Affirmative Defenses
If a business is demanding debt repayment from a client, a common reaction of the debtor within the legal process is that of an affirmative defense, such as payment, or an argument that the work was sub-standard. This means that the defendant admits to the nonpayment of debt and provides a justification for that action. This is legally defined as admitting fault and “[a] defendant’s assertion raising new facts and arguments that, if true, will defeat the plaintiff’s or prosecution’s claim, even if all allegations in the complaint are true.” (Black’s Law Dictionary (7th ed. 1999); ) (Arizona Rules of Court 8(c)). It is possible that a business pursuing legal action against a customer might be faced with an affirmative defense on the debtor’s behalf. In this situation, however, the burden of proof resets on the party asserting the affirmative deference. Therefore, with experienced legal counsel, a company could navigate the waters of debt collection. If you are a business in need of legal help with debt collection, contact Pak & Moring to discuss your situation and see if we can help you through this process.
What if I’m a business who is being sued for money I don’t owe?
If you do not actually owe another party any money, your accuser would have to show the way in which you accrued the debt. Using an affirmative defense, the opposing side would need to prove that you do, in fact, owe them money. This is an effective legal tool for a business who feels victimized by the prosecuting good or service provider because they do not actually owe any money. However, all affirmative defense cases are different. If you are a business who is facing litigation or any other legal action because of debt you do not owe, please contact Pak & Moring for a consultation with an experienced attorney who can help you decide on the right course of action in your situation.
(Please note: while informative, these posts are not intended to be formal legal advice and are not completely authoritative and should not be solely relied on as a primary basis for legal action.)