Filing a Sworn Denial

[Big Time]

I ran across this old-a$$ blog posted from elsewhere and wanted opinions on filing a sworn denial, even though you know damn good and well you owe what they claim:

http://debtcollectionlawyer.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-to-not-pay-your-debt-or-beat_03.html

...The second step is to file a SWORN DENIAL. This needs to be a statement in WRITING that you FILE with the court where you have been sued. It can be a simple statement, but it needs to be typed, signed, notarized, filed with the clerk of the court and a copy sent to the collection lawyer.

It needs to be a graduated denial. In other words, it needs to say, "I deny this is my debt and if it is my debt, I deny that it is still a valid debt and if it is a valid debt, I deny the amount sued for is the correct amount."

The sworn denial is a powerful tool. It eliminates the Sworn Affidavit of Account.

The vast majority of collection suits proceed without a witness for the creditor The collection attorney enters an affidavit signed by the creditor that the debtor owes the debt and that is this amount. With that affidavit in hand, the court gives the creditor a judgment.

When a sworn denial is filed, the debt collection attorney can not rely upon a sworn affidavit of account, but must instead produce a live witness to testify about the debt. The requirement of a live witness changes the dynamic of the collection action considerably. The likelihood that the action will go no further now increases again.

How does a SD cancel out an affidavit of debt (this scenario is from a lawyer suing directly on behalf of the OC) and if they prove their case anyway by bringing in whoever wrote the affidavit, won't you get nailed for perjury?

Is it that the sneaky way it's written has the same effect of saying "I have no recollection, knowledge" that neither admits or denies anything that lets you slip past perjury?

These are the deep intellectual thoughts that plague my mind.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Big Time

[Downto0]

How does a SD cancel out an affidavit of debt (this scenario is from a lawyer suing directly on behalf of the OC) and if they prove their case anyway by bringing in whoever wrote the affidavit, won't you get nailed for perjury?

No. If you don't deny the Plaintiff's claim then the claim will most likely become fact. It's as simple as that.

Quite often, even if a consumer did have an established business relationship with the creditor and the account became delinquent, the amount asked for is not correct, or if it is correct, the consumer is not able to understand the amount asked for. Thus, further explanation is needed to explain the amount asked for.

By filing a sworn denial the amount asked for cannot be accepted at face value and must be explained.

Edited April 25, 2010 by Downto0

[Chapel Hill]

By filing a sworn denial you're forcing the trial court to take notice that the debt is in dispute. This becomes a triable issue of material fact in dispute. Basically, you make the other side have to prove a debt the court would take as a valid obligation in its finding of fact, save your sworn denial.

You're basically on record saying, i don't owe these bastards a damn dime. Let em prove otherwise to the level necessary before this court of competent jurisdiction.

A sworn denial is not the same as an answer and should not be substituted for an answer.

[Imadashell]

"The sworn denial takes their ability to assert debt without proof away.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By filing a sworn denial you're forcing the trial court to take notice that the debt is in dispute.

Isn't this what you want? Aren't you suppose to give notice that you dispute the debt?

This becomes a triable issue of material fact in dispute. Basically, you make the other side have to prove a debt the court would take as a valid obligation in its finding of fact, save your sworn denial.

Again don't you want them to have to prove the debt is your?

You're basically on record saying, i don't owe these bastards a damn dime. Let em prove otherwise to the level necessary before this court of competent jurisdiction.

A sworn denial is not the same as an answer and should not be substituted for an answer.

If not a sworn denial then what? answer how?

[Public Enemy]

I'm just learning this stuff like you but since nobody else has posted I will give my take on it.

Isn't this what you want? Aren't you suppose to give notice that you dispute the debt?

Yes. As I understand it, Chapel Hill was saying that you DO want to file a sworn denial and explaining why you want to do it.

Again don't you want them to have to prove the debt is your?

Yes. More explanation of why you DO want to file a sworn denial.

If not a sworn denial then what? answer how?

A sworn denial sounds like an important item to stop them from getting a summary judgement. I think there are some other things that should be done in addition to this. It is important to stop the SJ so use all the tools available.

[Coltfan1972]

You get dueling affidavits or sworn denials and that beats summary judgment (generally speaking). It's true you can't just stand on a blanket denial if they file for summary judgement.

The graduated denial is just a way of saying multiple theories.

[purplebb]

You get dueling affidavits or sworn denials and that beats summary judgment (generally speaking). It's true you can't just stand on a blanket denial if they file for summary judgement.

The graduated denial is just a way of saying multiple theories.

So if you file a sworn denial after they file a affidavit then it will beat the summary judgement?

Are they allowed to file a summary judgement on you before trial or arbitration without proving anything?