We Defend You Against
Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC

The Langel firm defends consumers against New York state court collection lawsuits brought by Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC. We defend against collection lawsuits, and wage garnishments, and bank seizures. In appropriate cases, we may also take action against Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, deceptive business practices,, and other applicable laws.

Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC purchases defaulted consumer debt to collect and sue on them. Its affiliated names include: Cavalry SPV I, LLC, Cavalry SPV II, LLC, and Cavalry SPV IV, LLC.

Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC Biographical Information

Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC is a foreign limited liability company incorporated in Delaware, with its principal place of business in Hawthorne, New York. It is licensed (#1126502) by the Department of Consumer Affairs to collect debts in the City of New York. Cavalry SPV IV, LLC is licensed (#1347716) by the Department of Consumer Affairs to collect debts in the City of New York, as well.

Proper Service Affirmed in Cavalry Portfolio Services Case

Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC filed a complaint against the defendant to recover on an account stated. A clerk's judgment was entered against the defendant when she failed to appear or answer the complaint. She appealed, alleging that she did not receive notice in time to defend against the lawsuit. However, the court ruled that the affidavit of service constituted prima facie evidence of valid service, and that the defendant's allegations did not overcome the presumption of proper mailing. Therefore, her motion to vacate the clerk's judgment was denied.

Key Takeaways:

1. Validity of Service: An affidavit of service can serve as prima facie evidence of valid service, and the defendant's allegations must substantially refute its contents to raise an issue of fact requiring a hearing.
2. Presumption of Proper Mailing: If the summons and complaint were mailed to the defendant's correct residence address, there's a presumption of proper mailing and receipt. It's the defendant's responsibility to overcome this presumption with substantial evidence.
3. Importance of Timely Response: This case underscores the importance of promptly responding to a complaint. Failure to do so, as happened here, can result in a judgment against the defendant, which may not be easy to overturn later. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC v. Reisman, 865 N.Y.S.2d 286, 286–87 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dept. 2008)

​

Five Tips when Rebutting an Affidavit of Service in a Motion to Vacate

1. Cross-Verify the Receiver: Look closely at who the affidavit of service claims received the papers. If they claim to have given it to someone who lives or works with you, confirm if that individual recalls such an event. If the person doesn't exist or was not present at the stated time, it becomes a strong point in your challenge.

2. Analyze the Description: Consider the description of the person who supposedly received the documents. If the affidavit of service contains a detailed description, verify whether it matches the person they allege received the papers. If it's incorrect, it can be used to rebut the service.

3. Evaluate the Time and Date: Review the exact time and date of service mentioned in the affidavit. If the person who supposedly received the papers was not at home or work during that time, it could be strong evidence to rebut the claim. Evidence can include work records, travel documents, or third-party testimonies.

4. Request for Proof of Identity: If the server claims to have delivered the papers to someone who could accept them on your behalf, they should have confirmed the person's identity and relationship to you. If they didn't, you can use this as a rebuttal point.

5. Challenge the Authenticity: If the process server did not sign the affidavit of service in front of a notary, or if there are any signs of forgery, it might be possible to challenge the authenticity of the affidavit. In such a case, an expert opinion may be needed to prove that the signature was forged.

Understanding Consumer Rights: Key Changes in NY Debt Laws in 2023

1. The New York Consumer Credit Fairness Act (CCFA) was enacted in November 2021, introducing significant changes to New York's Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR).
2. The Statute of Limitations (time to sue) for consumer credit lawsuits was shortened from six to three years, effective from April 7, 2022.
3. The CCFA now requires a more detailed complaint, which must include a contract or charge-off statement and a range of specific information, including original creditor's name and an itemization of the amount sought.
4. The Act requires a more comprehensive chain of custody if the suit is brought by a debt buyer.
5. Alongside the Summons and Complaint, creditors must provide additional notice detailing consequences of not responding and available resources for defense.
6. If the additional notice is undeliverable, creditors cannot obtain a default judgment.
7. Even if the notice is received, improper service of the lawsuit can provide a defense.
8. Similar notice requirements apply if the plaintiff files a motion for summary judgment.
9. Consumers experiencing deception or mistreatment have the right to file regulatory complaints with the Bureau of Consumer Frauds and Protection or the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
10. Legal help is recommended for interpreting and defending against cases under this law.

District Court Certifies Class Action Lawsuit against Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC for Alleged FDCPA Violation