If Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC has served you with a debt collection lawsuit, there’s no need to panic. The worst thing you can do is ignore the problem, because, like most buyers of debt, Cavalry won’t have the necessary documents to prove their case against you, and they are betting on the fact that most people allow junk debt buyers to get a default judgment against them.
Who Is Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC?
Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC is one of the largest junk debt buyers in the nation. Cavalry buys up old charged-off debt from credit card companies, doctors’ offices, cell phone companies, retailers and even other debt buyers. For instance, you, along with thousands of others, had a credit card with Bank of America, N.A. After 120 days of not receiving payments on these cards, Bank of America will write the debt off and sell a large portfolio of these loans to a company such as Midland Funding or Cach, LLC. Bank of America will often only sell a large spreadsheet with names, account numbers, and estimated final balances. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC regularly makes debt collection phone calls from (800) 501-0909 and is located at:
500 Summit Lake Drive
Valhalla, NY 10595
Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC may also file their summons and complaints under its affiliates that actually own the account, including “Cavalry SPV I, LLC”, “Cavalry SPV II, LLC”, and “Cavalry SPV IV, LLC.” Cavalry Portfolio Service is the “debt collector” for these entities that will resort to phone calls and letters prior to actually filing a lawsuit.
How Much Does Cavalry Portfolio Pay For The Right to Sue You?
Pennies on the dollar. Remember that junk debt buyers like Cavalry Portfolio and Midland Funding often only receive a spreadsheet of data that includes your name, account, number, and final balance owed. This often doesn’t include any supporting documentation that allows them to prove their cases against you. Companies like Cavalry Portfolio usually buy these debts for just 3% of the original balance.[note]http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1084961/000108496115000011/ecpg-20141231x10k.htm[/note] so they stand to make $1.00 for every 3 cents invested. Attorneys’ fees you say? They add those to the amonut demanded in the lawsuit.
What Should I Do if I’m Sued by Cavalry Portfolio?
I would estimate that more than 96% of consumers who are sued by Cavalry Portfolio totally ignore the problem and never take any action to protect themselves. To win their lawsuit, Cavalry has the burden of proving that they
- have the right to sue you (that they own the debt they are suing on);
- that you owe the debt in the first place;
- and the amount you owe.
The simplest strategy to make fool out of Cavalry Portfolio and its lawyers is to make them PROVE IT. I’ve already included a link on how to answer a debt collection lawsuit. If you simply file a legally sufficient answer to the lawsuit within the time required and as listed on the summons served upon you, you drastically increase your chances of walking away without ever paying Cavalry a dime. These junk debt buyer lawsuits usually wind up working out one of three ways: 1) you get the case dismissed; 2) you settle for some lump-sum payment equal to 25% to 75% of the amount demanded in the complaint; 3) or Cavalry Portfolio voluntarily dismisses its lawsuit against you.
If you answer the lawsuit with the help of a competent attorney, it’s much more likely that you will either settle for some amount far less than what was demanded or get the lawsuit dismissed. You see, Cavalry also has certain evidentiary problems even if they were forwarded documents to support their case. If Cavalry attempts to introduce any credit card statements or account balances into evidence, they will have to have a records custodian present to testify as to how the records are processed and compiled and where the information came from. Guess how many times their lawyers actually have a qualified records custodian to testify? NOT MANY. Here are a few flaws that could potentially kill any lawsuit filed by Cavalry Portfolio:
- Debt buyer can’t prove that you owe the debt.
- Statute of limitations has passed (the legal deadline to file a lawsuit against you – 6 years in Georgia).
- Debt buyer can’t prove how much you owe.
- Debt buyer can’t prove that it actually has the right to sue you.
- Bad service.
- Inadmissible evidence.
- Providing “robo-signed” or false affidavits regarding the consumer’s debt.
Some of these defenses are called affirmative defenses that MUST be pled in your answer or waived. You can also make certain counterclaims against the debt buyer, and one of the best ways to make a counterclaim against Cavalry is under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The FDCPA prevents any debt collector from collecting amounts that they are not expressly authorized to collect under the contract, and it also prevents debt collectors like Cavalry Portfolio from using deceptive, false, or misleading representations in the course of collecting a debt. Fortunately, the test for whether a debt collector’s conduct is “deceptive,” “misleading,” “unconscionable,” or “unfair” under the FDCPA is NOT whether the particular consumer was deceived or misled; but rather, “whether the ‘least sophisticated consumer’ would have been deceived by the debt collector’s conduct.” [note]Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F3d 1254, 1258 (II) (11th Cir. 2014).[/note] These aren’t just empty threats. Consumers can often win FDCPA counterclaims and collect damages against the debt buyers for making false statements in affidavits filed in the lawsuits. In fact, a federal district court in Ohio held that a debt collector made a materially false statement that it had personal knowledge of the consumer’s credit card
These aren’t just empty threats. Consumers can often win FDCPA counterclaims and collect damages against the debt buyers for making false statements in affidavits filed in the lawsuits. In fact, a federal district court in Ohio held that a debt collector who made a materially false statement in an affidavit by claiming that it had personal knowledge of the consumer’s credit card