Equable Ascent Financial, LLC Loses Credit Card Collection Lawsuit and Ordered to Pay Consumer’s Attorney’s Fees.

A Maricopa County justice court recently ruled in favor of an Arizona consumer in credit card collection lawsuit brought by debt buyer Equable Ascent Financial, LLC. The Court has also ordered the debt buyer Equable to pay the consumer’s attorney fees.

The court held that Equable’s witness and exhibits were insufficient to prove that it owned the consumer’s credit card account it was attempting to collect, and entered judgment in the debtor’s favor.

Here is a short list of Debt Buyers who file suit against Arizona consumers:

Acarta, LLC
Action Financial
Arrow Financial Services (Delaware)
Asset Acceptance LLC (Delaware)
Bauhinia, LLC
CACV of Colorado
Cavalry Portfolio Services
Collins Financial
Copper State Financial Management, LLC
Debt Buyers Inc.
DSS Financial Group, LLC (Arizona)
Elche, LLC
Equable Ascent Financial, LLC
Fortis Capital LLC( Florida)
Incepta LLC
LVNV Funding, LLC
Main Street Acquisition Corp. (Maryland)
Masari Investments
Midland Funding, LLC
Midland Credit Management
Nu Island Partners, LLC
Palisades Recovery
Persolve, LLC (Delaware)
Precision Recovery Analytics, Inc.
Portfolio Recovery
Rail Limited Partnership
Skystreak LLC
Unifund CCR Partners
Velocity Investments
Western States Financial Management LLC
Worldwide Asset Management

If you are an Arizona consumer who has recently been served with a lawsuit by a debt buyer, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if you may have a defense to the lawsuit.

National Service Bureau Gets Sued in Arizona Federal Court

National Service Bureau, who true name is Seattle Service Bureau was recently sued by my office for violating the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA").  In the federal district court complaint, the Arizona consumer alleges that National Service Bureau repeatedly called her at work, left messages with co-workers, and never identified that he was trying to collect a debt, or that he was working for a collection agency. 

The reason so many Arizona debtors receive phone calls at work from collection agencies is that the agency is trying to harass or embarrass you.  Calls to work scare consumers into believing that if they don't pay the debt immediately, they may end of losing their jobs. AND IT WORKS!

Many times debts which are not owed are paid by scared consumers worried that they may lose their job if the calls continue.

Under the FDCPA, a collection agency that continues to call an Arizona debtor work, when they know that the debtor cannot receive personal calls at work violate the FDPCA. Leaving a message with a co-worker IS ALWAYS a violation of the FDCPA.

The FDCPA provides the Arizona consumer with the right to collect statutory damages of up to $1,000, plus any actual damages suffered. Actual damages includes emotional distress, humiliation and embarrassment.  The FDCPA also makes the debt collection agency, National Service Bureau in this case, pay for your attorney's fees and all the court costs.

If you are being harassed by a debt collection agency, feel free to call attorney Floyd W. Bybee to see if you have a claim.  The call consultation is free with no obligation.

 

ARIZONA Consumer Sues Allied Interstate for FDCPA Violations

We recently sued Allied Interstate LLC on behalf of an Arizona consumer for Allied's continuing attempts to collect a student loan debt that had been previously settled.  The Arizona consumer had settled his legal obligation on the debt over four years previously, but Allied continued to try to collect the debt.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), a collection agency that continues to collect on a debt that it knows has been satisfied violates the FDPCA. 

The FDCPA provides the Arizona consumer with the right to collect statutory damages of up to $1,000, plus any actual damages suffered.  The FDCPA also makes the debt collection agency, Allied Interstate in this case, pay for your attorney's fees and all the court costs.

If you are being harassed by a debt collection agency, feel free to call attorney Floyd W. Bybee to see if you have a claim.  The call consultation is free with no obligation.

 

MIDLAND FUNDING LLC SUED OVER “ROBO-SIGNING”

Minnesota Attorney General, Lori Swanson, filed suit against Midland Funding, LLC for filing false and unreliable affidavits in debt collection lawsuits. These are the same “robo-signed” and unverified affidavits Midland files in its Arizona collection cases.

To read the full story go here: http://www.startribune.com/business/118777379.html

What To Do If You Have Been Sued by Midland Funding, LLC

If you have recently been sued by Midland Funding, LLC, or its sister collection agency, Midland Credit Management, Inc., and believe that do not owe the debt, please contact Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822

 

 

FTC Issues 2010 Annual Report on FDCPA to Congress

FTC Reports Consumer Complaints Rise 17% in 2010

The Federal Trade Commission recently issued its 2011 annual report to Congress on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) showing that consumer debt collection complaints rose 17% in 2010.  The federal agency received 140,036 debt collection complaints in 2010 compared to 119,609 in 2009.  The FTC also reported that it received more complaints about the debt collection industry than from any other specific industry.


Top Categories for Debt Collection Complaints

The top areas which consumers complain about were:

•    calling repeatedly or continuously

•    misrepresenting the character, amount or status of the debt (including demanding a larger payment that is permitted by law)

•    Failing to send consumers the required written notice about the debt and their rights

•    Threatening dire consequences if the consumer fails to pay, including false threats of legal action, threats of criminal prosecution, wage garnishment, and damage to consumer’s credit rating.

•    Failing to identify that it is a debt collector

•    Revealing alleged debt to third parties, including family, friends, and co-workers.

•    Calls to consumer’s place of employment

•    Failing to verify disputed debts

•    Continuing to contact consumers after receiving written notice to stop all communication.


FTC Provides Information About Consumers’ Rights

The FTC’s “Debt Collection FAQs: Guide for Consumers” brochure is available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre18.shtm.  The FTC also has an animated video that explains consumer rights regarding debt collection. It can be viewed at http://www.ftc.gov/debtcollection and http://www.youtube.com/ftcvideos.


FDCPA Prohibits Deceptive, Unfair and Abusive Practices

The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using any deceptive, unfair, and abusive collection tactics to attempt to collect a debt. Though the FTC may take action against some third-party debt collectors or debt-buyers, most Arizona consumers will obtain relief only from bringing a private action in Arizona courts.


If you are an Arizona consumer who has been contacted by a third-party debt collector or debt buyer and feel that their collection actions were deceptive, unfair, harassing, or abusive, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822.


MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC. CONTINUES TO COLLECT FROM ARIZONA CONSUMERS AFTER CONSUMERS FILE BANKRUPTCY

Midland Credit Management, Inc. Continues Collection of Accounts from Arizona Debtors after Receiving Notice of Bankruptcy Filing.

Midland Credit Management, Inc., the sister company to Midland Funding, LLC, seems to have made it a regular practice to ignore the notices it and Midland Funding, LLC receives from the bankruptcy court so that it can continue to collect against Arizona consumers. Midland’s actions are illegal.
Arizona Debtor Sues Midland Credit Management, Inc. in Arizona Federal District Court for Harassing Phone Calls.

In December 2010, I filed a suit under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA against Midland Credit Management on behalf of an Arizona consumer who, after filing bankruptcy, continued to receive numerous harassing telephone calls from Midland.  Midland ignored the consumer’s efforts to tell the collector that she had filed bankruptcy and that she had an attorney.  Midland continued to collect on a debt that she had included in her bankruptcy.
Before the calls began, Midland Credit Management and Midland Funding, LLC had received two notices from the bankruptcy court of the consumer’s bankruptcy filing.  One notice was mailed to Midland by the bankruptcy court, and the other was electronically send by the court.  Both notices informed Midland that the debtor was represented by a lawyer, and thus it was illegal for Midland to directly contact the consumer and to attempt to collect the debt.
Arizona Consumer Sues Midland Credit Management, Inc. in Arizona Federal District Court for Contacting Her after She Had Filed Bankruptcy and Knowing She Was Represented by a Lawyer.

In the second case, Midland Credit Management, Inc. had received two electronic notices from the bankruptcy court in early November 2010 of the consumers’ bankruptcy filing.  Despite these notices, Midland sent two letters, one in November and one in December, directly to the wife demanding payment on an account it claimed was owed.  Midland also directly sent the husband a letter in January 2011 on another account that was in his name only.
FDCPA Prohibits Direct Communication with a Consumer it Knows Is Represented by a Lawyer.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA protects Arizona consumers from debt collectors communicating directly with them once they have hired a lawyer.  So, any Arizona debtor who files bankruptcy using a bankruptcy lawyer should not receive any direct contact from a debt collector.  And, if a debt collector does contact the consumer directly, then the creditor would be in violation of the FDCPA.
If you are an Arizona consumer who has filed bankruptcy using a lawyer, and has been contacted by a debt collector after the bankruptcy, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if I can help you.

Why Debt Buyers Must Provide Proof Debt Ownership

I regularly hear debt buyers filing suit in Arizona courts argue that of course they own the old credit card account they are attempting to collect, otherwise they would not be suing the debtor.  And, since they say the own the debt, they do not need to provide any verifiable proof of ownership. 

When challenged to provide proof of ownership, these same debt buyers usually come up with a copy of a billing statement or two from the original credit card company, and argue that their possession of these billing statements proves that in fact they own the debt.  Other times, they simply get one of their own employees to sign an affidavit saying that the debt buyer owns the debt.

Why You Must Require Debt Buyers to Provide Verifiable Proof of Ownership.

The Associate Press recently reported that the director of a Buffalo debt collection company had sold information from the company’s computer files to two illegitimate debt collectors who then scared consumers into paying made-up debts.  There have been other reports of debt buyers selling the same account to two or more debt buyers, who both later attempt to collect on the same debt.

If you have been sued by a debt buyer, make them provide absolute proof that they are the rightful owner and assignee of the original credit card company.  They will seldom be able or willing to do so. 

If you are an Arizona consumer who has recently been served with a lawsuit by a debt buyer, please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if you may have a defense to the lawsuit.

Arizona Federal Court finds Gurstel Staloch & Chargo Violated FDCPA.

In a recently published decision, a federal Magistrate Judge for the District of Arizona found that Gurstel, Staloch & Chargo, P.A., now known as Gurstel Chargo, P.A., now known as Gurstel Law Firm, P.C., violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because it failed to ceased communications with the consumer after she notified Gurstel both verbally and in writing that she was represented by a lawyer.  The Court also found that Gurstel violated the FDCPA by continuing to contact the consumer after she notified the firm that she disputed the debt, refused to pay, and demanded that Gurstel cease all communications with her.

A copy of the decision can be reviewed here.

If you have sent a letter (certified return receipt requested) to a debt collection company telling it that you refuse to pay the debt, or that you want it to stop contacting you, but they continue to call and / or write you, then it is violating the FDCPA as Gurstel did in this case.  You would be able to sue the collection agency and recover damages.

If you are an Arizona consumer being harassed or threatened by a debt collector or junk-debt buyer regarding a consumer debt, I can help.  Please call Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822






Bartolini Finance Still Filing Suits on Old Debts.

Recently I have been contacted by several Arizona consumers who have been sued by Bartolini Finance, also known as CNAC and J.D. Byrider.  In each instance, the account defaulted over four years prior to the suit being filed.

Arizona Statute of Limitations for Collecting on a Repossession is Four (4) Years.

A.R.S. § 47-2725 requires that Bartolini Finance file its suit to collect the remaining balance on your car loan within four (4) years after the repossession.

In the cases I am seeing right now, the repossession took place nearly six (6) years ago, meaning that Bartolini is too late.  However, if the Arizona debtor does not properly respond to the lawsuit, then Bartolini is able to get a default judgment.  This is obviously what Bartolini is hoping for.

Don’t Let Bartolini Get a Default Judgment Against You!

The large majority of the cases Bartolini Finance has filed have ended up with default judgments.  Many times the interest that has accrued far exceeds the amount of the original debt. 

You must file an appropriate answer with the Court in order to avoid judgment being entered against you.

Hire a Lawyer to Assist You.

If you have been sued by Bartolini Finance, hire the assistance of an attorney.  There are several consumer lawyers in Maricopa County which are capable of defending these Bartolini Finance lawsuits.  The cost of hiring a lawyer is usually much less than the amount of the potential judgment.  Plus, with the damage to your credit file by having a judgment entered, the cost of obtaining legal counsel is usually well worth it.

I would be glad to assist you in reviewing your case to see if you have a valid defense.  Please call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 for a consultation.



Arizona Consumers Hounded on Discharged Debt.

Are you an Arizona consumer who has filed bankruptcy within the past few years?

Are your creditors still trying to collect your discharged debt?

Are your discharged debts still reporting as owed on your credit report?

I am regularly contacted by Arizona debtors who are still suffering the collection harassment the bankruptcy was supposed to stop!  Unfortunately, many creditors sell the debts after they get notice of your bankruptcy. And, the debt-buyers who buy these accounts ignore the bankruptcy and hope you will too.

Sometimes their tactics are subtle, like reporting the accounts as outstanding to the credit bureaus, or sending soft letters suggesting that paying the debt will improve your ability to get new credit.  Either way, they are violating the bankruptcy laws and perhaps the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).

Sometimes they act much more boldly.  When you question the validity of the debt, the creditor or debt-buyer will suggest that perhaps the debt was not discharged in the bankruptcy and that you still owe the money.

The bottom line is that if a creditor, a debt-buyer, or a collection agency makes any attempt to collect one of the debts included in your bankruptcy, they have violated the law.

If you are an Arizona consumer, I may be able to help you stop the collection attempts, and recover damages from these unscrupulous collectors.  I offer a free phone consultation.  

Call me, Floyd W. Bybee, at 480-756-8822

 

J.R. Brothers Sued by Arizona Consumer over Illegal Threats.

My office recently filed suit on behalf of an Arizona consumer against J.R. Brothers Financial, Inc., an Arizona collection agency. The lawsuit alleges that the J.R. Brothers’ collector told the consumer that because she had written a bad check, she had committed a felony.  It also alleges that J.R. Brothers’ threatened to “press charges” against her for passing a bad check.  Finally, the suit alleges that the collector told the consumer that her doctor would no longer see her because she had not paid her bill. These threats violate federal law!

False Threats Under FDCPA Illegal.

The basis for the Arizona lawsuit is that J.R. Brothers violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA by making false threats to coerce payments on a debt.  Even when a debt is owed, a collection agency such as J.R. Brothers is prohibited from threatening or implying criminal prosecution unless the action is lawful (which it was not here), and the debt collector intends to take such action (which it did not intend to take here).

J.R. Brothers’ false statement that the doctor would no longer see the consumer as a patient is also illegal under the FDCPA.

Any false or misleading representations made in connection with the collection of a debt are prohibited by the FDCPA.

FDCPA Provides Recovery of Damages for False or Misleading Representations.


The FDCPA provides that any collection agency, such as J.R. Brothers in this instance, is liable to the consumer for money damages for making false or misleading statements or representations in order to collect a debt. Damages under the FDCPA include statutory damages of up to $1,000, plus actual damages resulting from the violation. They are also liable for court costs and attorney’s fees.   

Take Action to Stop Collection Harassment.

If you are being harassed or threatened by a debt collector or junk-debt buyer regarding a consumer debt, I can help.  Call Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822


Debt Collection Harassment and Abuse Top Complaints to State Attorneys General.

The National Association of Attorneys General recently released their Top 10 List of Consumer Complaints for 2008, and Debt collection was number one.

The complete list is:
 
    1.    Debt Collection
    2.    Auto Sales
    3.    Home Repair/Construction
    4.    Credit Cards (tie)
    5.    Internet Goods and Services (tie)
    6.    Predatory Lending/Mortgages
    7.    Telemarketing/Do-Not-Call
    8.    Auto Repair
    9.    Auto Warranties (tie)
    10.    Telecom/Slamming/Cramming (tie)


Collection Harassment and Abuse Likely to Continue.

With the current economic struggles, Arizona consumers will likely continue to see increased collection harassment and abuse from collection agencies and junk-debt buyers. With fewer dollars in consumer’s pockets, collectors are resorting to more aggressive, abusive and threatening tactics to wrestle the limited money away from the consumer into their own pockets.

Report to Your State’s Attorney General.


If you have been subjected to collection harassment or abuse, you can report it to your own state’s attorney general. For you Arizona consumers, you can file a complant at the Arizona Attorney General's website.

Remedies Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA.

Remember, you also have the right to file suit against the abusive debt collector and recover damages under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA.

If you are an Arizona debtor current being harassed or abused by a debt collector or junk-debt buyer regarding a consumer debt, I can help. I offer a free consultation. 

Call Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822

Arizona Department of Financial Affairs Obtains Consent Decree Against Child Support Network, Inc.

Child Support Network, Inc., an Arizona collection agency, recently entered into a Consent Decree with the Arizona Department of Financial Affairs, the regulator of Arizona collection agencies.  The Decree was the result of Child Support Network’s misrepresentation of available remedies to enforce collection of a child support order, including threatening jail time and suspension of driver’s license, continued contact with the debtor’s employer, and contact with the debtor’s father threatening jail time if the father did not pay the debt.

Since this debt was for child support, there would be no remedies under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA — the FDCPA requires that the debt or obligation arise out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.  However, many of the tactics used by Child Support Network are regularly employed by third party collection agencies and by junk-debt buyers collecting on consumer debts and would violate the FDCPA.  

Stop Collection Harassment Today!

If you are being harassed or abused by a debt collector or junk-debt buyer regarding a consumer debt, I can help.  I offer a free consultation.  

Call Floyd W. Bybee at 480-756-8822

 

Arizona Law Against Calling At Work.

I am frequently asked whether Arizona law prohibits collectors from calling a consumer at work.  While Arizona does not have its own law similar to the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or FDCPA, in most cases Arizona debtors are protected by the FDCPA.  

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) Prohibits Calls At Work.

The FDCPA protects a consumer from receiving calls at work “if the debt collector knows or has reason to know that the consumer’s employer prohibits the consumer from receiving such [calls].”  So, if the debt collector knows — meaning you have told them before by phone (good) or by letter (better) or by certified letter sent return receipt requested (best) — that your employer does not allow you to take calls from a collector, then they can no longer call you at work.  And if they do, they have violated the FDCPA.

Calls Must Be from “Debt Collector”.

The FDCPA only applies to “debt collectors” which includes almost all collectors other than the original creditor.  For example, if the calls are coming from a junk-debt buyer, then they are covered.  If the calls are from an original pay day lender, then they are not covered.  The calls must be from a third party collection agency, collection lawyer, or a junk-debt buyer.  Original creditors are excluded.

What To Do If The Calls Keep Coming.

If a collector keeps calling you at work, even after you have told them to stop and that your boss/employer does not allow you to take these types of calls at work, then your remedy will be to take legal action against the collector.  You are entitled to recover damages, including statutory damages of up to $1,000, against any agency who has violated the FDCPA.

Call BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC in Mesa Arizona.

Call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 to set up a free consultation.

FDCPA or Bankruptcy? Remedies for Arizona Debtors to Stop Collection Abuse and Harassment.

Both the FDCPA and Bankruptcy give Arizona consumers possible remedies for stopping collection harassment and abuse.  The FDCPA allows Arizona consumers to recover damages from third party collectors who have harassed them, thus usually stopping any continued harassment.  Bankruptcy, on the other hand, usually stops collection harassment with an injunction against all collection activity. (I say usually, as sometimes the harassment continues even after filing bankruptcy)

Many Arizona debtors find that they need to file for bankruptcy, but do not have the money needed to pay the lawyer’s fee up front.  Some law firms will sign up the client, but do not file the bankruptcy case until all the lawyer’s fees have been paid — sometimes as much as $2,000 - $3,000 — which may take up to six months or more to pay.  In the meantime, the collection harassment continues with no apparent remedy.

Use Both FDCPA and Bankruptcy!

My experience has been that many Arizona debtors have one or more existing claims against third party debt collectors by the time they meet with a bankruptcy lawyer.  Under the FDCPA, the consumer is entitled to recover damages, including statutory damages of up to $1,000, from the violating collection agency.  If pursued, these FDCPA cases may provide the additional money needed to pay the bankruptcy lawyer’s fees.  So, by using the FDCPA, Arizona consumers are able to ultimately file their bankruptcy cases sooner, and with less money directly out of their own pocket.

If You Are Considering Bankruptcy, Please Call BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC.

If you are considering filing bankruptcy, and you have collectors calling you about your debts, please call Floyd W. Bybee at (480) 756-8822 for a free phone consultation to see if he can help you.

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) Prohibits Collection of Fees and Charges Not Authorized by Contract or By Law.

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA, prohibits a collector — including collection agencies, bad-debt buyers, and lawyers — from collecting or attempting to collect any amount unless such amount is expressly authorized by the contract or agreement creating the debt, or is permitted by law. 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(1). This includes the addition of interest, collection fees, and attorney’s fees.

If, for instance, you borrowed $1,000 from the credit union, and now the collection agency is asking for $1,000 plus interest, plus some other fee, then you might be a victim of collection abuse.

Collection Agencies Regularly Add Collection Costs to the Debt.

The addition of interest, collection fees, and other charges has become common place for many Arizona collection agencies. In fact, adding 50% to an apartment debt is almost universal these days. The answer to whether such charges or fees are legal is not always clear.

Many Arizona landlords, at the direction of their collection agencies, have added clauses to their lease agreements providing that collection fees will be added to the balance owed in the event the debt is assigned to a collection agency. Some of these collection agencies even specify a certain percent to be added, such as 30% or 50%. Then, on top of these fees, the agencies will add interest. Soon, a $1,000 debt becomes $1,500 then $2,000. When a collection lawyer gets involved, attorney’s fees are added effectively doubling or tripling the original amount claimed to be owed.

Arizona Consumer Sues Tempe Collection Lawyer Over Addition of Attorneys Fees.

My office recently filed suit against a Tempe collection lawyer, Mark A. Kirkorsky and his law firm, Mark A. Kirkorsky, P.C., for adding $3,753.62 in attorney’s fees to a deficiency balance of $13,543.27 on a repossessed truck. That is a 27% surcharge for the lawyer’s fees! All that had been done at that point was the mailing of one form letter.

Even though the loan agreement provides attorney’s fees in the event of legal action, these fees were added in the very first letter sent to the debtor. Our lawsuit alleges, among other claims, that the addition of these fees was illegal under the FDCPA.

What Can Be Done?

If you are an Arizona consumer and have received a collection letter or collection lawsuit showing the amount claimed to be owed is more than it should be, then you need to determine if the collector is overreaching and violating the FDCPA. If so, then not only should you not pay the illegal fees or charges, but you also have a claim against the collection agency or law firm for violating your rights under the FDCPA.

If you think your rights have been violated,

Call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC
(480) 756-8822 to set up a free consultation.

Two More Courts Hold that Statute of Limitations on Credit Cards in Arizona is Three (3) Years.

 

Arizona Legislature Changes Statute of Limitations on Credit Card Accounts.

The Arizona Legislature recently changed the law to make most credit card collection cases subject to a six year statute of limitations. A.R.S. Sec. 12-548 now states that "if the indebtedness is evidenced by or founded on . . . a credit card. . ." it is subject to the six year statute of limitations.

The following cases will no longer provide the persuasive precedent that we have previously enjoyed.

Recent Cases.

The East Mesa Justice Court in Maricopa County recently followed the holding in the DSS Financial v. Walrod case and dismissed a collection lawsuit brought by a bad-debt buyer, Action Financial, LLC, holding that the statute of limitations on a credit card account is three (3) years. See Action Financial, LLC v. Long, CC2008005084.

The West Mesa Justice Court of Maricopa County also recently held that the debt, which was an old credit card account, was an open account and thus barred by the three (3) year statute of limitations under A.R.S. § 12-543. See Action Financial, LLC v. Foran, CC2008189319.

The holdings in these two cases do not conclusively settle the debate over the statute of limitations on a credit card debt in Arizona. However, as more and more Arizona courts hold that credit card debts are subject to the three (3) year statute of limitations, bad-debt buyers will be less likely to file these stale suits, or at least more likely to dismiss them if challenged.

What to Do If You Have Been Sued on an Old Credit Card Debt?

The worst thing you can do is do nothing. That is what these bad-debt buyers hope you will do – nothing, so that they will get their judgment. Once a judgment is entered, and unless it is set aside by the court, the debt now becomes collectible even if the debt was stale and beyond the statute of limitations, and uncollectible, when the case was filed. So you must do SOMETHING.

The best something is to fight back. You may have one or more defenses to the suit. The debt may be old, such as the cases noted above, or the bad-debt buyer may not be able to prove that it is the current owner of the debt. Other defenses include identify theft, unauthorized use of the credit card, or fraud.

Help For Arizona Consumers is Available.

Many Arizona consumers believe that they cannot afford to hire an attorney to assist them in defending the lawsuit. However, there are several attorneys in the Mesa-Phoenix area who defend consumers in these debt collection cases, and their fees are reasonable, and likely to be a much better alternative than to have an unwarranted judgment entered against you.

Floyd Bybee of the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC represents Arizona consumers who have been sued on old credit card accounts.

If you would like a free phone consultation to see if you might have a defense to the lawsuit, please call (480) 756-8822.



Should I Pursue My FDCPA Claims?

Many times I am asked by Arizona consumers whether they should pursue their claims under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). My answer is usually yes, and always starts with an explanation of the purposes of the Act.

FDCPA Intended to Protect Consumers From Abusive Collection Practices.

Congress stated that the purpose of the FDCPA is to protect all consumers from abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices. Even though not all consumers who are abused file suit, or even know they have any protection under the law, each individual consumer who does bring a claim under the law adds to the cumulative effect of coercing collection agencies into complying with the FDCPA. Thus, not only do these consumers recover the damages they have personally suffered as a result of the collection abuse, but the collection agencies are more likely to comply with the law in order to avoid similar court actions from other consumers.

Enforcement of the FDCPA also Levels the Playing Field for Ethical Debt Collectors.

Part of the benefit from enforcing the FDCPA, is that ethical collection agencies — the ones who are polite, and truthful, and respectful — are not put at a competitive disadvantage to those agencies who fail to comply with the FDCPA. That may not seem to be much of a benefit to the consumer, but it really is. Almost all Arizona consumers with whom I meet, are not looking for a way to avoid or delay paying a legitimate debt. They just need the harassment to stop so that they can keep their job, avoid filing bankruptcy, and eventually pay the debts they legally owe. So by raising the compliance level of all collection agencies, fewer Arizona consumers are suffering the effects of collection harassment and will ultimately be in a better position to pay the debts they owe.

I Can Help.

If you are an Arizona debtor and are being abused or harassed by a collection agency or other debt collector, find out what your rights are and whether you have any claims.

Feel free to call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 to set up a consultation.

ARIZONA CONSUMER SUES NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC. FOR COLLECTION ABUSE!

My office recently filed suit on behalf of an Arizona consumer against National Credit Systems, Inc. out of Atlanta, Georgia for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The suit alleges that National Credit Systems reported an old apartment debt from 1994 on the consumer’s credit report in 2009, even though it was 15 years old. The consumer first learned of National Credit Systems’ reporting of the account when he was attempting to purchase a used Jeep.

FDCPA Prohibits False Credit Reporting.

The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from reporting any credit information which it knows is false or which should be known to be false. In this case, National Credit Systems reported that the account was less than seven years old, and that the balance owed on the account was $790,977 — for an apartment lease!

FCRA Prohibits Credit Reporting of Collection Accounts More than Seven Years Old.


Accounts which went into collections or were charged off more than seven years prior cannot be reported on a consumer’s credit report. Here, National Credit Systems reported this account to the credit bureaus even though it was nearly fifteen years old at the time.

Debt Collectors Use Credit Reporting to Coerce Payment for Old or Out of Statute Debts.

It is common to see collection agencies or other debt collectors report to the credit bureaus old debts which are too old to sue on, and too old to be reported to the credit bureaus. They do this by misreporting the date of first delinquency to the credit bureaus so these old account slip onto the credit reports. Many times it is only after the consumer is denied credit that he learns that this misreporting has taken place. That is what happened in this case. His first notice that National Credit Systems reported this old debt to the credit bureaus is when he was told he could not get financing on his Jeep. By then, the damage has been done.

Do You Have Old Accounts Reporting on Your Credit Reports?

If you have not looked at your credit reports recently, you should. You can go to www.annualcreditreport.com to obtain your free credit report from each of the three national credit reporting agencies as provided by recent changes to the FCRA. Review your reports to see if any information is incorrect, or if anyone is looking at your credit report without permission.

Contact an Arizona Lawyer for Assistance.

If your credit reports show any significant errors, contact a local Arizona lawyer. He or she can assist you in reviewing your credit report to determine if your rights under the FDCPA or FCRA have been violated. He can also show you how to dispute the incorrect information with the credit bureaus.

If you believe that your credit report contains any significant errors, feel free to call Floyd W. Bybee at the BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC (480) 756-8822 to set up a consultation.