Portfolio Recovery Associates Is Suing Me in New York — What Do I Do?

Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC ("PRA") is a wholly owned subsidiary of PRA Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: PRAA), one of the two largest publicly traded debt buyers in the United States. PRA is headquartered in Norfolk, Virginia, and is unusually active in New York courts — it files more debt collection lawsuits in New York than almost any other plaintiff.

PRA buys portfolios of charged-off consumer debt — primarily credit cards from Synchrony Bank, Capital One, and various store-card issuers — at deep discounts and collects them through in-house collectors and outside collection counsel. The business model depends on default judgments. When defendants do not respond, PRA recovers the full balance plus interest from a portfolio it bought for pennies on the dollar.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has taken two major enforcement actions against PRA. The 2015 consent order required PRA to pay $19 million in consumer redress plus an $8 million civil money penalty for collecting on unverified debts, suing consumers using false affidavits, and filing collection suits without adequate documentation. In 2023, the CFPB took a second action for continued violations, resulting in an additional $24 million settlement. Both consent orders are public.

Why this matters specifically in New York: the New York Consumer Credit Fairness Act, which became effective May 7, 2022, imposes pleading requirements that map almost exactly onto the documentation gaps the CFPB sanctioned PRA for. New York is the most defendant-favorable state in the country for fighting back against PRA.

If you were just served with a summons and complaint from PRA in New York, 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 PRA. PRA is now suing you in New York Supreme Court or Civil Court 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, do not understand what to file, or assume the lawsuit will go away if ignored. When that happens, the court enters a default judgment automatically. Default judgments are PRA's primary profit driver — and the CFPB has criticized PRA specifically for filing lawsuits engineered to maximize default rates.

In New York, a default judgment carries serious consequences. PRA can garnish up to 10% of your gross wages — among the lowest caps in the country — restrain your bank account, and pursue other collection remedies. Bank account restraining orders in New York can freeze your entire account balance up to the judgment amount.

The critical fact for New York PRA defendants: New York has the strongest debt-buyer pleading law in the country (the CCFA), the shortest credit card SOL (3 years under CPLR § 214), and direct CFPB findings establishing PRA's pattern of suing without adequate documentation. All three together mean filing a real Answer in New York is unusually likely to succeed against PRA.

New York gives you twenty days to file your Answer if you were served personally, or thirty days if you were served by another method such as substituted service or service on a person of suitable age and discretion. This deadline is set by CPLR § 3012. Whether you have twenty or thirty days is determined by how the process server completed service — check the affidavit of service filed with the court if you are unsure.

You count the days starting the day after service. Weekends count. If the deadline falls on a weekend or court holiday, it rolls to the next business day under CPLR § 2103.

If you miss your deadline, PRA will move for default judgment under CPLR § 3215. The court will normally grant the default if procedural requirements are met. Once a default is entered, vacating it requires showing both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense under CPLR § 5015(a)(1) — a two-part test that gets harder the longer you wait.

New York has one feature that helps PRA defendants: under CPLR § 3215(a), a debt buyer must include an affidavit of facts in any default application, and CCFA-era complaints must include the six-element disclosure at filing. If those are missing, even a default application can be defective. PRA's CFPB record makes these defects unusually common.

The most important step you can take right now is to confirm exactly when and how you were served, calculate your deadline, and treat that date as the most important date on your schedule.

New York has the most consumer-protective debt-buyer pleading law in the country, and against PRA specifically, it is the most powerful procedural tool available. The Consumer Credit Fairness Act, codified at CPLR § 3016(j) and effective May 7, 2022, requires every consumer-credit complaint filed in New York to plead six specific elements on the face of the pleading: (1) the name of the original creditor; (2) the account identifier or last four digits of the account number; (3) the date of default; (4) a statement that the statute of limitations has not expired; (5) the complete chain of title from the original creditor to the current plaintiff; and (6) an itemization of the charge-off balance.

In addition, the CCFA requires that the complaint attach either the signed contract or the charge-off statement. Missing any element supports dismissal under CPLR § 3211(a)(3).

This maps almost perfectly onto the CFPB's findings against PRA. The 2015 consent order required PRA to obtain the original cardholder agreement and account-level transfer files before suing — and the 2023 action found PRA still falling short of those documentation requirements. The exact paperwork PRA was sanctioned for lacking is the same paperwork the CCFA requires it to attach to every New York complaint.

In practice, PRA complaints filed in New York routinely fall short of CCFA. The chain of assignment is often a generic block transfer. The post-charge-off itemization is often missing. The original cardholder agreement is often not attached. New York case law reinforces these requirements; in Palisades Collection, LLC v. Kedik (4th Dep't 2009), the court held that the chain of title must appear on the face of the complaint. CCFA codified and strengthened this rule.

New York has the shortest statute of limitations on consumer credit card debt of any state in our network — three years under CPLR § 214. This is dramatically shorter than the six-year SOL in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan. If PRA waited more than three years after your default to sue, the debt is presumptively time-barred.

The clock starts running on the date of your last payment or the charge-off date, whichever is later. If you made your last payment in March 2021 on a Synchrony Bank account that was charged off in October 2021, the three-year clock began on the charge-off date and expired in October 2024. A lawsuit filed in late 2024 or 2025 would be filed outside the limitations period.

The statute of limitations in New York is an affirmative defense — it does not happen automatically. The court will not throw out the case just because the debt is old. You must raise the defense yourself in your Answer or it is waived. Under CPLR § 3018(b), affirmative defenses must be specifically pleaded.

New York's short SOL is one of the reasons PRA files so many time-barred suits in this state. The CFPB has repeatedly criticized PRA for filing on debts they knew were past the limitations period. The 2015 consent order specifically required PRA to disclose to consumers when a debt was past the SOL — and the 2023 action found PRA still failing this requirement. Calculate your dates carefully — three years passes faster than you think, and many PRA complaints in New York are time-barred at the moment they are filed.

Most credit card agreements contain a clause requiring that any dispute be resolved through binding arbitration administered by AAA or JAMS. When PRA 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.

This is a powerful defense for New York PRA defendants. The arbitration clause is enforceable by either side, but PRA — like most debt buyers — often does not want to arbitrate. 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.

This creates the "arbitration fee trap." When a New York defendant files a motion to compel arbitration under CPLR § 7503(a) — and the court grants it — PRA must choose between paying thousands in arbitration filing fees or abandoning the case. They very often abandon, which can result in a dismissal.

New York courts will compel arbitration if the agreement is valid and the dispute falls within its scope. To use this defense, you generally need a copy of the original cardholder agreement showing the arbitration clause. PRA is required to produce that document if you request it during discovery — and the CFPB's 2015 consent order required PRA to obtain that document before filing suit. Pair the arbitration motion with a CCFA dismissal motion under CPLR § 3211(a)(3) for maximum leverage — many New York PRA cases settle or get dismissed under this combined pressure.

Your Answer is the most important document you will file in this case. It is your formal response to PRA's complaint, and it locks in your defenses for the rest of the lawsuit. A good Answer in New York does three things: it admits or denies each numbered allegation under CPLR § 3018(a), it raises every applicable affirmative defense under CPLR § 3018(b), and — where appropriate — it raises a counterclaim.

For the admit-or-deny portion: do not admit anything you do not actually know. Under CPLR § 3018(a), you can deny "knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief" — that is the right answer for any allegation about transactions, balances, or assignments you cannot personally verify.

The affirmative defenses to consider in a New York PRA Answer include: lack of standing under the Consumer Credit Fairness Act (CPLR § 3016(j)); failure to attach required documentation under the CCFA; statute of limitations under CPLR § 214 (three years); failure to state a cause of action; account stated cannot be established; arbitration clause; and lack of personal jurisdiction or improper service if applicable.

Where FDCPA violations are present — and PRA's twin CFPB consent orders make these unusually likely — consider an FDCPA counterclaim in federal court for statutory damages plus attorney's fees.

What you should never do: do not admit you owe the debt. Do not call PRA. Do not promise to pay. Do not ignore the lawsuit. The 20- or 30-day clock is unforgiving, and CPLR § 3215 default applications often succeed quickly.

New York has built one of the strongest consumer protection regimes in the country for debt collection defendants — and a regime that maps almost exactly onto the conduct the CFPB sanctioned PRA for.

The Consumer Credit Fairness Act (CPLR § 3016(j) and related provisions, effective May 7, 2022) requires every debt-buyer complaint to plead six specific elements on its face and to attach either the signed contract or the charge-off statement. Missing any element is grounds for dismissal under CPLR § 3211(a)(3). The CCFA also requires that any default application include the same six-element disclosure — meaning even consumers who fail to answer get a second layer of protection at the default stage.

New York General Business Law § 601 and related provisions prohibit unfair or deceptive debt collection practices. While these are mainly enforced by the New York Attorney General, they inform what kinds of conduct are unlawful and can support FDCPA claims under federal law.

The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act applies to PRA. 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 CFPB findings against PRA — that PRA collected unverified debts, used false affidavits, and sued without adequate documentation — are direct evidence of FDCPA-violative conduct.

The combination of CCFA dismissals and federal FDCPA counterclaims creates real downside risk for PRA in New York cases. This is the central reason many New York PRA cases settle quickly or get voluntarily dismissed once a real Answer is filed.

After you file your Answer with the New York court clerk and serve a copy on PRA's attorney, the case enters discovery. Discovery in New York is governed by CPLR Article 31 and gives each side broad rights to request documents and information.

In a PRA case, discovery is where the chain-of-title defense gets tested. You can serve a notice for discovery and inspection under CPLR § 3120 demanding every assignment document, every bill of sale, the original cardholder agreement, and the complete account history. PRA must respond within twenty days under CPLR § 3120(2). If they cannot produce a clean chain of title and an authenticated account record, their case is in serious trouble. Given the CFPB findings against PRA, this is a frequent outcome.

What very often happens next is a settlement offer. New York practitioners report that PRA commonly settles real-Answer cases for forty to sixty cents on the dollar — sometimes much less when the debt is at the edge of the 3-year SOL or when the CCFA disclosures are defective.

If the case does not settle, it proceeds to a court date. Cases for $10,000 or less in New York City Civil Court often go through the consumer credit transactions calendar; outside the City, the case proceeds in District Court or City Court depending on jurisdiction. Cases above $25,000 are in Supreme Court.

A meaningful share of PRA cases get voluntarily dismissed in New York after discovery, especially when the CCFA disclosures are defective or the debt is time-barred.

Answered is a self-help legal platform built specifically for pro se defendants in consumer debt collection lawsuits. The New York playbook was reviewed by a New York-licensed consumer-rights attorney and is built around the specific statutes and rules that govern PRA cases — the Consumer Credit Fairness Act (CPLR § 3016(j)), CPLR § 214, CPLR § 7503(a), and Palisades Collection v. Kedik.

When you upload your summons and complaint, Answered does the following: it extracts your service date and your 20- or 30-day Answer deadline based on how you were served; it scans for CCFA pleading defects, including missing chain-of-title disclosures, missing post-charge-off itemization, and missing signed-contract attachments — the exact defects the CFPB sanctioned PRA for; it identifies whether your debt may be time-barred under the three-year SOL of CPLR § 214; it checks whether an arbitration clause is likely available under CPLR § 7503(a); and it generates a court-ready Answer with the affirmative defenses that apply to your case under CPLR § 3018(b).

The Answer document is formatted for New York Civil Court, City Court, District Court, or Supreme Court depending on the venue, includes the proper caption and case style, and contains the affirmative defenses. It also generates a discovery request package designed to push PRA to produce or fail to produce the chain-of-title documents required by CCFA.

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.

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