Consumer complaint received 2023-11-07
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened to sue you for very old debt
Company: The Moore Law Group (AZ)

I understand that this is another complaint to add to the thousands of complaints already in your office. I am sure, just like in our situation, millions of Americans were hit hard by the recession and the complaints piled up year after year. Twelve years later, when maybe, just maybe, people have started to rebuild and get a little ahead, like in our situation, we have another unprecedented economic downturn and a pandemic. Yet, the secondary debt collector market is stronger than ever and as a consumer I am requesting that they are held accountable. I am hoping you will provide me with some ray of hope that consumers will be provided more protections from these unscrupulous businesses. 

The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) now receives more consumer complaints about debt collectors than about any other single industry. The agency received XXXX complaints about debt collection in XXXX, more than triple the number of complaints it received the previous year. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) received XXXX debt collection complaints in XXXX. In a national survey of consumer experiences with debt collectors, the CFPB found that one in four consumers contacted by debt collectors felt threatened. 

The company we are dealing with is The Moore Law Group, XXXX a vulturous, predatory and litigious company. 

Our Story : In XXXX, due to the economic downturn, our lives drastically changed ; losing our jobs and all of our savings, retirement and education funds for our XXXX children, XXXX of whom were in college at this time. After several attempts to receive a modified payment plan with XXXXXXXX XXXX SOUTH DAKOTA XXXX XXXX which by their agreement they offered, were all ignored. They then charged off the account, before requiring immediate payment of the entire account. It was then we heard from the first secondary market debt collector, which, at the time, was unchartered territory to us. We were in the midst of rebuilding our lives, receiving unemployment, applying for jobs and starting a small business simultaneously. We depended on assistance from family and friends to keep our home and pay our bills. As of XX/XX/XXXX, The Moore Law Group has an Application for Writ of Garnishment and there is a withdrawal pending on XXXX XXXX 's savings account of which XXXX XXXX is a signer. She is XXXX years old and her son is only a signer for when she passes, these are solely her funds. It amounts to more than half of her life savings. 

It is common for outside debt collection agencies to purchase charged-off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts that have fallen so behind on payments, which XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX then files as a loss. The debt collection agency purchases the debt for pennies on the dollar, usually 4 % of the original debt value, while they collect on the full amount plus fees and interest. Our original debt amount was XXXX which translates to being purchased at ~ {$650.00}, but now the Writ of Garnishment is for {$24000.00}. 

Timeline : XXXX : Last Payment to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX- Debt Purchased & Civil Summons XXXX : Judgment XXXX : Substitution of CounselXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Moore , XXXX XXXX XXXX Renewal of Judgment XXXX : Statute of Limitations Up XXXX : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX & Moore XXXX XXXX closed XXXX : The Moore Law Group-Purchases or Absorbs the Account XXXX : The Moore Law Group-Files Application for Writ of Garnishment XXXX : XXXX & XXXX Moore-Answer as Garnishee XXXX : XXXX & XXXX Moore-File Motion To Set Aside Judgment Some debtors fail to show up in court because they can not get time off from work or secure child care. Some are confused by notices, even having received several in the mail. Many are unaware of the consequences of missing the court date. In cases brought by companies that have purchased the debt from the original creditor, the plaintiffs name on the summons will be unfamiliar to the debtor, creating more confusion. According to consumer rights advocates, some debt collectors repeatedly request trial continuances, postponing the case whenever the debtor shows up in court and then moving for default judgment the one time the debtor fails to appear. Even when aware of the suit, debtors almost never have lawyers and dont know how to defend themselves in a legal proceeding. There is no constitutional right to an attorney in collection actions and civil contempt actions, and most debtors can not afford to hire one. As a result, debtors are represented by lawyers in fewer than XXXX percent of collection cases. 

In regards to the statute of limitations ( six years in Arizona ), The Affidavit of Renewal of Judgment was filed on XXXX, yet the House Bill XXXX revised A.R.S. XXXX extending judgements from five to ten years was signed into law on XXXX. Why was the Affidavit of Renewal of Judgment approved, it seems contradictory and unlawful. The principle of a statute of limitations says that you should not be able to sue on a claim that is too old or stale, as in this case, this debt is XXXX years old. 

The default judgments are routinely padded with interest charges and attorneys fees, so the amounts end up being far more than the original debt. Once a debt collector gets a court judgment, it gains the power to garnish wages, seize property, clean out bank accounts, or put a lien on a home. 

It seems to us that there is false representation, The Moore Law Group, XXXX. is not collecting this stale debt on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX but for their own ill-gotten gain. Yet, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is still listed as the Plaintiff on all Court/Legal Documents. Where is the transparency of who we are actually dealing with or where the money will end up? 

The Debt Collection Industry is a multi-billion dollar racket run throughout the country. Just as a photocopy of a {$100.00} bill is evidence of a {$100.00} bill, it is not the actual Federal Reserve note ; its a copy that doesn't spend. Yet, debt collectors are collecting billions on photocopies of debt. That is, evidence of debt, not the debt. The evidence of debt is being sold for and purchased for pennies on the dollar, while debt collectors/attorneys are collecting on the full face value plus penalties and attorney fees. 

The Courts have been rubber-stamping these transactions for so long that it has now become custom to rubber stamp. A custom that is at its best, difficult to overcome. The Courts don't like having to actually consider the facts and evidence, it is so much easier to hand out your money than for them to behave according to their own rules of procedure and evidence. The Courts want you to prove a negative that you dont owe. While refusing to require the Plaintiff to prove the charges he has brought against you. 


According to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), the majority of cases on many state court dockets on any given day are often debt collection cases. In many states, companies that bought debts from original creditors file more civil lawsuits than any other type of plaintiff. When judges automatically award default judgments without scrutinizing the merits of debt collectors claims, these judgments may be for the wrong amount, for debts that are not subject to collection, or against the wrong defendant. The FTC found that the information received by debt collectors is often inadequate and results in attempts to collect from the wrong consumer or to collect the wrong amount.

Once a lawsuit is filed, the process is stacked against the defendant, whether the amount is owed or not. Debt proceedings are plagued by substantial due process deficiencies, including failure to serve the defendant with adequate and legal notice of the suit, lack of evidence of the underlying debt, and falsified or improper affidavits such as robo-signed affidavits. 
Beyond that, debt collectors benefit from expedited judicial processes in small-claims courts, which provide limited due process protections to debtors.

Courts overburdened with cases churn through these collection lawsuits with astonishing speed and minimal scrutiny. The vast majority of theman estimated 90 percentconclude in a default judgment against the defendants, in which the debt collector automatically wins because the defendant did not contest the case. Most did not appear in court to defend themselves or respond to the litigation at all. 


The time has come to make changes and give consumers weapons to fight back these parasites of the American economy. 

Thank you for taking the time to understand our circumstances and take action to make the secondary debt collection industry illegal. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CC : The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Representative XXXX XXXX State Senator XXXX XXXX State Senator XXXX XXXX Arizona Governor XXXX XXXX Arizona Attorney General XXXX XXXX