I need help in filing an answer to credit card complaint. Do I deny everything?

No. Deny what is not true, admit what is, don't have sufficient knowledge of some things (probably) and request documentation of the debt.

I wouldn't get "too" legal if you are not sure what you are doing. Simple language is best.

If you use the AMHD search feature you will see hundreds of similar questions.

A couple of years ago in my own case for a suit from a third party debt collector who bought the original debt, which the Plaintiff finally dropped (dismissed) their case, I denied everything but the address where I lived.

Does a person have any "evidence" they owe a "specific" amount of money?. where's the account ledger showing the accounting of every penny?. where's the evidence of each of the "alleged" purchases?

However, I would add that if a person is going up against the original creditor, it will be much more difficult to win and a lengthy challenge could cause the attorney fees to be tacked on to the alleged amount owed if a judgment is entered in favor of the Plaintiff.

Do not pay anyone that says you owe a debt just because they say it, unless you know you owe the debt or if they provide debt verification.

Do not pay anyone that says you owe a debt just because they say it, unless you know you owe the debt or if they provide debt verification.


The question is how to answer and how to demand proof of the debt.

What is your legal advice?

This is not a chat board - this is an ask/answer board.

If you have specific information to the OP's State, please share it with all of us.

Only attorneys can give legal advice.

However, if I were in a similar situation, I would consider composing and filing an answer in a "paragraph-by-paragraph" response to the complaint and then use the Discovery process (Request for Admissions, Interrogatories, Production of Documents and Depositions) to "discover" what evidence of a debt the Plaintiff plans to use against me in court.

There might be a chance the Plaintiff doesn't have any evidence that meets the lawful definition of "evidence" as required by a State's "Rules of Evidence". If the Plaintiff is unable to present the court authenticated evidence of a debt, the case "should" be dismissed upon the Defendant's motion to dismiss the case.

An excellent source for "general" Rules of Civil Procedures explained in a chronological fashion, is O'Connor's Federal Rules - Civil Trials (http://store.jonesmcclure.com/s.nl;jsessionid=0a0104451f4376259669f88c4a62baf7ba 6544f89f5d.e3eSbNmQaheLe3eTa40?it=A&id=153&sc=2&category=805) by Jones McClure Publishing.

I hope you find this information helpful.

Only attorneys can give legal advice..



If you believe that only Attorneys can give advice on the legal threads you probably shouldn't be posting here.

At any rate - why the Federal rules? Why not the OP's State's Regs?