If the court case has resulted in a judgment, then it is too late. Our Liberty system only works prior to judgment, unless you have the readiness and willingness to counter sue. If you are able and willing to sue them and handle the litigation, then fine . . . you can use the Liberty documents as the centerpiece of the suit and you could win. But be aware that we do not assist with litigation. We are not lawyers, we don't give legal advice, and we don't get involved in assisting with lawsuits.

However, if they have sued you but it has not concluded yet, then you could use the Liberty documents by sending them to your opposing counsel. Usually in the past, when customers have sent the Liberty documents to the lawyers representing their opponents, the pretender lenders, the cases got dismissed. There is no guarantee that would happen in your case, but that is what happened to other customers.

If you present the documents and they don't dismiss, then you could still win, but you would need to use court procedure to force them to answer what is in the Liberty documents. If you present the documents and they don't dismiss, then what they are planning to do is AVOID having to answer the dispute letter in the Liberty documents. They can't win against what is in the dispute letter and affidavit, so the only way they can win is through procedural tricks, which allow them to rush it through to judgment without having to address the Liberty documents content.

Therefore to win, you will have to utilize some kind of court procedure that forces your opponents to answer the Liberty documents. There are procedures to do that.

You are not likely to get this kind of assistance by hiring an attorney. Most attorneys are afraid of going up against the banks. They are afraid of losing their licenses.

If you don't force the opposing counsel representing your credit card issuer opponent to answer what is in the dispute letter and affidavit, then they WILL push it through to judgment against you, WHOEVER the judge is. It's as simple as that.

What would work is to counter sue. You are much more likely to win by going on the offensive than by being on the defensive. One suggestion would be to go to https://howtowinincourt.com, for how to win. They provide the Jurisdictionary, which has a golden record of high success rates in winning.

If you need an attorney, one way to get one inexpensively is by joining Legal Shield. They charge $20 a month as a legal insurance premium and then you have huge amounts of legal attorney hours. For $20 a month, they'll give you first class attorney services. You can sign up at http://www.sumeru5.legalshieldassociate.com

If you use an attorney, though, you would need to get a contract with them in which they GUARANTEE you they will ONLY use the content of Liberty documents; they will NOT detour off into ANY other arguments, and they WILL force the opposing counsel to ANSWER what is in the Liberty documents. If you don't get that kind of guarantee in a signed contract, then BEWARE -- the chances are 99% to 100% that they will sell you down the river and you will lose.

The Liberty documents would pose a serious challenge to the law firm to prove that the underlying debt was valid, and it isn't, so they would be stuck; but they're also clever enough to get around it and somehow try to enforce the contract they have with you. That's where we don't specialize. We don't specialize in litigation or dealing with lawyers.

You might be more effective by counter suing the law firm. Those who go on the offense are generally far more frequently the victors than those who are on the defense. You would sue the law firm that represents your pretender lender opponent, challenging them to fulfill the requirements of the dispute letter and sign the affidavit that comes with it, which guarantees under penalty of perjury that the debt is authentic and valid. If they can't do that, then you have no further obligation to continue the payments.

They won't be able to do it, any more than any of the banks and lending institutions have. Not a single one of them in the years we've been doing this since 2002 have been able to answer what is in our dispute letter. Nor have any of them signed the affidavit, which they should GLADLY be willing to do if the debt were really valid and legal.

But if you do this, you would have to be absolutely firm that you will not allow whatever attorney YOU use to present ANY other argument. You can use attorneys --- just not "as" attorneys. Hiring them to "represent" you gives them a General Power of Attorney and they can then mis-represent you and sell you out if they want to, and that is frankly what the court ---- their real employer ---- often demands them to do. The way you get around this is by hiring them under a LIMITED Power of Attorney specifying exactly what they can and cannot do and what issue they may address under an "agency" contract. You hire them to act as your agent, a private arrangement, not as your attorney, which is a public arrangement.

There could not really be any template that would address your situation, as you would have to customize it to fit your case. The main thing is to specify that they're only acting as your agent, a private arrangement, and not as your attorney representing you.

Likewise, you would want to REQUIRE that they sign in that Limited Power of Attorney that they will ONLY use the argument in the Liberty documents, and no other. If you allow them to deviate and use ANY other argument, you will lose. You will ONLY win if they are strictly limited to ONLY the argument in the Liberty documents.

As to whether they would charge additional discounted fees, over and above the $20 per month Legal Shield premium, that would be determined after a consultation or two would identify specifically how many lawyer hours you need, etc. The best thing would be to join, pay the first month's $20, and then you could ask all kinds of member-only questions. The benefits far outweigh the cost, and you can quit at any time -- there is no obligation beyond one month. It's on a month-to-month basis.