2010 was a prettygood inaugural year for Morrow & Artim.  On the plus side, we won almost every single case that we handled. We helped consumers successfully defeat the claims of collection agencies to the tune of about 25-30 victories per month.  We saved those consumers over $1,000,000 in allegedly defaulted credit card debt. 

On the negative side, we lost 2 credit card cases to original creditors and we lost 2 credit card cases to collection agencies/junk debt buyers.  Both of the collection agency lawsuits were appealed.  We won one of those cases on appeal and the other one is still pending.  UPDATE:  We won the second case on appeal. 

In terms of the FDCPA claims that we agreed to represent clients on, every single case that Clay Morrow handled  either ended in a settlement or in a courtroom victory.  Kudos to Clay for a successful 2010.

In terms of the Lemon Law claims that we handled, every single case that we worked on either resulted in a settlement or a courtroom victory with the exception of one single case.  Our lone Lemon Law defeat occurred because our client simply didnt want to pursue his claim any further and failed to show up for the scheduled hearing.

We received some pretty fantastic news today.  We are representing an individual in a collection agency case in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania. This individual was sued by LVNV, which is one of the larger junk debt buyers that we deal with. The lawsuit was typical, typical in that it was severely lacking in information and details. As a matter of course, we filed objections to the case to raise the issue of legal sufficiency.

While we always expect a judge to agree with our reasoning, this judge went one step further.  He took action that would have a permanent effect on credit card cases in Schuylkill County, he issued a written opinion on the case.  A written opinion doesnt happen on every case.  To the contrary, written opinions are rarely issued.  A common pleas judge typically only writes an opinion where the case at hand has important issues that are recurring and can affect a number of people.  With the rise of credit card lawsuits in Pennsylvania, and in Schuylkill County in particular, this judge felt that it was important to set the law for the county.

The opinion focused on the defective nature of the lawsuit, namely, that the junk debt buyer (LVNV) didnt comply with the pleading requirements on credit card cases in Pennsylvania. The judge issued a ruling and opinion that the lawsuit was defective, and that if it was not corrected in a timely manner, it was subject to dismissal. We are hopeful that LVNV will not meet its burden on this case.  We have not only helped our client on this particular case, we have helped the wonderful consumers of Schuylkill County who are facing similar legal issues.

Ms. W was sued by Atlantic Credit and Finance for approximately $9000.00 in Dauphin County.  Ms. W hired our firm to defend and we noticed right away that the lawsuit was defective. With a defective lawsuit in Pennsylvania, the proper response is typically to file Preliminary Objections. We won the first round of arguments on the objections, forcing Atlantic Credit to cure the defects that were present in the complaint.  I guess that I should say that we forced them to “try” to cure the defects. Atlantic filed an Amended Complaint and it was still very defective.  We responded with another set of Objections to the Complaint and after Argument, the judge threw the case out for failing to cure the defects.  The lawsuit was lacking in many areas.  It failed to include a signed application, a cardmember agreement, or any of the monthly account statements.

In a rare occurrence, the judge issued a written opinion on the case, which was reported by the courts. Typically, judges simply issue brief orders that either dismiss the case or move the case forward to trial.  The written opinion is issued where an issue continues to re-occur and the court wants to set a standard for all similar cases.  We are proud to have helped Ms. W and we are also very proud to have had a written opinion issued in our favor.  Until another opinion changes the law, our case is the standard for credit card cases in Dauphin County.

We recently had the pleasure of representing Virginia H on an Allegheny County credit card lawsuit.  Virginia was sued by Arrow Financial earlier this year.  She failed to respond to the lawsuit in time, and a default judgment was entered against her.  She called our office and after a quick review of the docket, we noticed that the Important Notice that was sent to her was defective in that it contained additional language.  (An Important Notice must be sent by the debt collector if you fail to respond to the lawsuit within 20 days.  This notice affords you an additional 10 days to respond).  We immediately filed a Motion to Strike the Judgment and argument was held before the Honorable Stanton R. Wettick.  Our argument was that the additional language that the debt collector added to the Important Notice was deceiving in that Virginia thought that a judgment had already been entered against her.  Judge Wettick agreed and struck the judgment.  Shortly thereafter,  the judge scheduled an Arbitration hearing and of course, we won as usual.  The reported opinion can be found at the Pittsburgh Legal Journal

This was a very good week for our firm.  We obtained 4 non-jury verdicts this week on credit card cases.  All of the cases commenced at the Arbitration level of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. We won all of the hearings at the Arbitration level, and the debt collectors filed appeals on all of the cases. The hearings on these appeals were heard this week and we won every single case! 

To be fair, its really not a suprise when we win a case, it happens so often, but 4 in one week is pretty good!

Our client, Lady Z, received a demand letter from a junk debt buyer.  Lady Z contacted us immediately and we sent out a Validation letter.  A Validation letter is a request to the debt collector to authenticate the debt that they allege is due and owing.  The debt collecter in Lady Z’s case did not respond to our request.  By law, they have 30 days to respond to our Validation request.  If they fail to do so, they may make any further attempts to collect on the debt, and, they must mark the client’s credit record as “disputed”. 

In this matter, the debt collector failed to do anything that it was required to do by law.  After about 45 days, Lady Z reviewed her credit report and discovered that the debt collector was still reporting this debt as valid, with no dispute listed.  We immediately filed a lawsuit against the debt collector in state court. Within a matter of about 3 weeks, debt collector’s attorney contacted us and acknowledged the error.  He was willing to eliminate the underlying debt, remove the adverse credit reporting, pay $1000 in statutory damages and pay our attorney fees.

Today, March 30, 2010,  there was a fine article published on MSN money regarding suing  an abusive debt collector.  Founding partner at Morrow & Artim, Clay Morrow, was interviewed for the story.  Clay was able to discuss a recent victory where he sued a debt collector after the collector threatened to show up at our clients place of employment.   See the link here http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Banking/YourCreditRating/sue-your-debt-collector.aspx

We hear this one all the time at our office. People call my office because they have been sued by collection agencies or junk debt buyers on old credit card accounts. I tell them that we can defend the case and most likely win. They often say “But, I owe the money” 

My response to that is no, you certainly don’t.  Most people do not realize this, but here’s how it works with a credit card account. You obtain a credit card from the original creditor.  Something happens and you lose your ability to pay so you go into default status. The original creditor waits up to 180 days and then charges off the account. (A charge off is simply an accounting term, it DOES NOT mean that you do not owe the money any longer). At this point, the original creditor has 2 choices.  The first is to try to collect from you by filing a lawsuit; The second is to sell the debt to a junk debt buyer or collection agency.  Often times, the original creditor chooses option 2.

When a credit card account is sold, it is sold not as an individual account, but rather, as part of a group of block of delinquent accounts. Typically, these accounts are sold for mere pennies on the dollar. A group of “good” bad debt (good defined as recently defaulted) may sell for 5 cents on the dollar. It can get sold again and again, each time at lower rates. We have seen instances where $1000 of debt has sold for .25. 

So the purchasing junk debt buyer or collection agency then files a lawsuit against you. This is where “but I owe the money” comes into play.  From my standpoint, you may owe the money to the original creditor at the time that you default. If they lend you money or extend credit to you, you do have an obligation to pay it back so you do “owe the money”. However, once you go into default and they charge it off, they have a choice to make. They can sue you or sell the account to a collection agency. If they sue, then maybe you do “owe  the money”.  But if they sell your account, then I don’t believe that you “owe the money” any longer.

Here is my reasoning. You have a credit account and are extended credit. You certainly owe the original creditor something at that point.  Once you go into default, you still “owe the money” to that creditor. I believe, however, that if they sell the account, then you no longer “owe the money” because they have received adequate compensation for you default. When they sell your account they are saying that they no longer want to deal with you and they would like to be compensated for the default. Collection Agency X comes along and gives the original creditor money for your account.  At that point, the original creditor is out of the picture. They have received what they deemed to be adequate and fair compensation for your default.  They would not have sold it otherwise, right?  So if the original creditor is adequately compensated, then you no longer “owe the money” in my opinion.

This isn’t to say that a legal interest such as a credit card account cannot be bought and sold.  Those transactions are certainly legal. I am simply looking at this from a debtor’s standpoint. If you pay anything to that collection agency, if you believe that you “owe the money” , you are simply paying pure profit to that collection agency. After all, they paid only pennies on the dollar for your account. After the first $30 or so, any money that you pay to them is pure profit.  Do you really “owe the money”?

Bob and Mary (fictitiuous names, of course) had a delinquent account with a major credit card company. The credit card company hired a collection agency to assist in collection of the debt.  The collection agency placed a few calls to Bob and Mary, who chose not to speak with them. Undeterred, the collection agency called Bob and Mary’s neighbor and asked them to hand deliver a note to Bob and Mary.  The collector asked the neighbors to write down the  following message : ” This is Joe from XYZ colleciton agency.  I am troubled to hear that you do not want to take my calls. We really need to settle this debt so call me back right away”.  The neighbor handed the note to Bob and Mary, who fortunately called our office right away.

It is illegal for any debt collector to contact a friend, neighbor, family member or anyone at your place of employment to discuss your debt with them. (They may contact one of these third parties only to locate you, if they have made reasonable efforts at finding you that were not successful). The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) sets forth many rights that consumer or debtors have in regards to delinquent accounts and collection activities that take place as a result thereof.

My partner, Clay Morrow, contacted the collection agency right away and advised them of our representation of Bob and Mary. Clay advised that the activities were illegal and that we would be bringing a claim against them.  The collection agency knew that their actions were illegal so there wasn’t much of a fight. They do these things because they know that 1) these tactics are often successful and 2) that most people will not bother to consult an attorney.

Within a matter of 10 days, Clay was able to obtain the full amount of the statutory damages ($1000) plus attorney fees for Bob and Mary.  Clay was also able to settle the underlying debt with the original credit card company for a small fraction of the actual debt.  Great job Clay!

I have encountered many people who have tried to defend credit card cases themselves in the past few months and am very surprised at some of the defenses that they think will work. The following are a few of the worst defenses that I have seen, and an explanation as to why they are such bad defenses.

I’ve never had an account with you.

This means absolutely nothing in a court of law. The right to sue someone is a legal interest. A legal interest can be sold, at any time, at any price, to anyone.  While it may be true that you did not have an account with the collection agency, that doesn’t mean that they cannot sue you on a delinquent account. (Whether they can prove that they bought the account is another story and is the basis for much of our success in defending collection agency lawsuits).

I tried to pay, but they wouldn’t work with me.

This may be the worst defense ever.   “I tried to pay…”  this is called an admission. Who pays on something that they do not owe?  No one.  The admission here is that you did have an account with someone and that you are in default on that account.  In a nutshell, it means that you lose your lawsuit. To be clear, once you are in default the creditor or collection agency does not have to accept any payment other than payment in full.  You do not get to set the terms of repayment.  Its not up to you to decide how much you can or are willing to pay. In addition, a court typically does not determine payment arrangements. Instead, a court determines if you owe anything and then how much. Repayment afterwards is up to the parties to handle.

My divorce decree says that I don’t have to pay.

This is mixing apples and doritos. A divorce decree or order is issued by a family court. While it has a binding effect between the spouses (ex spouse’s I should say) it does not bind other parties. The credit card company (or collection agency) is not bound by this divorce decree or order because its case is in civil court, which is different. The credit card company can sue the named cardholder only, not anyone else, and the divorce decree will not prevent that. What may happen is that the credit card company sues the cardholder and wins its case. The cardholder could then go to family court and have the other person found in contempt for not handling the account.

I hired a debt settlement company.

Perhaps the second worst defense, and, the absolute worst move that you could make, period. (This author firmly believes that debt settlement companies are useless and clearly not worth the outrageous fees that you pay them). As stated above, a credit card company or collection agency does not have to accept any payment other than payment in full, once you are in default. Debt settlement companies cannot stop lawsuits from occurring and are not equipped to help you respond to a credit card lawsuit. DO NOT TAKE LEGAL ADVICE FROM A DEBT SETTLEMENT COMPANY.  Again, don’t hire them to begin with and you won’t have to worry about heeding their legal advice.