[hatecredit card]

I received a summons last week that says I need to reply to the plaintiffs attorney within 20 days. How do I respond? Is it reasonable in the response to make a settlement offer?

[JudyKayTee]

I received a summons last week that says I need to reply to the plaintiffs attorney within 20 days. How do I respond? Is it reasonable in the response to make a settlement offer?

You don't make an offer to settle in the response. That's a separate conversation - or correspondence - with the creditor.

Your response - depending on your State and the Court - can be fairly informal or has to follow a legal format. It HAS to be in writing, sent to the Court and the Attorney. It would list your defense(s), such as out of Statute, not your debt, whatever your defense is.

[kayebird]

You need to file an answer if you wish to pursue this further. There are many posts in these forums with sample answers as well as other debt websites dealing with debt suits. If you don't do something, they will automatically get a default judgment. If they are a debt collector or junk debt buyer you have the right to ask for proof and if they don't provide it, it can be dismissed. Try your legal options before offering settlement if you wish.

[JudyKayTee]

You need to file an answer if you wish to pursue this further. There are many posts in these forums with sample answers as well as other debt websites dealing with debt suits. If you don't do something, they will automatically get a default judgment. If they are a debt collector or junk debt buyer you have the right to ask for proof and if they don't provide it, it can be dismissed. Try your legal options before offering settlement if you wish.

Actually you have the right to ask for proof no matter who the creditor is.

[mlr08]

I was able to find an Answer template online. I don't think I can list the URL here, but if you Google, "HowtoAnswerACreditCardDebtLawsuit" you'll find the page.

There's some helpful information there about exactly what you need to file with the courts and why.

[kayebird]

Actually you have the right to ask for proof no matter who the creditor is.

I didn't mean to imply that an original creditor did not have to provide proof nor that you didn't have the right to ask for it from them. Most original creditors have court sufficient documentation and it is very difficult to fight them. Junk debt buyers who buy numerous portfolios are less apt to have documentation or sufficient records to establish the debt, and the cases are easier to pursue in court. You should always ask for proof from any creditor who is suing you if you wish to answer their complaint, file pleadings and go to court.

[philligirl]

Hi All,

I want to know if the following statement I found from another blog is true:

Debt collection companies do not have the right to collect a debt sold to them by a debtors origianl creditor. A person cannot put himself in harms way and then once he is harmed go and sue for the damage the harm did to him. This is equivalent to a buyer purchings a home that is on fire and then after the sale the new owner sues the old owner for fire damage. If a collection company purchases a debt that has been uncollectable he cannot win a law suit against the debtor to the original creditor because he has no ground to stand on. This reason among others is why we at freedomfromcreditors.com consider a debt owed by a collection company to be uncollectable and one not to be paid.