As abounding humans know, aboriginal creditors are advised abnormally than debt collectors. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) applies, by and large, just to debt collectors and gives aboriginal creditors a almost chargeless ride. So area do attorneys fit in? And should you sue them if you can?
Lawyers Can Be Debt Collectors
Lawyers are not adequate beneath the FDCPA. They can be, and as a applied amount the one suing you apparently is, a debt collector. However, if the advocate is apery an aboriginal creditor and acting in its name, he will be advised as an aboriginal creditor. If you are getting sued by a debt collector, affairs are acceptable that the advocate is aswell a debt collector, you can appealing abundant calculation on it. He can be sued for things he does wrong.
Before you go suing the lawyer, though, there are two things you should know: one has to do with your acknowledged rights, and the added is added of a applied consideration.
Respondeat Superior
There is a abstraction in the law that makes humans amenable for the things humans who are acting as their agents do. This is accepted as "respondeat superior." With a few exceptions, an employer is accountable for the accomplishments of an employee. That agency a applicant is amenable for the accomplishments of his or her lawyer. In general, this agency that a debt beneficiary is amenable for annihilation that its advocate does. Or to put it differently, you don't charge to sue the advocate to advance the debt collector.
Should you do it anyway, though?
Tactical Considerations
Whether or not it makes faculty to sue the advocate is not an simple decision. I apperceive you yield the accusation personally-it represents a ample blackmail to your claimed and banking well-being. Naturally you wish to bang back, personally, at the animal getting you see on the added side. The catechism is, though, is this the accommodation a lot of acceptable to accord you the a lot of benefit? Is it a lot of acceptable to could cause them to bead the case and leave you alone?
I don't know. A lot of of the time, the attorneys suing you attention your case from a absolutely business angle attempting to aerate their accumulation and abbreviate the amount of suing you. And abundant of my access to debt action has been to advance that humans accomplishment this business angle by authoritative your case unprofitable. That is almost simple to do, although of advance this isn't consistently enough. If you sue the lawyer, you change her motivation. Then, instead of it getting a alone business decision, you access the claimed stakes for the lawyer. It makes things abhorrent for the lawyer, no doubt, but it aswell motivates them to plan abundant harder in abounding cases. You accept assorted your enemies.
A Final Acknowledged Consideration
If you are suing the lawyer, your affirmation is not absolutely a "counterclaim." Instead, what you would apparently do is acknowledgment beneath the FDCPA adjoin the debt beneficiary and accompany a third-party clothing (within the aforementioned lawsuit) adjoin the lawyer. The argumentation is just alleged a third-party clothing and names the advocate as third-party actor and states your affirmation in the aforementioned way the acknowledgment did. Then the advocate has to be served a summons. None of this is distinctively difficult, but it is time-consuming. Given the ambiguous account of suing the lawyer, I rarely anticipation it was account spending the added time. You'll accept to adjudge what makes faculty to do in your case.