The robo-signed affidavit: why one page is not proof

Open the attachments to almost any debt buyer complaint and you will find a one-page sworn statement. An employee of the plaintiff declares that they are familiar with the company's records, that the records show you owe a specific amount, and that the account was purchased from a named bank.

That page is doing an enormous amount of work. It is meant to establish the existence of the account, the accuracy of the balance, and the transfer of ownership, all at once, without any witness from the bank.

Why the affidavit is hearsay

Records created outside of court, offered to prove what they say, are hearsay. There is a well-established exception for business records, but the exception has requirements: the record must have been made at or near the time by someone with knowledge, kept in the ordinary course of a regularly conducted activity, and it must be introduced by a custodian or qualified witness who can speak to how it was created.

The problem is the mismatch. The affiant works for the plaintiff. The records that matter were created by the bank. The affiant did not open the account, did not generate the statements, did not compute the interest, and typically has no knowledge of the bank's data entry practices.

Many courts allow a party to lay a foundation for records it received from another business if it integrated them and relies on them, but that requires actual testimony about the integration and verification process, not a form paragraph.

What to look for in the affidavit itself

• Does it identify the specific records reviewed, or just say "business records"?
• Does it explain how the affiant knows the bank's records are accurate, or only that the plaintiff received them?
• Does it break down the balance, or state a single number?
• Is it signed and notarized in the same state on the same day, or does the notary block look mass-produced?
• Does it attach the records it describes, or reference them without providing them?
• How many similar affidavits does this signer execute? Volume signing has been the subject of regulatory action.

How to challenge it

In your Answer, plead that the plaintiff's evidence consists of inadmissible hearsay and that the affiant lacks personal knowledge. Then use discovery:

• Interrogatories asking the affiant's job title, duties, training, and the number of affidavits executed in the past year
• Requests for production of every document the affiant reviewed
• Requests for admission that the affiant did not create the original account records and was not employed by the original creditor
• A request for the records certification, if any, from the original creditor

If the case reaches a hearing, an objection to admissibility is the moment where the paperwork gap becomes visible. A plaintiff that cannot get its records into evidence cannot prove its balance.

Keep it factual

Challenging an affidavit is not an accusation that anyone lied. It is a statement that the document does not meet the standard for admitting business records, and that the burden of proof belongs to the party who filed the case.