Florida debt defense
Last updated May 2026
If you were served with a Florida debt lawsuit, your first priority is the Answer deadline. Missing it can lead to default judgment before the plaintiff has to prove the debt. This guide explains Florida deadlines, FCCPA issues, debt-buyer proof problems, and how Answered helps pro se defendants build a filing-formatted self-help Answer Packet.
You have 20 days to respond.
Florida gives you 20 days from the date you were served.
Answer Packet $60. Full Defense $99. Document Review $99 where available.
Orientation
Somebody filed a lawsuit against you in a Florida court alleging that you owe money on a consumer debt — a credit card most often, sometimes a personal loan, occasionally a medical bill, an auto deficiency, or a charged-off installment loan. The packet in your hand is a Summons (the order to respond) plus a Complaint (the document explaining what they are suing you for, with attached exhibits).
The first thing to identify is which court your case is in, because Florida runs three different procedural tracks. Cases under $8,000 go to small claims under the Florida Small Claims Rules. Cases from $8,000.01 to $50,000 go to County Court under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Cases above $50,000 go to Circuit Court, also under the Rules of Civil Procedure. Most credit-card debt-buyer cases land in small claims because typical portfolio amounts are under $5,000; auto-deficiency and original-creditor cases more often land in County Court.
Most defendants in Florida debt cases are sued by debt buyers — companies that purchased the defaulted account in a bulk portfolio years after charge-off, paying pennies on the dollar. Florida law can turn proof gaps in debt-buyer cases into issues to preserve, primarily through Rule 1.130(a) and the Pepper-Garron exhibits-control rule. You have 20 days to file an Answer in County or Circuit Court under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(a), or a pretrial appearance date in small claims. A timely response is the safest way to avoid default risk.
Your deadline
In County Court and Circuit Court, the deadline is set by Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(a): 20 days from the date of service to file a written Answer. Calendar days, including weekends and Florida court holidays under Rule 1.090(a). The clock runs from the day a process server hands the papers to you (or to a competent adult at your residence), not the day the complaint was filed and not the date printed on the summons. Look at the proof-of-service section of the summons or check the return on file with the clerk.
In small claims (cases under $8,000), the framework is different. The summons sets a pretrial conference date under Fla. Sm. Cl. R. 7.090; you must appear at the pretrial, and if you intend to assert any counterclaims you must file them before or at the conference. A written Answer is permitted but optional pre-pretrial. Do not assume the 20-day rule applies in small claims — read your summons.
What default judgment can look like in Florida: the court may enter judgment for the full amount claimed, plus statutory interest at the rate set quarterly under Fla. Stat. § 55.03, plus costs. Once entered, the plaintiff can garnish wages under Chapter 77 (subject to the § 222.11 head-of-family exemption — see State Advantages below), levy bank accounts, and docket the judgment as a lien on real property under § 55.10. Setting aside a Florida default requires a Rule 1.540(b) motion showing excusable neglect, a meritorious defense, and due diligence — discretionary, often denied. Treat your effective deadline as Day 17 or Day 18, not Day 20.
Product preview
Answered starts with the Answer packet, then lets you upload papers for a deeper proof checklist, possible defense issues, and available self-help documents.
Build Answer PacketDeadline found
Florida: answer due soon
Plaintiff
Debt buyer
Documents
Answer + next filings
Case Plan
The court system
Florida runs three trial-level forums. Small claims (cases up to $8,000) is governed by the Florida Small Claims Rules at Rules 7.010-7.341, with simplified procedure built around a pretrial conference. County Court ($8,000.01 to $50,000) and Circuit Court (over $50,000) are both governed by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure with full motion practice and the same 20-day Answer deadline under Rule 1.140(a). Most credit-card debt-buyer cases fall in either small claims or County Court because typical portfolio amounts are under $50,000.
The pretrial conference in small claims is the single most important non-trial appearance in the case. Under Fla. Sm. Cl. R. 7.090, the court will encourage settlement, identify the genuine issues, and set a trial date. Defendants who fail to appear are subject to default judgment. Defendants who do appear can assert affirmative defenses orally and request discovery — though under Rule 7.020(b) some discovery devices (depositions, interrogatories) require leave of court in small claims. Requests for production and requests for admission are generally available without leave.
Filing fees vary by track. Small claims fees run roughly $55 to $80 depending on the amount in controversy. County Court fees run $185 to $300. Circuit Court fees run around $401. A pro se defendant who cannot afford the fee can file an Application for Determination of Civil Indigent Status and request a fee waiver or deferral. E-filing through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal at myflcourtaccess.com is mandatory for attorneys statewide; pro se defendants can register to e-file or, in most counties, file paper Answers at the clerk's office. Practice varies — check your local clerk's website.
Statute of limitations
Florida’s statute of limitations on debt is 5 years, codified at Fla. Stat. § 95.11(2)(b). The clock typically runs from: date of last payment.
If the time-bar has run, the debt may not be legally collectible in court — but you generally have to raise the defense yourself. It is not raised automatically.
Compare this entry with the national debt lawsuit deadline and statute-of-limitations table.
For the old-debt defense specifically, open the Florida statute-of-limitations hub entry.
Your rights
The one thing most people miss
Key fact
Florida's FCCPA (Fla. Stat. § 559.72) may support a fee-shifted counterclaim when the facts show a debt buyer filed a time-barred suit, sued without standing, or pursued collection conduct prohibited by the statute. Remedies under § 559.77 can include statutory damages, actual damages, attorney's fees, and, in appropriate cases, punitive damages.
The framework
Concise summaries below. Use these as issue-spotting prompts tied to your user-confirmed facts and court papers.
Statute of limitations — the 5-year / 4-year split
Fla. Stat. §§ 95.11(2)(b), 95.11(3)(j)
Florida runs two SOLs on consumer debt: five years on a written contract under § 95.11(2)(b), and four years on an account stated or open account under § 95.11(3)(j). When a debt buyer does not produce the original signed cardholder agreement, the four-year SOL may become an important issue to preserve and test. Plead both subsections in the alternative where appropriate and request the signed agreement in discovery. For the full Florida SOL deep-dive — § 95.11(2)(b)/(3)(j) split mechanic, accrual analysis, and major-issuer breakdown — see /blog/statute-of-limitations-credit-card-debt-florida.
Read the full breakdown →FCCPA counterclaim
Fla. Stat. §§ 559.72, 559.77
The Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act prohibits a debt collector from claiming, attempting, or threatening to enforce a debt when such person knows the debt is not legitimate (§ 559.72(9)). Filing without standing, after the SOL has expired, or without documents required by Rule 1.130(a) may support an argument that the collector asserted a right it knew or should have known did not exist. Remedies under § 559.77 can include statutory damages, actual damages, attorney's fees, and, in appropriate cases, punitive damages. A related FCCPA counterclaim may be compulsory depending on the claim and court; evaluate before filing.
Read the full breakdown →Rule 1.130(a), Pepper-Garron exhibits-control, and Calloway/WAMCO authentication
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.130(a); Harry Pepper & Associates, Inc. v. Lasseter, 247 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Glen Garron, LLC v. Buchwald, 210 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Jaffer v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 155 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); Bank of New York v. Calloway, 157 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); WAMCO XXVIII, Ltd. v. Integrated Electronic Environments, Inc., 903 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Yisrael v. State, 993 So. 2d 952 (Fla. 2008); Fla. Stat. § 90.803(6)
Two doctrinal layers can matter in Florida debt-buyer cases — a pleading-stage exhibits-control layer and an evidentiary-stage authentication layer that governs what gets admitted at summary judgment or trial. Both layers operate within the Florida foundation requirements set by Yisrael v. State, 993 So. 2d 952 (Fla. 2008) — the four-part business-records foundation test that applies statewide. Pleading layer. Rule 1.130(a) may require the plaintiff to attach the contract or account-active document being sued upon. Form 1.933 sets out attachment requirements for an account-stated claim. When attached exhibits contradict the allegations of the complaint, the exhibits may control under the Pepper-Garron rule. In a debt-buyer case, the attached bill of sale and account printouts may not establish what the complaint alleges, and Jaffer can require chain-of-assignment proof for the specific account, not just the portfolio. This can be an important pleading-stage issue to preserve and test. Authentication layer (honest framing). Florida appellate doctrine on prior-creditor records authentication is governed by Bank of New York v. Calloway, 157 So. 3d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015), which adopted what is known as the "rule of incorporation" — when a successor business integrates a prior business's records into its own and verifies their trustworthiness, the records can be authenticated as the successor's business records under Fla. Stat. § 90.803(6). The WAMCO/Calloway line includes WAMCO XXVIII, Ltd. v. Integrated Electronic Environments, Inc., 903 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Sas v. Federal Nat. Mortg. Ass'n, 165 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015); Channell v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., 173 So. 3d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015); and Nationstar Mortg. v. Berdecia, 169 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). This makes Florida's authentication doctrine more permissive than Pennsylvania's, where Commonwealth Financial Systems, Inc. v. Smith, 15 A.3d 492 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2011), explicitly REJECTED the rule of incorporation. Practical implication: Florida's foundation defense at the evidentiary stage is fact-intensive rather than doctrinal. Defendants must challenge the strength of the integration and verification evidence in the specific case (the affiant's personal knowledge, the custodial chain, the bills of sale, the account-level identification), not rely on a per-se admissibility limit. The Pepper-Garron-Jaffer attacks operate at the pleading stage WITHIN this broader Calloway framework — debt buyers can integrate prior-creditor records, but they still must address Rule 1.130(a), exhibits-control issues, and the Yisrael business-records foundation test for the original creditor's records.
Read the full breakdown →Federal FDCPA counterclaim
15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.
The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act can stack on top of the FCCPA because Florida permits cumulative remedy. False or misleading representations under § 1692e and unfair practices under § 1692f are common issues to evaluate in debt-buyer litigation. Statutory damages cap at $1,000 per case, and attorney-fee shifting may be available for successful claims under § 1692k(a)(3). Evaluate whether the claim is compulsory or permissive before deciding where and when to file.
Read the full breakdown →Why this state
Florida has several consumer-debt defense features worth reviewing, but each depends on the pleadings, documents, and court track. The 5-year / 4-year SOL split under § 95.11 can matter when the plaintiff does not produce the original signed cardholder agreement. Rule 1.130(a) plus the Pepper-Garron exhibits-control rule can create pleading-stage issues when attached exhibits do not match the complaint. The FCCPA at §§ 559.72 and 559.77 may provide statutory damages, actual damages, fees, and punitive damages where the required elements are proven. The § 222.11 head-of-family wage-garnishment exemption can also affect post-judgment collection economics. None of those issues guarantees dismissal or settlement, but together they give Florida defendants concrete issues to preserve and test.
Real case
I do not have a Florida case to cite as my own. The case I won pro se was Plaza Services LLC v. DiSalle, Eau Claire County Case No. 2025SC000885 — a Wisconsin Small Claims action, not a Florida case. The complaint was the standard debt-buyer template: a thin allegation of breach, a generic affidavit, a chain-of-title summary that named no original creditor with specificity, and a copy of a cardholder agreement attached as an exhibit. The cardholder agreement contained a binding arbitration clause naming the American Arbitration Association as the administering forum.
I filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration under Wisconsin's arbitration framework. The court granted the motion and the dispute moved to AAA administration. Under the AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules, the business that wants AAA to administer the arbitration must pay a business filing fee within a specific window. Plaza Services failed to pay the fee. The AAA closed the file for non-compliance. I returned to Eau Claire County and moved to dismiss for the plaintiff's failure to comply with the arbitration procedure they themselves had invoked. On April 9, 2026, Commissioner Johnson dismissed the case without prejudice.
This playbook may transfer to Florida when the cardholder agreement contains an enforceable arbitration clause and the court grants a motion to compel under Fla. Stat. § 682.03. The AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules are national, not state-specific, so business-fee compliance can matter in Florida too. The plaintiff may still litigate, pay required fees, settle, or pursue another procedural route depending on the facts and judge.
The honest framing: this is a transferable playbook with a Florida statutory hook, not a Florida outcome. The arbitration clause is not the win; the playbook around enforcing it is. Answered exists to compress that playbook into a product.
Plaza Services LLC v. DiSalle, Eau Claire County Case No. 2025SC000885 (Wis. Cir. Ct., dismissed without prejudice April 9, 2026).
Action plan
Days 1-2 — Read the summons line by line. Identify which court the case is in: small claims (under $8,000), County Court ($8,000.01-$50,000), or Circuit Court (over $50,000). Calendar your deadline — either 20 days from service under Rule 1.140(a) for County and Circuit cases, or the pretrial conference date for small claims. Add a third date 17 calendar days from service as a working filing target. Do not pay anything to anyone until you have read the complaint and any cardholder agreement attached.
Days 3-4 — Identify your defenses. Locate your last payment date on the alleged account. If more than 5 years ago, § 95.11(2)(b) is in play; if more than 4 years ago, the § 95.11(3)(j) account-stated SOL may be in play if the plaintiff does not produce the signed cardholder agreement. Look at the exhibits attached to the complaint: do they actually establish what the complaint alleges? If not, Pepper-Garron is an issue to review. Did the plaintiff send you a § 559.715 30-day notice of assignment before they began collecting? If not, that fact alone is no longer a defense under Brindise v. U.S. Bank (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) and its progeny across the 1st, 4th, and 5th DCAs — but it may support an FCCPA counterclaim under § 559.72/§ 559.77 if combined with other prohibited collection conduct.
Days 5-10 — Gather records. Pull all three credit reports at AnnualCreditReport.com and find the original creditor name on the tradeline. Compare to the plaintiff named on the complaint — they are often different in debt-buyer cases, and the gap may create a standing issue. Save every collection letter and call log. Build a timeline of last payment, charge-off, and debt-buyer first contact.
Days 11-17 — Draft the Answer. Components: (a) caption matching the complaint exactly; (b) admit-or-deny each numbered allegation, denying anything you cannot personally verify; (c) affirmative defenses (SOL under § 95.11(2)(b)/(3)(j) in the alternative; failure to comply with Rule 1.130(a); Pepper-Garron; Jaffer chain-of-title); (d) counterclaims — whether FCCPA claims under § 559.72 or FDCPA claims under 15 U.S.C. § 1692 arising from this collection are compulsory under Rule 1.170(a) is contested in Florida courts (federal FDCPA caselaw treats these as permissive; at least one Florida circuit court has applied the same rule to FCCPA claims). If you have the evidence ready, asserting the counterclaim now may be the safer move; if not, consult a Florida consumer-rights attorney before deciding.
Days 18-20 — File the Answer. Two options: (a) take the Answer to the clerk of court for the county where the case is pending and file in person — the clerk will date-stamp your copy and accept your filing fee or fee-waiver application; (b) register at myflcourtaccess.com and e-file. Mail or e-serve a copy on the plaintiff's attorney with a Certificate of Service. Answered does not mail-file Answers in Florida — you handle the filing yourself. File by Day 17 or 18, not Day 20.
A one-page guide to your rights, your deadline, and your first three steps — specific to Florida courts.
No spam. One email with your checklist, then occasional updates. Unsubscribe anytime.
Frequently asked questions
How long do I have to respond to a debt collection lawsuit in Florida?
You have 20 days from the date you were served to file your Answer in Florida Circuit Court under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(a). If you miss this deadline, the plaintiff can move for default judgment, allowing them to garnish up to 25% of your disposable income or levy your bank account.
What is the statute of limitations on credit card debt in Florida?
Florida's statute of limitations on written contracts and credit cards is 5 years under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(2)(b). The clock typically runs from the date of your last payment. If the debt is older than 5 years, the plaintiff may be time-barred — but this defense must be raised in your Answer.
Can I fight a debt buyer in Florida without a lawyer?
Yes. Florida Circuit Court, County Court, and small claims (up to $8,000) all allow self-represented defendants. File your Answer within 20 days of service under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(a). Florida Rule 1.130(a) may require debt buyers to attach the original contract or account document to the complaint; under Harry Pepper v. Lasseter, 247 So. 2d 736 (3d DCA 1971), attached exhibits may control where they conflict with the complaint text. The Florida FCCPA (Fla. Stat. § 559.72) may provide a fee-shifted counterclaim where the facts support it. Preserve supported chain-of-title and SOL issues in your Answer.
What defenses do I have against a debt buyer in Florida?
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.130(a) may require debt collectors to attach the original contract or account-active document to the complaint. Under Harry Pepper v. Lasseter, 247 So. 2d 736 (3d DCA 1971), if attached exhibits contradict the complaint's allegations, the exhibits may control. Under Jaffer v. Chase, 155 So. 3d 1199 (4th DCA 2015), chain-of-assignment proof for your specific account can be an issue to review.
What happens if I ignore a debt collection lawsuit in Florida?
If you do not respond within 20 days, the plaintiff can seek a default judgment. With a judgment, the plaintiff may be able to garnish wages or levy a bank account, subject to exemptions such as Florida's head-of-family protection.
Does Florida have any special protections for debt collection defendants?
Yes. Florida's Consumer Collection Practices Act (Fla. Stat. § 559.72) may provide a fee-shifted counterclaim where a debt buyer files a time-barred suit, sues without standing, or engages in prohibited collection conduct. Statutory damages and attorney's fees may be available under § 559.77. Even if the debt buyer later drops the case, you may still have a claim to evaluate.
Get started
Enter the case basics from your summons. Answered drafts your filing-formatted Answerfirst, then lets you upload papers later for deeper proof issue scanning.
Common plaintiffs
The most active debt buyers and original creditors suing Florida consumers right now. Each link goes to a state-specific defense guide for that plaintiff.
Cavalry SPV I, LLC
Cavalry Investments-affiliated debt buyer, Greenwich, CT. Subject to a 2015 CFPB consent order requiring approximately $92M in consumer relief plus a $10M civil money penalty for false statements in collection lawsuits and collecting on time-barred debts. That enforcement history can be useful context, but Florida defendants should focus first on the documents and conduct in their own case: SOL timing, standing, FCCPA issues, and proof of amount.
Portfolio Recovery Associates
PRA Group, Inc. (NASDAQ:PRAA), publicly-traded, headquartered in Norfolk, VA. Subject to a 2015 CFPB consent order ($19M consumer redress + $8M civil money penalty) and a 2023 follow-up action ($24M settlement). Those records can be useful context, but Florida defendants should focus first on account-level proof, Rule 1.130(a), chain-of-assignment issues, and SOL timing in their own case.
LVNV Funding LLC
Sherman Financial Group / Resurgent Capital Services — a major debt-buyer filing network in Florida. Multi-layer corporate structure (Sherman Originator III → Sherman Acquisition → Resurgent → LVNV) can create Florida Rule 1.130(a) and Jaffer v. Chase, 155 So. 3d 1199 (4th DCA 2015), chain-of-assignment issues to review. The 2022 CFPB consent order against Resurgent ($1M civil money penalty) can be useful context, but Florida defendants should focus first on the documents, transfer history, SOL timing, and collection conduct in their own case.
Midland Credit Management
Encore Capital Group (NASDAQ:ECPG), publicly-traded, headquartered in San Diego. The largest US debt buyer by acquisition volume. Files in Florida under both Midland Funding LLC (holder) and Midland Credit Management (servicer). Two layered regulatory records apply in Florida — one federal, one multistate (Florida participated in both). (1) Federal CFPB enforcement: CFPB v. Encore Capital Group (Sept. 9, 2015), In re Encore Capital Group, Inc., 2015-CFPB-0022 — $52 million total ($42M consumer refunds + $10M civil penalty + an order halting collection on more than $125M in debts), 5-year conduct duration. CFPB v. Encore Capital Group (entered Oct. 16, 2020), U.S. District Court Southern District of California Case No. 3:20-cv-01750 — $15 million civil penalty + $79,308.81 in consumer redress. CFPB findings: ~100 time-barred lawsuits and ~425,000 letters missing required time-barred-debt disclosures after the 2015 order was already in effect; 2015 conduct provisions extended an additional 5 years. Combined federal CFPB exposure: over $67 million in penalties for the kinds of practices that arise in Florida state-court cases. For the full federal CFPB record see /blog/cfpb-encore-midland-portfolio-recovery-enforcement. (2) 2018 multistate Encore/Midland $6 million settlement: Florida participated. Then-Florida AG Pam Bondi joined the 42-state coalition that signed the Assurance of Voluntary Compliance, stating the settlement "establishes further safeguards to protect future borrowers from bad collection practices, in addition to providing judgment relief to existing debtors." Up to $1,850 in judgment-balance credits are available to qualifying Florida consumers — eligibility requires (a) a judgment entered against you in a Florida court between January 1, 2003 and September 14, 2009, (b) you disputed the debt with Midland before the lawsuit was filed, and (c) you never made a payment on the disputed debt. The 2018 multistate also imposed required reforms to Midland's affidavit production and account-documentation practices. For the full multistate AVC framework see /blog/encore-midland-2018-multistate-settlement. The combined federal + multistate record documents the per-account assignment and affidavit gaps that Midland's Florida complaints still reflect — frequently attaching only a generic bill of sale without per-account assignment proof, creating a direct Rule 1.130(a) + Jaffer chain-of-title attack and supporting FCCPA § 559.72(9) counterclaims for filing on inadequately-supported debt.
Related reading
Start with the plaintiff-specific guides we have for people sued in Florida. Each link below goes to a state-specific defense guide for that plaintiff.
Written by John DiSalle · reviewed by a licensed Wisconsin attorney whose name is withheld at their request.
Free Florida paper scan
20 days to answer. Answer Packet first.
Self-help software, not a law firm.