Should Debt Buyers Have a Higher Burden?

I’ve said as much, and the Minnesota Attorney General thinks so, too. Well, actually, she thinks “a debt buyer should have admissible evidence” to back up its claims. That’s not really a higher burden; it’s what the law requires. Except in cases of default, which is what debt buyers really want, after all.

The reason this is even an issue is that debt buyers often file thousands of lawsuits without the ability to back up their claims. They often have faulty information, and frequently get default judgments, which gives them the right to garnish bank accounts.

The ability to garnish bank accounts is serious. It gives debt buyers the right to freeze money in a defaulted defendant’s account before the court is even aware of the lawsuit. This is too serious to allow without knowing whether or not the debt buyer can even produce evidence to support its claims.

  • mst

    Through some bad choices and just bad luck, we made ourselves victims of the debt industry. When my spouse was diagnosed with cancer, it was a choice of either our house or our credit cards. Obviously we chose the house. We did negotiate and pay settlements on most of our debt.. Most of our debt is settled now with the exception of a couple. It’s been a long arduous process that is still daunting. The few that are left seem to be the hungriest and nastiest of the wolves. Debt buyers seem to live in a world governed by their own set of rules and twisted logic. This is the insane world, we’ve put ourselves in.

    None of this is for the faint hearted. Plus, it’s embarressing to be in this position.

    But on the flip side, if I loaned money to someone and couldn’t find my original contract with them and couldn’t collect, I’d blame myself for losing the contract.