LVNV Funding Is Suing Me in Missouri — What Do I Do?

LVNV Funding LLC is one of the largest passive debt buyers in the United States. Headquartered in Greenville, South Carolina, LVNV is part of Sherman Financial Group LLC and was founded in 2001 specifically to purchase portfolios of charged-off consumer debts.

When a bank like Citibank, HSBC, Capital One, or GE Capital decides an account is uncollectible, it sells that debt — often for two to eight cents on the dollar — to a debt buyer. LVNV is one of the biggest buyers in the country. LVNV does not service the debt itself; it uses an affiliated company called Resurgent Capital Services LP to manage collections and engage local Missouri collection attorneys.

In 2022, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a consent order against Resurgent Capital Services for collecting on debts consumers had disputed by submitting Identity Theft Reports and for unfair billing practices. Resurgent paid a one-million-dollar civil money penalty and was required to provide consumer redress.

The key fact: LVNV is not your original creditor. LVNV did not lend you any money. LVNV bought your charged-off account at a deep discount, hoping to collect the full balance plus interest. Missouri has one of the strongest debt-buyer pleading rules in the country — Missouri Supreme Court Rule 55.22, effective July 1, 2021. Combined with the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act and a quirky arbitration choice-of-law issue, Missouri gives defendants real leverage against LVNV.

If you were just served with a complaint from LVNV Funding in Missouri Circuit Court, here is what almost certainly happened. You fell behind on a credit card or other consumer account. The original creditor wrote the account off and sold it as part of a portfolio to LVNV at a deep discount. LVNV is now suing you in Missouri because a default judgment is the most efficient way to convert that purchase into a full-balance recovery.

Industry data and CFPB studies confirm that the majority of consumers sued in debt collection cases never file an Answer. They get scared, they do not understand what to do, or they assume the lawsuit will go away if they ignore it. When that happens, the Missouri court enters a default judgment automatically.

In Missouri, a default judgment carries serious consequences. Missouri does not generally allow wage garnishment for most consumer debt judgments — but LVNV can levy bank accounts and pursue other collection remedies. A Missouri judgment is valid for ten years and renewable.

Filing a real Answer flips the case from a near-automatic default into a real lawsuit that LVNV must actually prove under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.22. They often choose to settle or dismiss rather than do that work — particularly when Rule 55.22 is missing the required attachments and an MMPA counterclaim is on the table.

Missouri gives you thirty days to file your Answer in Circuit Court after you were served with the summons and complaint. This deadline is set by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.25.

Missouri uses two different procedural tracks. For full Circuit Court cases (which include most debt-buyer suits over $5,000), you must file a written Answer within 30 days of service. For Small Claims Court (cases up to $5,000) and Associate Circuit Court cases on the small-claims track, you must appear in court at the hearing date rather than file a written Answer — the procedure is more like Virginia’s return-date system.

For Circuit Court cases: count the thirty days starting the day after service. Weekends count. If the deadline falls on a weekend or court holiday, the deadline rolls to the next business day under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 44.01. "Served" in Missouri generally means a sheriff or licensed process server personally handed you the papers, or — under certain conditions — left them with someone of suitable age at your usual residence.

If you miss the thirty-day deadline in Circuit Court, LVNV will move for default judgment under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 74.05. The court will normally grant the default if procedural requirements are met. Once a default is entered, vacating it requires a motion under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 74.05(d) showing good cause and a meritorious defense.

The single most important step you can take right now is to confirm the procedural track of your case (Circuit Court written Answer or small claims hearing date), mark your deadline accordingly, and treat that date as the most important date on your schedule.

Missouri has one of the strongest debt-buyer pleading rules in the country. Missouri Supreme Court Rule 55.22, effective July 1, 2021, requires every debt-buyer complaint filed on or after that date to attach — or recite verbatim — both the assignment(s) AND the underlying contract.

This is a two-element requirement. LVNV must attach: (a) every assignment of the debt from the original creditor through every intermediate buyer to LVNV; AND (b) the underlying contract — typically the cardholder agreement that gave rise to the debt. The complaint must either physically attach these documents or recite their contents verbatim. Failure to do either supports dismissal under Rule 55.22(d).

In practice, LVNV complaints filed in Missouri routinely fall short of Rule 55.22. The chain of assignment is often presented as a generic block transfer without account-level identification. The underlying cardholder agreement is often not attached. Each defect supports a motion to dismiss.

Missouri also requires a debt buyer to establish standing through admissible evidence. Under Mo. R. Evid. 803(6) (business records exception), the custodian who authenticates the records must lay foundation showing personal knowledge of how the records were created and kept. A Resurgent custodian generally cannot testify about how Citibank kept its account records.

Attacking the chain of title under Rule 55.22 is the central LVNV defense in Missouri. Combined with the MMPA counterclaim available under Jackson v. Barton, the leverage is substantial.

For credit card debt and most consumer accounts in Missouri, the statute of limitations is five years under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120. The clock runs from the date of your last payment or last charge, whichever is later.

If you made your last payment in March 2019, the five-year clock began on that date and expired in March 2024. A lawsuit filed in late 2024 would be filed outside the limitations period and would be time-barred. If you cannot remember when you last paid, look at your old credit reports.

Missouri allows revival under § 516.320 through written acknowledgment or partial payment, with specific procedural requirements. Be careful if you made any payment to Resurgent or LVNV after the original SOL began running — that payment may have restarted the clock.

The statute of limitations in Missouri is an affirmative defense that must be raised in your Answer. Under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.08, affirmative defenses must be specifically pleaded. If you fail to plead the SOL, you waive it.

LVNV is well known for filing on accounts that are right at the edge of the limitations period or even past it, betting that the consumer either will not raise the defense or will not respond at all. The CFPB has criticized this practice. Calculate your dates carefully and raise the SOL defense if it applies. Combine the SOL defense with the Rule 55.22 attachment defenses for maximum effect.

Most credit card agreements contain a clause requiring that any dispute be resolved through binding arbitration administered by AAA or JAMS. When LVNV bought your account, they bought it subject to whatever terms were in the original cardholder agreement — which means the arbitration clause may now belong to you.

Missouri has an unusual procedural quirk in this area. Missouri’s Uniform Arbitration Act (Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.350) excludes contracts of adhesion from coverage. Most consumer credit card agreements are technically contracts of adhesion under Missouri law. So the state UAA standing alone might not allow you to compel arbitration on a Missouri credit card case.

However, the Federal Arbitration Act preempts that exclusion for credit card agreements involving interstate commerce. Bunge Corp. v. Perryville Feed & Grain, 685 S.W.2d 837 (Mo. banc 1985), confirms that the FAA controls when interstate commerce is involved. Most credit card transactions are interstate (the bank is in Delaware or another state), so the FAA preempts § 435.355.

The practical implication: in Missouri, always plead your motion to compel arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 4 (the Federal Arbitration Act), NOT under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.355. Missouri courts will compel arbitration under the FAA when the agreement is valid and the dispute falls within its scope. Get this right or you may lose the motion on technical grounds.

The economic logic of arbitration is the same in Missouri as elsewhere. AAA and JAMS commercial filing fees for a business claimant typically run from $1,500 to $5,000 or more, plus the arbitrator’s hourly fees. If the disputed debt is, say, $3,200, the cost of arbitration may exceed the recoverable amount, and LVNV often abandons. Pair the arbitration motion with the Rule 55.22 attachment defenses for maximum leverage.

Your Answer is the most important document you will file in this case. It is your formal response to LVNV’s complaint, and it locks in your defenses for the rest of the lawsuit. A good Answer in Missouri does three things: it admits or denies each numbered allegation under Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.09, it raises every applicable affirmative defense under Rule 55.08, and — where appropriate — it raises an MMPA counterclaim.

For the admit-or-deny portion: do not admit anything you do not actually know. If LVNV alleges that you owed Citibank $3,217.42 as of a charge-off date you do not remember, deny that allegation for lack of knowledge.

The affirmative defenses to consider in a Missouri LVNV Answer include lack of standing or chain of title; failure to comply with Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.22 (missing assignment, missing underlying contract); statute of limitations under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120; failure to state a claim; account stated cannot be established; and arbitration clause (if the original agreement contains one — pleaded under 9 U.S.C. § 4, not Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.355).

Where MMPA violations are present, raise a counterclaim under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.025 for actual damages, attorney’s fees, and punitive damages where supported. Per Jackson v. Barton, the MMPA applies to debt collection practices.

What you should never do: do not admit you owe the debt. Do not call LVNV. Do not promise to pay. Do not ignore the lawsuit. The 30-day clock is unforgiving in Circuit Court cases.

Missouri has a powerful consumer protection statute that applies to LVNV cases — the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, codified at Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 407.010–407.130.

The MMPA prohibits unfair, deceptive, fraudulent, false, and misleading practices in connection with consumer transactions. Per Jackson v. Barton (Missouri Supreme Court applies MMPA to debt collection practices), the MMPA applies to debt-buyer suits where the conduct is independently deceptive — including suing without the documentation required by Rule 55.22, suing on a time-barred debt, or making false statements about the amount or character of the debt.

The MMPA provides a private right of action under § 407.025 for actual damages, attorney’s fees, and punitive damages where supported. Fee-shifting is the critical feature: even a small case that the consumer wins generates real attorney-fee liability for LVNV.

The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also applies to LVNV and Resurgent. The FDCPA prohibits false statements, misrepresentations of the amount or character of the debt, and abusive collection tactics. FDCPA violations entitle you to up to $1,000 in statutory damages plus attorney’s fees in federal court.

The combination of MMPA fee-shifting, FDCPA statutory damages, the Rule 55.22 attachment requirements, and FAA-preempted arbitration leverage means LVNV faces real downside risk in Missouri cases. Many Missouri LVNV cases settle or get dismissed once a real Answer is filed with proper Rule 55.22 and MMPA defenses raised.

After you file your Answer with the Missouri Circuit Court clerk and serve a copy on LVNV’s attorney, the case enters discovery. Discovery in Missouri is governed by Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 56–58.

In an LVNV case, this is where the chain-of-title defense gets tested. You can serve a request for production of documents under Rule 58 demanding every assignment document, every bill of sale, the original cardholder agreement, and the complete account history. LVNV must respond within thirty days. If they cannot produce the documents required by Rule 55.22 — a clean chain of assignment and the underlying contract — their case is in serious trouble.

What very often happens next is a settlement offer. The economics for LVNV change dramatically once they realize they are facing a defendant who is going to make them prove their case under Rule 55.22 — and who may have an MMPA counterclaim with attorney’s fees pending. Missouri practitioners report that debt buyers commonly settle real-Answer cases for forty to sixty cents on the dollar, sometimes much less.

If the case does not settle, it proceeds to a court date. Cases under $5,000 are heard in Missouri Small Claims Court (Associate Circuit Court small-claims track). Cases above $5,000 are in Associate Circuit Court general civil or full Circuit Court depending on amount.

A meaningful share of LVNV cases get voluntarily dismissed in Missouri after Answer, especially when Rule 55.22 attachments are missing. Many more settle for a deeply discounted lump sum.

Answered is a self-help legal platform built specifically for pro se defendants in consumer debt collection lawsuits. The Missouri playbook was reviewed by a Missouri-licensed consumer-rights attorney and is built around the specific statutes and rules that govern LVNV cases — Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.22, 55.25, 74.05, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120, the MMPA, and Jackson v. Barton.

When you upload your summons and complaint, Answered does the following: it identifies whether your case is on the Circuit Court track (30-day Answer) or the small-claims track (court appearance); it scans for the Rule 55.22 attachment defects most commonly found in LVNV pleadings — missing assignment, missing underlying contract; it identifies whether your debt may be time-barred under the five-year SOL of § 516.120; it analyzes whether an MMPA counterclaim is supported under Jackson v. Barton; it pleads any arbitration motion under the FAA (9 U.S.C. § 4), not the state UAA, to avoid the § 435.355 adhesion-contract exclusion; and it generates a court-ready Answer with the affirmative defenses that apply to your case.

The Answer document is formatted for Missouri Circuit Court or Associate Circuit Court, includes the proper caption and case style, and contains the affirmative defenses and (where applicable) MMPA counterclaim language.

Pricing is simple: free to start, and a one-time $99 charge to unlock and download your final documents. There is no subscription. There is no per-document fee.

This product exists because the founder, John DiSalle, was sued by a debt buyer, fought back using exactly this process, and won. He built Answered so that other defendants do not have to figure it out from scratch.