Alpaca Fleece, Fur, Fiber, For Sale @ Furbelow Alpaca Farms: Credit Card Defendant Wins Lawsuit, Collects $120,000

Credit Card Defendant Wins Lawsuit, Collects $120,000

Most of the debt collection industry is based on bully tactics. Each stage of the collection process is designed to intimidate and harass until the individual simply surrenders and pays the debt. Collectors send embarrassing letters in pink envelopes marked "URGENT!" or "IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED!" They make scores of phone calls at home and work, until you are afraid to pick up your own phone.

Even when there is a valid defense, a credit card company will sometimes seek to bury the defendant with the enormity of its size. Take for example the recent Palm Beach County, Florida, case of Capital One Bank USA, NA v Pincus. Capital One sued Steven Pincus for a credit card debt of $803.95. Pincus offered to settle the debt for a few hundred dollars, and Capital One refused. Pincus then hired an attorney to defend. Capital One responded with a barrage of court filings that ran up Pincus's legal expense tab to over $100,000.

Pincus moved for summary judgment and dismissal claiming the lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations. Pincus asserted that the Capital One cardholder agreement states that Virginia law shall control, and, since the contract was not signed by either party, whatever agreement existed between Pincus and Capital One must be an oral contract. Pincus further argued that since the statute of limitations for oral contracts in Virginia is three years and since Capital One's lawsuit was filed three and a half years after the date of the last transaction, Capital One's case is time barred. Capital One defended by arguing that Florida law and its five year statute of limitations should control because Florida was the state where the contract was made.

The Palm Beach County Court found that Virginia law controlled and the credit card agreement was an oral contract based on Virginia law. The opinion cited several similar Florida cases finding the choice of law provision in a cardholder agreement applies to a statute of limitations defense. In granting Pincus's summary judgment motion and dismissing the case, the Florida court opinion said the credit card company is "'master of its complaint' and cannot disavow the choice of law provision contained in the document it attaches to its Complaint so it can take advantage of the longer statute of limitations."

The Pincus case did not end there. Pincus and his attorney filed a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act lawsuit in federal court against Capital One's attorneys to recover his attorney fees (Capital One, as an original creditor, is exempt from the FDCPA, but collection attorneys are not). The case was settled after contentious litigation for $120,000.

The moral of the story is "Don't be bullied!" If you are sued for a credit card debt, seek legal advice from an experienced debt defense attorney. Many bankruptcy attorneys are experts in debt defense and can explain your legal options.