge to take the law of evidence more seriously. In fact they take jury trials more seriously in a lot of ways. That benefits the debt defendant because our case is usually that the debt collector does not have any evidence that complies with the rules of evidence, and we need the court to take that seriously.
I also suggest demanding a jury trial because they are far more difficult for the debt collectors.
Understand what I’m saying, though. It isn’t that debt collectors don’t know how to do jury trials or even that they aren’t good at them – individual talent varies, of course. I’m only saying that debt cases tried to a judge can take twenty minutes. Picking a jury can take hours. And all the rules have to be carefully followed, and there are special rules and procedures, too. So demanding a jury might require 20 times as much attorney time. And time is money. Especially attorney time at $250/hour.
Debt plaintiffs don’t like cases that take a lot of time. It increases their costs, and they know you don’t have much money, so they worry about getting it back. Debt collector lawyers also worry about cases taking a long time because their performance affects their annual pay, and long debt cases hurt them.
In my opinion, those are strong reasons to seek a jury trial, and I might add that there will be times when a jury is also more sympathetic to the defendant than a judge would be. Judges haven’t faced debt trouble in a very long time, in general, by the time they’ve become judges. Most jurors, on the other hand, will have money worries. But I wouldn’t rely on this too much. Some judges are sympathetic, and some take their work seriously whether they’re sympathetic or not. And some juries can be pretty harsh.
But our goals in jury trials don’t depend on the jury that much. We want the judge to exclude evidence that shouldn’t be seen, and they take that more seriously when there’s a jury. Then it’s clear the debt collector didn’t make its case.
So why might you NOT want a jury? The only reason I’ve ever heard from debt defendants is that they’re scared of them. And I hear that a lot, but it’s not a good reason. Almost everybody I know who has ever had a jury trial has said it wasn’t scary. Not when you’re doing it. They are a little scary to think about and get ready for – pretrial jitters are normal, but once the trial starts, you’ll be too busy to be nervous. That’s as true of jury trials as it is of judge-tried cases.
You have a right to a trial by jury, but how and when you ask for it can make a difference. In some jurisdictions you just put it at the end of your Answer. In some jurisdictions you have to enter it as a separate request, separately. Which of these you’ll need to do is probably in your court’s local rules, but you might ask a court clerk about that. If you can’t get an answer from an authority, I’d suggest putting it both on your Answer and making a separate request which you submit at the same time as your Answer.
If you didn’t ask for a jury trial, is it too late?
The law favors jury trials, but individual judges often don’t, since they know as well as I do that jury trials take more time and attention. For that reason, if you haven’t already asked for a jury trial, I suggest you do it ASAP. The number of days could matter, since a court’s discretion to deny a request for jury is probably tied to how long the case has been going on. You should do a little research before filing your jury demand, though, because if you don’t do it right off the bat, you’ll need to file a motion that tells the judge why you should get one. That isn’t complicated, but you’ll want to know what the rules are that apply to it.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-01-27 03:06:192023-01-27 03:06:19Your Right to a Jury Trial in Debt Litigation
Arbitration. Should you compel arbitration? Or oppose it? I’ve recently had a comment on Youtube asking me to discuss arbitration, and it has also come up in several recent teleconferences as members contemplated seeking arbitration. Others have wanted to know whether to oppose a motion to compel arbitration.
Let’s start with a definition: Arbitration is the submission of your case to a private entity known as an arbitrator. After some process and a hearing (most likely), the arbitrator will decide what happens in your case and issue what amounts to a judgment.
For debt cases, it’s always a single arbitrator or a company that will provide a single arbitrator that’s appointed, but for other cases it could be other things, like a panel, perhaps. In any event, there will be an arbitrator and some special rules that will NOT be your state’s rules of civil procedure and also might not be your state’s rules of evidence. But there will be rules that control the process.
Arbitration is popular because it makes it faster, easier and cheaper for people to engage in litigation. The discovery process will be limited, and the appeals process almost eliminated. That’s why rich companies and debt collectors always love it. Almost all of these things are completely and profoundly BAD for debt defendants. That’s why I’ve always suggested debt defendants should avoid arbitration.
But there is another side to the question, and there are some who argue in favor of allowing or even forcing arbitration in debt cases. What’s their argument?
I think the argument in favor of arbitration boils down to the fee, which apparently has to be paid up front by the debt collector And that can amount to two or three thousand dollars, or even a little more. The idea here is that debt collectors won’t want to put that much money down on the barrelhead just to chase a bad debt and that court is, for them, much cheaper.
There is some sense in this argument.
Debt collectors never worry about winning a case, but they do know you don’t have much money. That means that they’re sure they’ll win, but worry that they won’t collect, which is the most important thing to them. The more you make them spend, the more worried about that they’ll be. Maybe they’ll drop the case if you demand arbitration.
We often make the argument that by pursuing discovery, filing and defending motions, and preparing for trial you are driving up the costs of litigation and may make the whole thing too expensive for debt collectors to want to do. Again, not because they worry about losing, but just the amount of money they’re having to spend when their business model is designed around easy, cheap judgments. However, conducting discovery and filing and defending motions and the rest do in fact improve your chances of winning, and we think that, when it comes to a debt collector, you should win your case. These things are the way to do it, and the chance the company will drop the case is basically the icing on that cake.
In arbitration, it’s the whole cake. You should remember that.
One big question that may be more theoretical than real is, who ultimately pays the arbitrator?
I say it may be theoretical since I just said the debt collector isn’t sure you’ll have any money at all, but this won’t stop them from seeking as big a judgment as possible. And if they get a judgment, they WILL try to collect it. All. So be advised that the judgment size could matter.
Okay, but who pays the arbitrator?
I think some states may have rules that matter, and I know that California, for example, does have rules regarding employment and consumer-brought claims. In the absence of any state based rule, you
would look to the arbitration provision giving you the right to arbitration – i.e., the contract. That will often say who pays the arbitrator, and it can specify any of a number of things, from company pays all to loser pays all, to dividing it up. The contract isn’t often going to put all the burden on the company because, after all, the company wrote the contract.
If it says company pays all, though, the company can’t shift that payment to you if you lose. If it’s loser pays all, though, it obviously will. But if there isn’t a direction in the contract, that would usually mean you start by splitting the cost, but that the arbitrator can award the cost to the winner, i.e., add it to the judgment.
The rule in your case is going to depend on your own specific circumstances.
The net of all this would suggest that you will have some advantage if the contract makes the company pay, but there’s risk if the loser pays. And of course it matters a lot who pays up front, which is often the debt collector.
So… should you compel arbitration?
In a debt buyer/collector case (i.e., not the original creditor) I’d still lean strongly against. You should win this case under most state laws because of the rules of evidence, and you cannot depend on the arbitrator to enforce those rules rigorously. If it’s an original creditor, it’s a much closer question. You’ll have to consider all the things we’ve discussed here and make a judgment call.
Filing a motion to compel arbitration might trigger some settlement negotiation, but I wouldn’t think you could get the company to give you a very steep discount, but there I’m just guessing based on what I know about lawyers and not experience in these type cases.
I remain very hesitant about suggesting arbitration, but there may be value in considering it if you’re
dealing with an original creditor.
https://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webp00Ken Giberthttps://yourlegallegup.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/logo-208x300.webpKen Gibert2023-01-27 01:54:242023-01-27 01:54:24What is Arbitration and Should you Seek or Oppose It?
Talking with the Judge and the other Lawyer
Talking with the Judge and other lawyer
I’ve discussed some of the background realities of talking with the judge and the attorney for the other side when you’re representing yourself as a defendant in a suit for debt in “Real Words about Talking to Judges and Lawyers.” I mentioned that neither judges nor the lawyers will start off respecting you if you’re pro se. That means you’re going to need to do certain things.
When speaking as a pro se defendant in a debt case, your first rule, always, is to speak normally. That means, use plain English – don’t try to impress anybody with you or what you know. Impress them with the facts. Speak in a normal tone of voice and with respect but not fear. Don’t kiss up to them, but treat them the way you’d treat somebody you like or can work with. Keep your cool. You’re in a situation where disagreements always come up – they’re not personal, or at least you should never make your words personal.
With those things in mind, there are some specifics to remember with judges and the lawyer for the other side.
Talking with the Judge
You’re going to have to be better than the lawyer for the other side. There are reasons this is possible, but it’s primarily because of the business model of the debt collectors. They take a factory approach, and their lawyer won’t work on your case much at all. It just isn’t profitable for them to do that. Nor is it profitable for them to hire the smartest lawyers in the business. Their whole approach is to bug you into paying without suing you and then to file huge numbers of suits knowing most people won’t defend themselves at all and will allow a default judgment. This isn’t to say their lawyers aren’t any good and can’t win, but it gives you a good chance if you’re willing to work.
Defending yourself takes you way out of the “ordinary” kinds of cases the deal with, and it’s a start, but you also still have to put in enough work to be better than the other side, and that’s what we discuss here.
Because of the general lack of respect for pro se defendants, when you say something, you will be more likely to need to cite controlling authority than a lawyer would. They can make references to “black letter law” (which is just legalese for “generally obvious”), but you will do better, if the issue is important at all, by citing a case that supports it. That means research is going to be important to you. (We have a product that can help with this.)
One thing non-lawyers seem to have trouble with is keeping things “relevant.” If you’re arguing about whether the debt collector has proof they own the debt, some things will shine a light on the issue, but the fact that the company has been sued by the federal government for collection abuses will not be, for example. Because of the way the court sees you, it will have very little tolerance for any straying off topic – the judge will think you’re wasting time and often tune out. Therefore, make sure everything you say relates to exactly the issue you’re discussing.
A related issue is keeping things brief. Again, the court will quickly sense that you’re wasting time if you veer away from the most important things at all. The judge doesn’t need to know why you thought something or planned something, it needs to know what the law requires. Pro se defendants seem to have a tremendous difficulty with this – you want to tell your story, but let me tell you that the court could not give one damn about your story. Legal talk is very different in this respect than regular human talk. Do NOT waste the court’s time.
Don’t whine. This is probably self-explanatory, but it’s part of the other things I’ve mentioned. Because the court does not care about your feelings, it will regard anything you say or insinuate about your feelings as a waste of time.
Know when to hold and when to fold. This is part of maintaining self-discipline and paying attention to the judge. When the judge says they’ve ruled, you are on extremely borrowed time. Ordinarily you should shut up and sit down. As I point out in “Real Talk,” you do that by saying, “Thank you, your honor.” But sometimes you don’t think you’ve had a chance to raise a crucial point. In that situation, you say something like, “I hear that, your honor, but I wanted to make sure you knew that they caught the defendant red-handed holding the knife with blood all over him…”
What I’m saying here is that if you want to say something after the judge has already ruled, it had better be damn good, and even then you’re on thin ice, but sometimes you have to say something to preserve the record. Judges can be hasty, and specially so with pro se debt defendants, so sometimes you may feel you have to point something out, but make sure it’s good – otherwise you’re just going to make the judge mad.
And speaking of anger, you must ALWAYS keep your feelings in check when you’re talking to the judge. If you raise your voice you could get thrown in jail for contempt of court, but of course it’s much more likely that the judge will just stop listening to you for the rest of the case. Baseball coaches seem to think it helps sometimes to get kicked out of a game, but this is never going to be a good strategy for you. Shut up, collect your thoughts, and be ready for the next thing.
Talking with the Lawyer
And now just a few words about the lawyers. First, keeping your cool is just as important with them as it is with judges. They can’t throw you in jail, but they can certainly tune you out in lots of ways. It won’t be good for you if they do.
Because you’ll be negotiating in various ways with the other lawyer, you need to remember one thing: threats are cheap. Because they don’t have a lot of respect for you, if you tell them “we should settle this thing now, or I’m going to file a motion for summary judgment next week…” they’re just going to ignore that. They don’t think you’ll do it. Any similar threats are pointless and more harmful than good. Instead, do the work first and let your actions speak for you.
In other words, don’t tell them you’re going to file a motion – file it and then talk. That would be more work, no doubt, if they ever would listen to threats and save you the trouble, but they never do. Threatening will lose ground for you. Doing without threatening (or warning, or negotiating to try not to have to file something) will gain ground for you.
Incidentally, a lot of lawyers try the same trick with the same results (nothing), but whereas I could probably draft a motion for summary judgment and send it to the other side saying that if they don’t settle I’m going to file the motion, you probably couldn’t even do that. There’s a chance they’d read it if a lawyer wrote it, but they probably won’t read anything you send until you file it. So go ahead and file what you’re going to file. Let your actions do your talking.
Don’t be afraid of the work. As long as the case continues, nothing you do will be wasted – everything you do will teach things you’re going to need to know.
On Being Nasty or Difficult
I hesitate to address this topic, but think I must. The lawyer for the other side does not take you seriously most of the time, and getting personal will normally not do any good. However, he or she is a person, and in a rare case, especially where there are complicated legal issues or where you’ve already done some winning, being personally difficult or unpleasant can work to your advantage. They already don’t want to work on your case, and if you can make them feel worse about that you might hasten their willingness to settle. This is rarely a good strategy, however. If you’re good at it (and you will know if you are), and the situation develops correctly, you might consider it. This is obviously only relating to the other side’s lawyer, never the judge.
[This article updated 3/26/25]
Real Words about Talking to Judges and the Other Side
Real Words about Talking to Judges and the Other Side
If you are being sued for debt and representing yourself – that’s called “pro se” – you’re going to be talking to judges and also to the lawyer for the other side. That presents special challenges for pro se defendants, and particularly pro se debt defendants.
The first thing you must remember is that any FACTUAL thing you say to anybody can be taken as an “admission.” That means, any fact you say that could hurt you will be regarded as proven. That can be huge in debt cases where debt buyers often cannot prove things with legitimate evidence. If you say “I know I owe…” or “I know I did…” or “You told me…” or anything else that leads to a factual statement, that fact will be regarded as proven. Not BY you, incidentally, but AGAINST you. So don’t try to get cute and say, for example, “I know you can’t prove your case.” The rule only applies to what are called “admissions against interest” and it’s a one-way street: you can’t make admissions for the other side. Is that clear?
Talking to Judges
When you’re talking to judges, they may simply ask you, for example, whether you used or had a credit card or something along those lines. You may be disputing, primarily, whether the debt collector has a right to collect from you, which could be a completely different issue, but if you admit you got the credit card you will lose the case 99% of the time. You must resist the temptation to answer such a question with an admission. You can say, instead, “that’s one of the things the other side has to prove, and I’m not admitting it.”
You are not a witness under oath when you’re talking to the judge in open court unless you are, in fact, testifying, and you should not feel required to make admissions. If the judge presses you very hard, simply say you don’t think so.
Talking to the Other Lawyer
If the lawyer for the other side asks you point blank for some similar admission while you’re negotiating or haggling over discovery or at any other time than while you are under oath, you should simply say you “deny” it. That’s what you’re doing by your denial of the allegation in your answer.
Some Hard Facts about Judges and Lawyers
Now let’s go to some “unwritten” facts, you might say. And they’re frankly not going to be pleasant to hear, but you need to know them. Both judges and the other side – lawyers and their minions – regard you as socially inferior. You may feel it and feel intimidated, or you may not even feel it, but most of the time it is a simple fact. They do not respect you in a fundamental way.
With judges that can never be remedied. They can respect your intelligence and your willingness to compete, shall we say, and they like fighters, but they are in a position of power over you that is virtually absolute, and they’ve been in that position or some similar position for a long, long time. This gives you kind of a delicate task which we’ll come back to in a minute, but first we’ll talk about the lawyers and the other side generally.
Lawyers don’t respect you, either, and neither, most especially, do their owners the debt buyers. Again, you cannot fix that, but you must treat them, as much as you possibly can, as your equals. They’re not your parents and will never, under any circumstances, do anything in your interests that doesn’t help their interests, so do not ask them for guidance in any way. Ask me. Or ask a trusted friend. And then do your research. But when you’re talking to the lawyer you should be aware of the power dynamic and resist it. I’m not saying to be rude or overbearing; I’m saying to keep your cool and treat the lawyer the way you’d treat anyone else you’re in a professional relationship with. Because that’s what you are.
Believe me, though, they usually start with contempt for you, and that will never change unless you fight and win. You fight and win by standing up for your legitimate rights, keeping your cool, not making admissions, and forcing their hand where possible. Eventually, if you do these things, they’re likely to develop a sort of grudging admiration for you – fighters like fighters, in a way. They respect that about each other. But they’re never going to invite you to the boathouse, if you know what I mean. Know that fact.
Back to Judges
Now let’s get back to judges, because your relationship to them is much more complicated.
Your job, as an advocate, is to instruct the judge on what the law requires, as you understand it. If the other side is suing you for a debt they cannot prove they own, you have to tell the judge that that failure to prove ownership requires they lose the case. When you object at trial or in motions, for another example, you have to tell the judge why legal precedent in your state requires that your objection be sustained.
Lawyers do this all the time, although even lawyers handle judges they don’t know extremely well, with kid gloves. And your job is much much harder because the judges regard you as socially inferior. You still have to tell the judge what the law requires, and you can’t mince your words about that. But never, ever, interrupt a judge, raise your voice, or lose your cool. Don’t forget that judges can make mistakes (and so can you, of course), so work with that. It doesn’t mean they’re against you – it doesn’t usually mean much of anything. It’s usually impersonal, and even if it isn’t you have to act like it is.
Remember that judges are in a god-like position over you, and a lot of them seem to think they are god, too. If they tell you to shut up or it’s over, they’ve ruled on a question, they expect you to thank them! They do, and it’s standard. The judge says, “I’ve overruled your objection,” and you say, in response, “Thank you your honor.”
It could seem disgusting, but it’s tradition as much as anything else, and you are respecting their position when you say that more than their person.
So you have a challenging balancing act with judges. You have to tell them what the law requires and what makes you think so – and they actually may not know or remember. But you must keep in mind that their power is nearly absolute, so you should usually treat your arguments as “reminders” to them of what you expect they already know. And yet you are their intellectual equals, too, so you should stand up for the right of your position even if the judge is questioning it.
With all that said, a lot of judges are intelligent, nice people. ALL of them are, at least some of the time to some people. Recognize that fact and understand that they play a role in this case, and that role is to make judgments, some of which you aren’t going to like. Don’t personalize their rulings, and don’t think that because they disagree with you on some point that they’re against you on all of them. Unless you’re a competitive athlete or a lawyer, this is probably way out of your experience, but referees in football are required to look at every play and make their best judgment regardless of who they like better. They try to do that, and so do judges, most of the time. Understand that fact – it’s just their job.
When you’re talking to the other side, but especially when you’re talking to a judge, remember to listen carefully. So often people just listen to what others are saying primarily as a way of marking time – you have something to say, and you’re just waiting for them to finish so you can say it. Don’t do this in the law. Listen to what they’re saying – it’s usually important.
And make sure the things you say are important, too. Stay on point and remember that anything you say that seems to go off-point will cost you respect and attention. No one wants to hear your feelings or difficulties. They want to hear what the law is and what it requires. If you’re representing yourself, you’re going to have strong feelings, but keep them in check and keep them quiet. Talk about the few things that matter to whatever you’re discussing.
Remember that above all, the case that means so much to you means very little to the other side or to the judge. It’s just a job to them, which they may take more or less seriously, but for you it is much more important. Act like the case is important to you and work steadily and hard, and stay humble. Hope the judge will take his or her responsibilities seriously enough to be fair and listen to you when it matters, and that the lawyer on the other side is as uninspired as most of them are. Keep those things in mind and you’ll have a great chance to win.
[Article updated 3/26/25]
What to Expect as a Poor Person in a Rich Man’s Game
What to Expect as a Poor Person in a Rich Man’s Game
You may have heard that “justice is blind,” which oddly enough was meant to suggest that justice is fair in America – it’s blind to class and race, and all the rest, supposedly. But if you’re being sued for debt you’ve probably heard of another saying that’s a little more apt: “it’s a big club, but you aren’t in it.”
But don’t give up. You have a good chance anyway.
I’m afraid that second saying is probably more relevant to what you can expect in the courts. If you’re going it pro se, that is to say representing yourself, you’re going to have some trouble getting the attention of most judges. They’re not going to value what you say as much as they’d value what a lawyer would say, especially a lawyer for a corporation. Most judges are on that side of the fence, and they’re DEFINITELY from that side of the tracks, if you know what I mean.
So let’s just say there’s an institutional bias – prejudice – against you. But I am saying “most” judges, after all, and some don’t share that bias.
And as a general rule judges do have a sense of fair play as far as playing by the rules, although again this is just a “general rule.” If they care about the outcome of a case, I’d say they can be pretty results driven, never minding the rules, but in fact most of them do NOT care about the outcome of debt cases. On the whole they seem not to like them, and we’ve all heard that debt collectors are notoriously heartless and… dirty. The judges are aware of all this, and I think they do regard them, on the whole, as the vultures of the legal kingdom. Judges often come from the more high profile sort of law.
But these are generalizations, and you should observe for yourself what your judge is like.
And here’s yet another general rule of the courts: the judges regard cases involving less than a couple of million dollars as being sort of trifling and not worth their time. That’s a thing you should never forget. It’s a question of who they blame for your case wasting their time. I think they start with the sense that YOU are to blame, if you bother defending yourself, but this can change, and we want it to change. You didn’t bring the suit, after all, but you are one of the few meaningfully opposing the debt collectors, and so the judges might blame you for that. It has often seemed that way to me, anyway.
This is all hardly a ringing endorsement of the process, I know, but probably nothing new to you, either. So why do I still think you have an excellent chance of winning if you fight these cases? Because the debt collectors really don’t usually have what they need to prove the things they need under the rules, and courts do have respect for rules. They’ll forgive corporate counsel a few transgressions, but in the final analysis they want the rules to be followed, and the case can be reversed on appeal if they don’t. So you have your chance.
And judges are people. The more time you spend with them, providing you keep your goals in mind and respect their time, the more the judges will like you, the more they’ll listen to what you have to say. And you will have the law on your side. That does matter. It usually makes all the difference if you know what you’re doing.
And that’s why we’re here – to make sure you do know what you’re doing. Just be aware that whatever they say about cutting a break for non-lawyers in the justice system – and they do in certain unimportant ways – you’re probably going to be held to a higher standard than the lawyer representing the debt collector rather than a lower one. You’re going to have to know more and do a better job than the other side.
You can do that, it just takes work and a certain humility. The lawyers on the other side are not the greatest legal minds. The debt collection business draws business people, and the business they’re in means they won’t spend a lot of time on your case. They won’t have a lot of the stuff they need or the time to get it. Your job is to figure that out in your case and show it to the judge in a way he or she will listen to. It’s a challenge, but it can usually be done. We’ll be helping you.
Debt Collection Lawyers
The lawyers for the other side have a job to do, and that’s to beat you. Some of them will treat you with respect, and others with contempt (which will be controlled), but remember their job, and however they present themselves to you it will be part of their overall plan to beat you. Don’t expect to go out with them for drinks after it’s all over.
If You’re Pro Se
If you’re trying to represent yourself, we can help. The best way for us to help is through membership, but we also have products that can help along the way.
Our 20-20 Membership
Our 20-20 Membership
People often ask me what they should get first from Your Legal Leg Up. To me, the answer is obvious, and it’s both the first and last thing you’ll pay for in most cases: the 20-20 membership. It’s the best thing we offer both in value and price. It’s so much better than the other options, in fact, that I almost feel guilty when people buy anything else, but there could be reasons something else would be right for you, so I’ll talk briefly about your other options at the end of this article.
Teleconferences
I’m not aware of any other program on the market that offers anything like our teleconferences.
They are is an opportunity to ask questions in real time. You can ask about what things mean, what the bad guys might be driving at or trying to accomplish with something they’re doing, and how you might respond. We’ll help direct you to sources of information or guide your research. Sometimes you might just want to know where you are in your case, what a word means, or how to say or search for something… stuff like that.
Sometimes you’ll just need some encouragement and a reminder to keep up the good work because
working steadily is important but difficult in legal work, where there are deadlines that can be months away, but you forget how much time things take even aside from doing the work itself.
And sometimes you’ll want to hear other people who in the same boat as you are. Debt defense pro se can be a lonely process, but there are a lot of people trying to defend themselves. You can talk to them, and we offer encouragement and coaching as well as more substantive help too. People who use it find it enormously helpful. We can’t offer legal advice – you’d have to pay between $150 – 250 per hour to get that – but consider it a very active form of coaching and help.
Teleconferences currently happen three times per week and members can come to any and all of them. They’re scheduled for an hour each, but often go above that amount of time because I want everyone with a question to get it answered. If need be, we’ll increase the number of teleconferences per week to make it easier to get those questions answered.
Fees and Prices – Why the 20-20 Membership is Best
Most of our memberships involve a registration fee and a monthly payment, but the 20-20 only requires one payment for a full year that will be less than the other memberships for a year. The other memberships offer discounts on our digital products, but with the 20-20 you get all the digital products for free.
In other words, for one price you get all of our digital products and access to all the materials on the website for a year in addition to the teleconferences. The digital products which are designed to make the whole process easier and more effective, and the many articles and videos should help you get a deeper understanding of specific topics as well. You don’t get any “bonuses” because you get everything with the membership.
Materials You’ll Get – You Get ALL Digital Products we Offer
Maybe that’s all you need to know, but if you like to see it all before you make a decision, I’ll say you get all the digital products on our comprehensive product page. This includes numerous reports, including among others, Got Debt, Assignment Contracts, and Three Weaknesses Almost All Debt Collectors Have, the Manuals for Debt Litigation, Debt Negotiation, and Credit Repair, and all the Motions Packets, including the Motion to Vacate Default, Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Compel, and Motion for Summary Judgment. There will be others, too. You will also get our Model Discovery Pack and, if you live in either California or Pennsylvania, products relevant to those areas.
And you’ll get access to all the hundreds of articles on our site. Many are free to the general public, but many others are restricted by level of membership. As a 20-20 member you get them all. Go here to sign up for the membership now, be sure to click on the 20-20 membership option.
Why Such a Good Deal?
I know this is going to sound like sales talk, but the 20-20 is a much better offer than we’ve ever made, and some explanation might help it make sense. There are two reasons, one selfish, and one not so selfish, for making this offer.
The selfish reason is that I’ve noticed that when people get sued they regard the law suit as a major priority and will pay what they have to (if they can) to give themselves a chance to win. That makes a lot of sense to me. But if they sign up for a monthly membership, there often comes a time when the case is less scary, or there comes a time when they need to buy a product but don’t have the money. So they cut corners and skip a product. That lowers their chance of winning, which isn’t good for Your Legal Leg Up’s reputation. It’s very important that you all win if at all possible, so making a deal which will never make you cut corners makes good business sense to me. And it’s why I’m here in the first place.
The other reason is just that I can do it. The products are here (and the work has been done, though they are sometimes revised), and I want you to be able to do your best work and get your best results without always having to sweat gallons. You’ll have plenty to do, but we can make things a lot easier. So I want to do that and am fine with making a little less than I might in to do it.
The Other Memberships
I mentioned the other types of membership a little bit above. Those are the Gold, Platinum and Diamond memberships. The main advantage with them is that if you show up and the debt collector gives up just because you do, you’ll save money because you won’t be paying for things you don’t us. Don’t laugh, that can happen. And it does happen maybe 1 percent of the time. They’re looking for an easy, automatic victory, and just by answering you make them decide to go away. Like I said, that happens about 1% of the time as far as I can tell. To be frank, nobody that’s happened to felt bad about getting the 20-20, but it’s a fact that a monthly membership would have cost less in that situation. Just about any other situation, though, and the 20-20 will save you a bunch of money and a ton of time and worry.
It’s the way to go for almost everybody. Go here to sign up for the membership now, be sure to click on the 20-20 membership option.
Motion to Compel Cycle
The “Motion to Compel Cycle”
– What to do when the Company Suing You Won’t Answer Discovery
If you’re being sued for debt and following our system, you will serve “discovery” on the other side. That is, you will send them questions to answer called “interrogatories,” requests for documents, and requests that they admit certain things.
We do this because debt buyers usually don’t have the proof they need to establish their case, and even original creditors often don’t. We need to know exactly what they do have so we can prepare to show that it isn’t legitimate evidence. That will be important in resisting any motions they file, in filing our own motions, and preparing for and winning at trial.
You will send discovery, and no matter what you send, you will receive nothing but objections in response. This is called “stone-walling,” and it’s in every debt collector’s playbook. Do NOT just send another set of questions – it doesn’t matter what you ask, they will always object, so that would be useless. They might be stonewalling because they know they don’t have legitimate evidence, but frankly I think it’s mostly just a strategy to convince you to give up – to make you think you don’t have a chance against their lawyers and their money.
Don’t give up. Make them give you your answers.
To do that, you’re going to have to do the things that allow you to file a motion to compel, and then you will, obviously, have to file the motion, too. This whole process is what I call the Motion to Compel Cycle. So what is that?
Look at your rules of civil procedure for the rule on motions to compel. READ THAT RULE!
You will notice, in every jurisdiction I’ve ever seen, that the rule requires you to negotiate “informally” in good faith to resolve the issues raised by the other side’s objections. That is going to require you to call them up on the phone, speak to the lawyer on the other side, and discuss the objections. You will do this in good faith, but they certainly will not. And when you get through with this conversation, you will send them first a confirming letter if they’ve agreed to anything, and secondly what’s called a “good faith letter,” which outlines the items remaining in contention and states your basis for demanding the evidence.
So it goes like this:
Send discovery and wait for response
Call them to discuss objections
Write good faith letter outlining disputes and giving them a certain time to provide the information you demand
Wait for that time to expire
Write and file motion to compel.
It is possible they will respond with an argument. You should reply to that argument, but remember never to make any admissions of owing them or anyone money, of any prior relationship to the creditor, etc. NO ADMISSIONS AT ALL EVER. This is critical because they may slip a question in asking “don’t you owe __ the money?” or “don’t you already have the records? It was your credit card account!”
The only issue you should discuss is whether and why they owe you the discovery. Don’t forget.
This whole process is tedious and annoying because you know they are not in good faith. However, remember this: your efforts are requiring more attorney time spent on your case than many other cases combined would require. You are drawing blood with every minute you make them spend. And it’s the only way you will get what you need.
Remember in your first phone call to ask about EVERY SINGLE OBJECTION. I know there are dozens. Go through each one. It’s your right and responsibility, and it costs them $250/hour to talk with you.
Write a “confirming letter” if they make any concessions at all. Say “you said you would give me __ by [date]” and mention everything they agreed to. If they said they didn’t have anything responsive to a question or request, confirm that in the same way, too. You must create a written record.
You won’t get much, so you have to take the next step, the good faith letter where you say why you’re entitled to the information you request. If you’re using our model discovery, you’ll know what to say here.
They won’t give you anything even after this, in all probability, so your next step is the motion to compel. In that, you will include a statement about the phone calls you attempted, and you’ll attach your good faith letter. The court won’t hear your motion otherwise.
We have materials that could help you with all of the motion to compel cycle, from phone call to hearing.
What if they are Suing me and my Business
What if they are Suing me and my Business
Who is Suing Me for an old Debt?
Who is Suing Me for that old Debt?
One important thing to know is whether you’re being sued by a debt buyer, a debt collector, or an original creditor. Knowing this will help you focus your strategy.
First, some definitions.
An “original creditor” is someone who claims you borrowed money from them. It could be a loan or a credit card or anything else creating debt, but the point is that they claim THEY are the ones who originally were involved in the transaction. For example, you’re being sued by American Express, and they say you signed up for and used an American Express credit card and didn’t pay them. “But I never signed up for an American Express credit card!” – That’s good, but it doesn’t matter for the purposes of this definition. Whether or not you owe the money doesn’t matter for this. If you’re being sued by someone who claims you borrowed from them, it’s an original creditor case.
A “debt buyer” is someone who bought the debt from the original creditor. This person may also be a debt collector, but the point here is they’re claiming you owed money to someone else and the debt was assigned to them. As you probably know by now, selling old debt is big business in America and throughout the world. Look for the word “assigned.” If a debt buyer is NOT a debt collector, your rights to countersue will be limited (because the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act won’t apply to them), but they will still have most of the weaknesses in establishing their case that we usually talk about.
A “debt collector” is someone who either is acting on behalf of a debt owner (rare, these days) or a debt buyer whose primary business is the collecting of debts (i.e., they buy debts and sue people without providing any real service to the people they’re suing). These people will have weaknesses in their case AND may give you a chance to countersue.
So Who Is Suing Me?
To determine this on a preliminary basis, look at the name of the case. It will be “X Company vs. You” Normally, this means that X Company is the plaintiff. Their lawyer is NOT suing you for most purposes, and the lawyer is not, by virtue of being the lawyer on the case, a party to the action. Companies can only act through lawyers (in court), and the lawyers are generally only “mouthpieces” for them. So most of the time you can forget about them as you consider your rights.
I did say “on a preliminary basis.” What I mean is that you start with the basic assumption that the person named as plaintiff IS the plaintiff, but it turns out this isn’t always true. Sometimes debt collectors (including lawyers) buy debts and bring the lawsuit in the former owner’s name. I think this violates the FDCPA, but for now you just need to know it CAN happen and does happen sometimes, and you need to know if it’s happening in your case. The only way to find out is by conducting discovery, and our model discovery therefore includes some questions about whether the debt has ever been transferred, and to whom.
Sued not Served
Sued not Served
What Should I Do if I Know a Debt Law Suit Has Been Filed but not Served?
Sometimes people find out they’re being sued before the plaintiff gets around to serving them. How does this happen? And what do you do if you find that out?
People can learn about a suit before being sued – it is public knowledge, after all, so it could happen
in a lot of different ways. Mostly though, it happens in one of two ways. Sometimes debt collectors bug you for money, and you go out of your way to check court files to see if you’re named in a suit, or you find out from a neighbor who gets curious when they see someone trying to serve you. I guess these ways are actually rare, but they can happen. The other way is more common.
There are lawyers who want to represent people in these cases, and they may send you a letter telling you you’re being sued. It may be news to you that anybody is even after you, much less actually suing you. So you check the court files and find out it’s true.
What do you do?
There have been times people brought these cases to me, back when I was practicing, and wanted to take action. In that situation they had a lawyer and a counterclaim (usually), and where that’s the case, it could make sense to waive – or let go – your right to service and just enter on the case. We were sure we’d win, and we had a counterclaim, so why wait?
If you’re pro se these days, the situation is very different. You can’t be sure you’ll win however much you think the facts are on your side, because you can’t count on the courts to see it your way. No matter how clear you think it is, you just can’t count on winning. And you’re less likely to have a counterclaim because the courts have narrowed the definition of counterclaim and debt collectors have gotten a little more careful.
So for those reasons I think it makes sense to watch the court docket (without identifying yourself to the court) to see if they ever claim to have served you. Or until they actually do serve you.
You have no obligation to make it easier for them to serve you, and if they can’t get you served they will eventually have to drop the case – or get it dropped (for “failure to prosecute”). I think it makes good sense to give them that chance. But watch to make sure they don’t claim you were served. Likewise, if they “serve by publication” (which is putting an ad in a small local paper) you’ll probably need to answer, but it’s rare, and they have to get permission to do it. Still, you should watch for it.
If they don’t serve you, you might get lucky and have them drop the case. Or you will get served and have to defend.
Obviously, if that happens, we can help.
Your Right to a Jury Trial in Debt Litigation
Your Right to a Jury Trial in Debt Litigation
Under the Seventh amendment you have a right to a jury trial for cases involving “damages.”
Damages is a little bit of a term of art in this sense, but it basically means “money” for claims that were traditionally brought in courts of “law” (as opposed to courts of “equity”). As it happens, breach of contract, which is what most credit card cases are, is a legal claim subject to the 7th amendment. On the other hand, claims brought under, for example, the claim of “account stated,” are equitable claims that don’t give you a right to a jury trial by themselves.
That means that if the debt collector is suing for breach of contract or “open” or “closed” account, you have a right to a jury trial under the constitution. If they are suing you EXCLUSIVELY for account stated, on the other hand, you don’t.
When you have a right to a jury trial for one claim, you have a right to jury trial for all claims, so if they bring breach of contract AND account stated, you’ll have a right to jury trial for both. Most debt defendants, therefore, do have a right to trial by jury. Should you demand a trial by jury? I usually think so.
Trials by jury force the judge to take the law of evidence more seriously. In fact they take jury trials more seriously in a lot of ways. That benefits the debt defendant because our case is usually that the debt collector does not have any evidence that complies with the rules of evidence, and we need the court to take that seriously.
I also suggest demanding a jury trial because they are far more difficult for the debt collectors.
Understand what I’m saying, though. It isn’t that debt collectors don’t know how to do jury trials or even that they aren’t good at them – individual talent varies, of course. I’m only saying that debt cases tried to a judge can take twenty minutes. Picking a jury can take hours. And all the rules have to be carefully followed, and there are special rules and procedures, too. So demanding a jury might require 20 times as much attorney time. And time is money. Especially attorney time at $250/hour.
Debt plaintiffs don’t like cases that take a lot of time. It increases their costs, and they know you don’t have much money, so they worry about getting it back. Debt collector lawyers also worry about cases taking a long time because their performance affects their annual pay, and long debt cases hurt them.
In my opinion, those are strong reasons to seek a jury trial, and I might add that there will be times when a jury is also more sympathetic to the defendant than a judge would be. Judges haven’t faced debt trouble in a very long time, in general, by the time they’ve become judges. Most jurors, on the other hand, will have money worries. But I wouldn’t rely on this too much. Some judges are sympathetic, and some take their work seriously whether they’re sympathetic or not. And some juries can be pretty harsh.
But our goals in jury trials don’t depend on the jury that much. We want the judge to exclude evidence that shouldn’t be seen, and they take that more seriously when there’s a jury. Then it’s clear the debt collector didn’t make its case.
So why might you NOT want a jury? The only reason I’ve ever heard from debt defendants is that they’re scared of them. And I hear that a lot, but it’s not a good reason. Almost everybody I know who has ever had a jury trial has said it wasn’t scary. Not when you’re doing it. They are a little scary to think about and get ready for – pretrial jitters are normal, but once the trial starts, you’ll be too busy to be nervous. That’s as true of jury trials as it is of judge-tried cases.
You have a right to a trial by jury, but how and when you ask for it can make a difference. In some jurisdictions you just put it at the end of your Answer. In some jurisdictions you have to enter it as a separate request, separately. Which of these you’ll need to do is probably in your court’s local rules, but you might ask a court clerk about that. If you can’t get an answer from an authority, I’d suggest putting it both on your Answer and making a separate request which you submit at the same time as your Answer.
If you didn’t ask for a jury trial, is it too late?
The law favors jury trials, but individual judges often don’t, since they know as well as I do that jury trials take more time and attention. For that reason, if you haven’t already asked for a jury trial, I suggest you do it ASAP. The number of days could matter, since a court’s discretion to deny a request for jury is probably tied to how long the case has been going on. You should do a little research before filing your jury demand, though, because if you don’t do it right off the bat, you’ll need to file a motion that tells the judge why you should get one. That isn’t complicated, but you’ll want to know what the rules are that apply to it.
What is Arbitration and Should you Seek or Oppose It?
Compel Arbitration or Oppose it?
Arbitration. Should you compel arbitration? Or oppose it? I’ve recently had a comment on Youtube asking me to discuss arbitration, and it has also come up in several recent teleconferences as members contemplated seeking arbitration. Others have wanted to know whether to oppose a motion to compel arbitration.
Let’s start with a definition: Arbitration is the submission of your case to a private entity known as an arbitrator. After some process and a hearing (most likely), the arbitrator will decide what happens in your case and issue what amounts to a judgment.
For debt cases, it’s always a single arbitrator or a company that will provide a single arbitrator that’s appointed, but for other cases it could be other things, like a panel, perhaps. In any event, there will be an arbitrator and some special rules that will NOT be your state’s rules of civil procedure and also might not be your state’s rules of evidence. But there will be rules that control the process.
Arbitration is popular because it makes it faster, easier and cheaper for people to engage in litigation. The discovery process will be limited, and the appeals process almost eliminated. That’s why rich companies and debt collectors always love it. Almost all of these things are completely and profoundly BAD for debt defendants. That’s why I’ve always suggested debt defendants should avoid arbitration.
But there is another side to the question, and there are some who argue in favor of allowing or even forcing arbitration in debt cases. What’s their argument?
I think the argument in favor of arbitration boils down to the fee, which apparently has to be paid up front by the debt collector And that can amount to two or three thousand dollars, or even a little more. The idea here is that debt collectors won’t want to put that much money down on the barrelhead just to chase a bad debt and that court is, for them, much cheaper.
There is some sense in this argument.
Debt collectors never worry about winning a case, but they do know you don’t have much money. That means that they’re sure they’ll win, but worry that they won’t collect, which is the most important thing to them. The more you make them spend, the more worried about that they’ll be. Maybe they’ll drop the case if you demand arbitration.
We often make the argument that by pursuing discovery, filing and defending motions, and preparing for trial you are driving up the costs of litigation and may make the whole thing too expensive for debt collectors to want to do. Again, not because they worry about losing, but just the amount of money they’re having to spend when their business model is designed around easy, cheap judgments. However, conducting discovery and filing and defending motions and the rest do in fact improve your chances of winning, and we think that, when it comes to a debt collector, you should win your case. These things are the way to do it, and the chance the company will drop the case is basically the icing on that cake.
In arbitration, it’s the whole cake. You should remember that.
One big question that may be more theoretical than real is, who ultimately pays the arbitrator?
I say it may be theoretical since I just said the debt collector isn’t sure you’ll have any money at all, but this won’t stop them from seeking as big a judgment as possible. And if they get a judgment, they WILL try to collect it. All. So be advised that the judgment size could matter.
Okay, but who pays the arbitrator?
I think some states may have rules that matter, and I know that California, for example, does have rules regarding employment and consumer-brought claims. In the absence of any state based rule, you
would look to the arbitration provision giving you the right to arbitration – i.e., the contract. That will often say who pays the arbitrator, and it can specify any of a number of things, from company pays all to loser pays all, to dividing it up. The contract isn’t often going to put all the burden on the company because, after all, the company wrote the contract.
If it says company pays all, though, the company can’t shift that payment to you if you lose. If it’s loser pays all, though, it obviously will. But if there isn’t a direction in the contract, that would usually mean you start by splitting the cost, but that the arbitrator can award the cost to the winner, i.e., add it to the judgment.
The rule in your case is going to depend on your own specific circumstances.
The net of all this would suggest that you will have some advantage if the contract makes the company pay, but there’s risk if the loser pays. And of course it matters a lot who pays up front, which is often the debt collector.
So… should you compel arbitration?
In a debt buyer/collector case (i.e., not the original creditor) I’d still lean strongly against. You should win this case under most state laws because of the rules of evidence, and you cannot depend on the arbitrator to enforce those rules rigorously. If it’s an original creditor, it’s a much closer question. You’ll have to consider all the things we’ve discussed here and make a judgment call.
Filing a motion to compel arbitration might trigger some settlement negotiation, but I wouldn’t think you could get the company to give you a very steep discount, but there I’m just guessing based on what I know about lawyers and not experience in these type cases.
I remain very hesitant about suggesting arbitration, but there may be value in considering it if you’re
dealing with an original creditor.