When the Debt Collectors Want Arbitration

Added: 2026-05-30

[00:00:00]the following reasons for this case being good for you. If you go through arbitration, you lose your constitutional rights. You lose your evidentiary rights. The evidentiary rights are everything because the debt by velocity, crown asset, MCM, P, LVNV funding all rely on their interpretation or affidavit coming in to say, "Yeah, we own the debt." But none of that comes in because it's an hour a court statement offered to prove [music] the truth of the matter asserted or hearsay. An exception is the business records exception [music] of your state or federal court. You don't have those same rights [music] in arbitration. And if you're arbitrating a case against a debt buyer, you got to think twice [music] about that. You just lost all the reasons you can win that case in court.

[00:00:50]and you lost all those court protections that we've had for hundreds of years.

[00:00:54]I've done those cases. I have been I I [music] remember as a City Bank case, we went to town and I nailed them and it was clear I was going to win. I won a summary motion, everything. They did the exact same thing right before trial.

[00:01:08]They go, "Hey, we're going to do a motion to arbitrary." I go, "Are you crazy? You just did all this. You can't do both." And the court agreed. They waved their right to arbitrary. So look to see if [music] someone's litigating, you start winning, and they try to get into arbitration, this case is good for you. How to use Jackson versus PSC in your own case. If you live in the Fourth Circuit, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, [music] North Carolina, South Carolina, this is binding precedent in these factual situations.

[00:01:39]Jackson versus Proise, Spivic and Collins LLC. It was decided May 18th, 2026, [music] just a couple of days ago.

[00:01:48]So, this is a fourth circuit, a very large district published opinion. The law firm cannot enforce its client's arbitration clause unless the clause specifically says it covers clients agents, lawyers, or representatives.

[00:02:02]So, remember, arbitration is not good unless it's a last resort.

[00:02:08]creditors created arbitration, so it's their baby. You don't want to go into their backyard, okay? But they'll use it if they fear that you're good at your stuff. And Parker [music] GPT makes you good at your stuff.

[00:02:25]Hey, Brian Parker here with another exciting video. This one's a good one.

[00:02:29]Why? Because it's a followup to my last video. Let me put it up there, which was I told you under well under YouTube and Reddit advice contrary to that, please don't file a motion to get into arbitration in a debt buyer case. It's just not going to serve you well. Even in creditor cases with your last resort where all is lost, then if you can get into arbitration, fine. But remember who created the rules of arbitration and the right to when you signed that agreement, credit card agreement, whatever it is, loan agreement, [music] you did not ask for arbitration. Who did? The company that's lending you the money. So if they want that in the agreement, think about that. Why is that good for you? It's corporations aren't looking out for their customers, especially these days.

[00:03:21]So let me show you which I gave you from the last video and reasons why you shouldn't do arbitration. Shazam category is decision-m the court is a local judge or a lawyer. They decide everything in arbitration. An out ofstate person may not even be a lawyer.

[00:03:40]If you go to arbitration Shazam the rules of evidence strict hearsay excluded. You want that under arbitration? None. Hearsay is going to generally be allowed. It's whatever the arbitrator says he wants to he or she wants to bring in. Burden of proof. The real teeth here. They have a burden of proof. Under arbitration, the arbitrator decides, not the US Constitution. A right to appeal. Shazam. You have a right to appeal. If a judge does something wrong or rules incorrect with the law or the facts, you essentially have no right to appeal in arbitration, discovery, full procedures. you want that or even the threat of that and arbitration is limited to what the arbitrator wants to bring in. [music] It's one person, not the constitution.

[00:04:27]Jury trial, it's available. Arbitration, there's no jury trial. Don't you want your peers ruling on whether you or she [music] you should win that case? By the way, the judge in a case is your peer.

[00:04:42]If it's a case where just the judge is ruling, he or she runs in the community to get back to get reelected and you are a voter. That matters. Time to judgement. Here's a big one. When you are sued, it's going to last about 8 to 12 months if you do a decent job. With arbitration, they get a judgment against you up to in 60 to 90 days. And now they're doing collection efforts on you because you went through arbitration.

[00:05:10]cost to you? Minimal filing fee, arbitration, filing admin fees. By the way, when you're sued in a court, you pay nothing to answer. Sources of authority, constitutional law, and under courts, the constitution and the law govern. In arbitration, a contract you sign or the arbitration rules, the federal arbitration rules. So, I'm going to present to you a case out of the fourth circuit court of appeals, which is one step below the Supreme Court. It has true binding effect in a lot of states. West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina. You know, I love the Carolinas. They're great for consumers.

[00:05:53]So, in this case, a man by the name of Dante Jackson was sued by Velocity on a $30,000 debt. And he did the work and he fought back. And right before trial, the plaintiff that was suing him, Velocity, after doing tons of motions and litigating the case, trying to beat him back, the day before trial, they dismissed the case with prejudice. So they made him do all that work and right on the doorstep of going to trial, they dismissed their own case. And in this case, the defendant, when you're being sued, your defendant was clear that he had not made a payment in 3 years, which is the statute of limitations in the state he was being sued upon. So he knew that they didn't have a right to sue him, but they did it anyway. and he fought like they came up with some novel reason why they should be beyond the statute of limitations that nobody agreed to. So at the last minute they dismissed the case against him, but they made him do all that work. So welcome to killad.com where I'm going to show you the work that you can do that normally takes hours takes minutes with kill.com.

[00:07:07]So boring the heck out of you is cases Jackson versus Prousivoke and Collins LLC. And essentially they represented velocity in suing Mr. Jackson. But as I said, he fought back.

[00:07:22]He showed that he did not owe the debt.

[00:07:25]And a company called Prosper was the servicing entity for the original credit, which is an old favorite. You've all heard it before, Web Bank. There is a ton of old web bank debt out there.

[00:07:38]It's I love it because it's so easy to beat and it's picked up by velocity and crown asset and company and LVMV funding. But in this case, this was way beyond the statute of limitations. The man should not have been sued. So when he was done, when he got what he wanted, he didn't let sleeping dogs lie, whoever the dogs are. He turned around and did a class action against Velocity and against the law firm, let's call them PSC, Prousiv, and Collins. The theme of the lawsuit was simple. They're suing on time bar debt, and they should not be doing that when you can't even prove they own the debt. Now, let me give you the um caption in this case. Shazam. So, that's Mr. Jackson against Velocity Investments and Prous Bivik and Collins.

[00:08:28]And [music] it's a class action complaint as you can see.

[00:08:33]And I'll give you the highlights. Shazam defendant Velocity. So now that he's suing Velocity, they're not the plaintiff anymore. They're the defendant through its attorneys [music] Produce Bivik and Collins PSC sued Mr. Jackson on consumer debt more than a year after the statute of limitation expired. When Mr. Jackson moved to dismiss on the grounds that the statute of limitation expired, Veloci and PSC argued that the underlying debt was a negotiable instrument with a longer statute of limitations, but also that motions dismiss were unavailable in Maryland District Court. Velocity ultimately dismissed the case. So in other words, he's saying not only did they have a false interpretation of the law, substantive law, procedurally, they couldn't sue, they couldn't file that motion to dismiss. It's unavailable in the court. They was he was sued at a district court level. So Velocity ultimately dismissed the case with prejudice. That means it goes away.

[00:09:34]Can't pursue him again. But then Mr. Jackson incurred expenses, spent time defending himself. Mr. Jackson is now suing on behalf of himself and all the class of similarly situated individuals to recover damages. So now watch what velocity and the law firm did. So they litigated the case against Mr. Jackson heavily and then the last second the goose was cooked. So they dismiss the prejudice. They could have done that on the first second, third day, week or month that this case was filed. be honest with you, there's a lot of spite that goes into it. That's I'm just going to say that. So, here's the promisary note that Mr. Jackson was part of.

[00:10:16]Shazam. I just show you that for the reason. Just look to the side and it says prosper. So, the first ruling in the district court level. So, when you sue in federal court, there's three levels. One, the federal district court.

[00:10:30]Two, the court of appeals, federal court of appeals. And then that Supreme Court, I think they take maybe 80 cases a year.

[00:10:39]So they filed a motion to compel arbitration. So after everything I just told you, they get sued and the defendants Velocity and PSC say, "Hey, this should be an arbitration."

[00:10:54]Why did they do all that lawsuit, all that litigation if this thing should have been in arbitration? So let's find out. So as to velocity the court at the district court level in federal district court said yes you are technically a party to the arbitration group. So velocity doesn't own the debt but they claim they do and the original company is web bank sort of prosper. So they've passed it through securitization and all this and then velocity picks it up on pennies on the dollar and sues on it like in this case. So they are technically the court said a party to the arbitration agreement. So two parties are party to an arbitration agreement. The borrower, Mr. Jackson, and the person that lent the money, web bank. But if there's a proper assignment, then whoever properly was assigned the debt can enforce arbitration. They can say, "We're going to arbitration." Even if they're a debt buyer down the road, they just got to prove it. That's a lot of work. [music] As the court says here, you are technically a party to the arbitration agreement. You brought the note, the note as an arbitration clause. you qualify as a subsequent holder velocity under the definition of you. But the court said you waved your right to arbitrate when you filed a lawsuit in state court against the same consumer over the same debt. So here's that opinion first page. Shazam for the reasons that below I've highlighted. The court denies defendant PSSE, the law firm's motion to dismiss for improper venue due to the arbitration agreement or in the alternative motion to compel arbitration and stay of civil proceedings. And two, the court denies defendant velocities motion to dismiss for improper venue due to arbitration agreement or in the alternative motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. In a nutshell, let's give you the holding of that court. Notably, the complaint makes clear that each of the claims asserted in the case relates to defendant velocities alleges decision to bring a state collection lawsuit against the plaintiff, Mr. Jackson, after the statute of limitation to defendants's velocity's debt claim had expired. And so, the claims asserted in this matter are related to the claims the defendant asserted in the state court case, resulting in a waiver of its right to arbitration. So, but here Velocity waved its right to arbitrate because it kept litigating the case. So, the beauty of that is it's sort of sad that a man has to defend himself knowing he's right and gets taken all the way to the trial and velocity can just say, "Okay, we dismissed for prejudice and now you've paid this attorney and you've done all this work and heartache and it's gone a long time and there's no retribution for you." So that's part of the reason probably why he sued and he was right to do that. But the comeuppance here was velocity you did all that litigation you waved your right to arbitrate. Just hold on to that. So because that exactly what I told you in the last video when a debt buyer files against you in court they have made their choice. They are in court. They do not get to pivot to arbitration when you start getting smart and be smart and don't go to arbitration despite what people that aren't attorneys or even educated in this field are telling you.

[00:14:14]And even attorneys that tell you to go to arbitration, I think are incorrect because what do you give up? You give up your rights under the US Constitution, your evidence rights, your procedural rights in favor of whatever arbitration rules the arbitration service is using.

[00:14:28]And remember, if you didn't create something and the other side did create that document, why are you being forced into their rules, they must like those rules and that arbitration agreement.

[00:14:41]And here they realize they were on the run and they are using arbitration against the consumer for themselves. So, Velocity, they lost at the district court level. They did not appeal. the attorney law firm PSC appealed and they are claiming yes, we should have had the right to arbitrate. So remember again, if you and another person contract and there's an arbitration clause in there, that other person can enforce arbitration. If someone buys that from that other person, let's say a creditor sells it to a debt buyer, the debt buyer can enforce that. The law firm is saying we want to enforce arbitration and protect ourselves because Mr. Jackson also sued the law firm for the same violation of the rules under the FDCPA etc. So the law firm is saying hey we are services and the agreement says anybody that's a borrower or a creditor or a serer can enforce arbitration. So the law firm is going, "Hey, we're services." So the issue here is, "Are is a law firm a service?" I'll quickly go into that. So this is the law firm's argument. The law firm pulled definitions from Britannica, Miriam Webster, and Oxford to define service as paying interest on a loan or a debt.

[00:16:04]Judge Wilkinson in this case said, "This cannot possibly what the clause meant."

[00:16:09]Why? Because the person making payments on the loan is defined in the contract as me. That would be Mr. Jackson. And if you and meant the same thing, the contract would be meaningless. So here's the actual rules of arbitration. Shazam.

[00:16:23]And this is what the rules are as to who may enforce arbitration. I is defined as me, meaning Mr. Objection and my mean the promiser under this note as well as any person claiming through such a promiser you or your is web bank or any person servicing the note for web bank.

[00:16:45][music] So second attempt so the court said get out of here. Second attempt to service means to provide something necessary. So the law firm said servicing means providing something needed. Legal representation is something needed. They thought we are servicing the note meaning we are not in the same shoes as velocity who did not appeal this but because we're working for them we are considered servicesers.

[00:17:13]Judge Wilkinson dismantled that too. He said that if that was the definition, the clause would sweep in everybody that does some kind of representation, including the bank, including the mailman, including an internet provider of this loan that would servicing what is a serer would incorporate so many reasons it would kill the definition of serer.

[00:17:40]So what the court said is something quite elegant. It said, "Look, service is a word with many meanings. Miriam Webster lists 17 and the obvious one, the one that the law firm dismissed and ignored. Serer in this context means to service a loan to collect payments and maintain a payment schedule for the loan." The court cited Oxford English dictionary, Cambridge's dictionary, and Black's law dictionary. All agreed. So then the court delivered the killshot.

[00:18:10]This was the second document [music] in the borrowing package that Mr. Jackson signed, the borrower registration agreement, Shazam. It specifically says that Prosper Marketplace and I have fun with that because Prosper has so many names that I I [music] always say to the call, okay, let's see the assignment between all these services and all these people that claiming ownership. And Prosper Marketplace is one of many names for Prosper. So, Prosperous services all loans made through the platform, but has engaged [music] certain third parties, including PMI, that's a different serer, to act as agents for Prosper. So, that means unless you're a serviceer pursuant to Prosper's right to service, you're not a serer. And the registration agreement specifically named the company Prosper as the serer. That's the end of that.

[00:19:04]Under Maryland contract law, when two documents, meaning the loan agreement and the borrower registration agreement here are executed, they are part of one transaction. They are read together. So the word servicing and the promisary note meant the same thing [music] as the borrower's agreement that Prosper is the one that collects payments. Prosper maintained the records. Prosper communicated with the borrower. None of that was done by a law firm in this case. So they cannot be servicing a loan. They're just there to sue on Velocity's behalf. So the big principle here is lawyers are not their clients.

[00:19:41]As important as a lawyer is to the process, he and the client are not the one and the same. And the court said PSC's effort to secure the benefit of the arbitration agreement is ultimately unsuccessful because the agreement was drafted to protect only creditors and loan services, not lawyers, and by the way, not consumers. Think about that.

[00:20:02]The boundary between lawyer and a client is the reason why in an ordinary case, a law firm cannot take advantage of an arbitration agreement [music] that was written to protect its client. They're telling you it's for the creditors.

[00:20:15]Anyway, why this matters to you? The following reasons for this case being good for you. If you go through arbitration, you lose your constitutional rights. You lose your evidentiary rights. The evidentiary rights are everything because the debt by velocity, crown asset, MCM, P, LVMV funding all rely on their interpretation or affidavit coming in to say, "Yeah, we own the debt." But none of that comes in because it's an hour a court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted or hearsay. An exception is the business records exception of your state or federal court. You don't have those same rights in arbitration. And if you're arbitrating a case against a debt buyer, you got to think twice about that. You just lost all the reasons you can win that case in court. and you lost all those court protections that we've had for hundreds of years. So, number one, read the arbitration clause word by word. The exact wording controls. Who is the serer? That's who has the right to service on the loan. Two, a debt collection law firm is not automatically covered by the client's arbitration clause. Three, if the debt buyer sued you first in court and lost, dropped or dismissed the case, they have waved their right to arbitrate the claim. I've done those cases. I have been I I remember as a city bank case. We went to town and I nailed them. And it was clear I was going to win. I won a summary motion. Everything. They did the exact same thing right before trial. They go, "Hey, we're going to do a motion to arbitrate." I go, "Are you crazy? You just did all this. You can't do both."

[00:21:56]And the court agreed. They wave their right to arbitrate. So look to see if someone's litigating, you start winning, and they try to get into arbitration.

[00:22:06]this case is good for you. Four, contemporaneous documents matter. If you have a borrower, registration agreement, a credit agreement, a welcome letter, a privacy disclosure, all signed or delivered around the time same time, courts read them all together to help you. Five, lawyers can be liable for their own actions. The attorney client relationship does not shield a debt collection law firm from FDCPA liability. I've probably sued as many law firms as I have would be debt buyers/credititors.

[00:22:37]So, how to use Jackson versus PSC in your own case. If you live in the Fourth Circuit, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, this is binding precedent in these factual situations. Jackson versus Prousiv and Collins LLC was decided May 18th, 2026, just a couple of days ago.

[00:23:01]So [music] this is a fourth circuit, a very large district published opinion.

[00:23:05]The law firm cannot enforce its client's arbitration clause unless the clause specifically says it covers clients agents, lawyers, or representatives. If you live in another circuit, this is persuasive authority. So if your circuit doesn't have the same binding precedent, you can bring it in as persuasive authority under your fact scenario if there's not a case similar to it. And courts will listen. do it all the time.

[00:23:32]So the bottom line here, Shazam, one, on May 18th, 2026, the fourth circuit ruled that a debt collection law firm cannot use its clients arbitration clauses.

[00:23:43]Two, the arbitration clause covered only loan services, which is prosper here, and that entitles who are entitled to collect regular payments and keep payment records, not lawyers who file collection lawsuits. The law firm's only job was to file a lawsuit and litigate, nothing else. Three, the debt by velocity also lost its motion to compel because it waved arbitration. It did not appeal the ruling. So that should have been a hint and a half for the law firm.

[00:24:13]Four, together, these rulings give consumers a powerful set of arguments against being dragged into arbitration when they sue debt collectors and their law firms for misconduct. Five, the big lesson, the lawyer and the client are not the same. The lawyer's on the hook for lawyer's own misconduct in court and can't go to arbitration. Six, the collectors love arbitration when it works for them. They run from it when it works against them. That tells you everything you need to know. So, if you're being sued on a debt, litigate it through kill.com.

[00:24:47]You can do in five minutes what it used to take me five hours. That's killed.com with [music] Parker GPT. My 30 years of every document, everything I've done is inside of Parker GBT for you. I like leveling the playing field between the consumer and the corporation. They have to it levels things out. They're no longer a victim. I like representing people that are victims. And that is the way to go with law is to get rid of the grunt work. That's the heart is the n mindnumbing grunt work. Parker GPT takes that out of the process of being an attorney. Of course, you do your work, you check your work, but we have lawyers that are members of the service. Think about it. So, remember, arbitration is not good unless it's a last resort.

[00:25:38]Creditors created arbitration, so it's their baby. You don't want to go into their backyard, okay? But they'll use it if they fear that you're good at your stuff. And Parker GPT makes you good at your stuff. So go get them. And when they try to get into arbitration, you can beat them back. Thank you.