Due Process And Debt Elimination

Few legal topics are subject to as much controversy and myth as due process of law requirements. In the most basic sense, the due process and debt elimination quandary creates undue confusion among debtors and creditors alike, as well as judges, juries and lawyers appearing before the court. Legal liabilities are enforceable. Illegitimate liability is prohibited, and may be subject to criminal prosecution. Due process and debt elimination then becomes a battle of nerves in many cases, arguing legal compliance and interpretation of statutes, rules, and case law.

Credit Rating help under due process and debt elimination laws

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech. But the right to speak does not protect any person from responsibility for defamation, liable, or slander. Harm caused by false statements creates a legal cause of action, and is subject to collection through both civil and criminal courts. Specifically, financial defamation is considered so egregious, and likely to cause irreparable harm, that most states provide a lesser standard for recovery (liability per se, no actual damages required for statutory penalties). However, credit ratings and credit reporting agencies enjoy an unprecedented exception when due process and debt elimination claims collide. False credit ratings and defamatory information, even though inaccurate, does not violate due process and debt elimination requirements. These agencies enjoy super-immunity, regardless of negligence, gross recklessness, or wanton disregard for the rights of citizens. A knowing and intentional violation subjects agencies to only nominal statutory fines.

Constitutional due process and debt elimination help

The US Constitution, and virtually all state Constitutions, create due process and debt elimination restrictions. All creditors are entitled to a fair and impartial hearing upon legal debts. Notice is required for all court proceedings. Creditors must be given a chance to appear and contest allegations. All decisions must be made by an impartial judge or jury, based only upon admissible evidence. These constitutional due process legal requirements, in an ideal world, guarantee that law applies equally to all parties involved in litigation. In practice however, few trials are ideal. Judges and juries are motivated, even subconsciously despite their best efforts, by untold bias, prejudice, preference and personal political agendas. In practice, courtrooms are arenas were each lawyer put forth their level best to win, by any means allowed.

The best practice, before retaining lawyers or appearing in court

All people have financial options. Credit counseling, loan consolidation, home equity loans, and even bankruptcy, offer highly affordable alternatives to litigation of specific claims. Collection attorneys are stopped dead in their tracks by bankruptcy, and are typically eager to collect cash, even partial settlements, and close cases. For the best avenue of relief and elimination, an intuitive set of instructions and forms should compare cost, benefits, burdens and rewards from all options available. These forms are available for immediate download, without cost or obligations of any kind.