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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoorBloke

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 by Jones McClure Publishing.

I hope you find this information helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drivedoctor

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?