Fighting a junk debt buyer that sued my boyfriend


#1

I am joining this collective in solidarity. I do not have credit card debt but my boyfriend does. We are currently navigating court on our own and he actually has a court date on Friday that was supposed to be a trial (this was the strategy we went with, knowing there was little chance the debt buyer had the chain of title for the debt and that they had no original contract.) He received an emergency motion for dismissal without prejudice from the lawyers representing the collection company late last week. After reading up and learning the difference between with and without prejudice I suggested that he ask the judge to dismiss with prejudice as a response with the reasoning being that he has already gone to court several times and now the plaintiff is dismissing it. If they dismiss without prejudice that means they can try to come after the debt again. If it is dismissed with prejudice it means it is closed for good.

I will post a longer form follow up about this whole process with details after court on Friday. I just want to give folks hope in navigating these types of lawsuits.

They did not seem prepared for someone who wanted to challenge the debt. They tried several times along the process to get him to say something and admit the debt was his. I told him to stop talking to them at all and the last time they tried to call he told them “I am sorry. I am not allowed to talk to you.” Then they sent the emergency order for dismissal in the mail about a week later.


#2

So i guess its dismissed and unless we want to pay to file a motion it is dismissed without prejudice. So i guess we will see if they sue again.


#3

They are now attempting to collect again on the debt and sent a letter offering to settle. I am going to get my boyfriend to file a general debt dispute. He had mentioned going back to the courthouse to file a motion to reopen the case and demand it be closed with prejudice. I feel like that would be a waste of money since they already know they cannot prove the debt is his. If they had chain of title and original loan agreements they would not have dropped the case.

Thoughts?