UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) Use in Counterclaims, reasons for dismissal, discovery interrogations/requests

Community Self Defense Q&A › Category: General Comments › UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) Use in Counterclaims, reasons for dismissal, discovery interrogations/requests
Vote Up 0 Vote Down
Michael Mendez asked 15 hours ago

Hey everyone,

I am new to the community and excited to digest this wonderful information and interact with you all.

I was wondering if anyone has in the past has utilized UCC compliance in their answers, counterclaims, reasons for dismissal, discovery, etc.

I ran some information through ParkerGpt and it returned this (BELOW) which seems consistent with all my research and studying of the UCC, however, all the answers, counterclaims, and discovery documents that I have reviewed in the library thus far have NEVER mentioned UCC (not even once).

I know this is not legal advice, but I was wondering if it would be wise OR detrimental to include this UCC focused defenses/counterclaims in my legal documents or just argue on the basis of the other things that have more precedent in the library's collection.

THANK YOU Brian (for weighing in with your years of knowlede/experience) and anyone from the Killdebt Community that has any thoughts/input on this matter!

------------PARKER GPT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING UCC DEFENSES, COUNTERCLAIMS, and DISCOVERY---------------------------------------

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE - UCC ARTICLE 3 VIOLATIONS AND DISHONOR OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

Defendant tendered payment to Plaintiff in the form of a UCC Article 3 compliant negotiable instrument as a medium of discharge of the alleged debt. Said negotiable instrument was received by Plaintiff but was improperly ignored and/or dishonored without lawful cause or proper notice as required under UCC § 3-501 through § 3-505. Plaintiff's failure to accept the negotiable instrument or provide proper dishonor notice constitutes acceptance for value under UCC § 3-409 and discharges the underlying obligation pursuant to UCC § 3-602. Alternatively, Plaintiff's conduct constitutes accord and satisfaction under UCC § 3-311, fully discharging any alleged debt.

Additional Counterclaim to Add:

COUNT V - WRONGFUL DISHONOR OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

Defendant incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.
Defendant tendered a valid negotiable instrument to Plaintiff as payment and discharge of any alleged obligation.
Said negotiable instrument complied with all requirements of UCC Article 3 for negotiability.
Plaintiff received the negotiable instrument but failed to either: a. Accept and process the instrument as payment; or b. Provide proper notice of dishonor as required under UCC § 3-503
Under UCC § 3-409, Plaintiff's failure to properly dishonor the instrument with notice constitutes acceptance for value.
Under UCC § 3-602, acceptance of the negotiable instrument discharges the underlying obligation.
Alternatively, under UCC § 3-311, Plaintiff's conduct constitutes accord and satisfaction, fully discharging any debt.
Plaintiff's wrongful conduct has damaged Defendant and violated Florida's adoption of the UCC.
Defendant is entitled to damages for Plaintiff's wrongful dishonor and violation of UCC provisions.

Strategic Legal Analysis:

UCC Article 3 Protections

UCC § 3-602: "Payment or satisfaction of the obligation of a party to pay the instrument discharges the obligation to the extent of the payment or satisfaction"
UCC § 3-311: Provides for accord and satisfaction when a negotiable instrument is tendered
UCC § 3-503: Requires proper notice of dishonor

Brian Parker Staff replied 15 hours ago

Thank you for the kind words. I have passed them on to ParkerGPT. 🙂 I will admit to having little knowledge of the UCC for debt defense. It is useful for the Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA) and my video from May 22, 2025 on the FCBA and Truth in Lending Act (TILA) for any loan agreement and the rules of payments owed and interest to be charged given up front, very useful. If you have a debt related issue through a loan agreement or even possibly a foreclosure debt, it becomes more relevant. When I did a lot of warranty work (lemon law, Federal Magnusson Moss Act, Revocation), the UCC was important. It does not have it be your only choice is my advice. Why? Keep it simple stupid-KISS. If you know it like the back of your hand because it is very relevant to your case, then by all means, go all in. But don’t take it on if there are easier ways to explain your case that are closer to the bone and easier to understand. If it is directly relevant to your case, go all in and know it like you have to teach it to someone that does not know it as well because my friend, that is what you will have to do: Know it enough to teach it to your average judge who is lazy, busy or both.

Just the title “Secured Transactions” scared most law students away from the course and we just hoped to know enough to pass. I had, by far the wrong teacher in school. I got a C and I did not care. I learned all I know about the UCC from my years doing lemon law. But it is a rich field of protections through other statutes where you will strike gold. So mine that hill for UCC gold with the a pick axe of relevancy to the point of your presenting it. Why the UCC over anything else?

In writing this and because I continue to get questions on this area of law, I will master up the courage to do a whole video on it next week and hope I serve your needs. Stay tuned.