Do I have change to win my case tomorrow? Here what I have

[bored7one4]

Court data tomorrow and I'm getting sued by Hunt & Henriques. So they are representing CITI bank but when I request for a BOP they send me statements that belongs to ATT universal card. It did show zero balance for the start but that ATT universal acct are not even on my credit report i just ran so I have no clue what acct im being sued for. on the statement it does not say citi bank anywhere.

Also on their Letter head it says LAW OFFICE of Hunt & Henriques but there a disclaimer at the bottom saying they are a debt collecting agency. I believe they are in violation of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15 USC 1692a Sec, 803 (6) DEFINITIONS, and is not licensed as such with the Secretary of State's Office in the State of CALIFORNIA, Were deceptive in their written communication to the Defendant by using a legal letterhead on a collection notice. Please refer to United States Courts of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, KISTNER v THE LW OFFICES OF MICHAEL P. MARGELEFSKY and Michael P Margelesky DOC 07-3134.9. Debt collectors do not have bona fide right to collect as the alleged debt has been claimed as a loss, charge-off, or an insurance policy has been claimed. Plaintiff should not be entitled to collect under volenti non fit injuria as plaintiff cause its own situation.



what you guys think?

[First Timer]

Originally Posted by bored7one4

Court data tomorrow and I'm getting sued by Hunt & Henriques. So they are representing CITI bank but when I request for a BOP they send me statements that belongs to ATT universal card. It did show zero balance for the start but that ATT universal acct are not even on my credit report i just ran so I have no clue what acct im being sued for. on the statement it does not say citi bank anywhere.

Also on their Letter head it says LAW OFFICE of Hunt & Henriques but there a disclaimer at the bottom saying they are a debt collecting agency. I believe they are in violation of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15 USC 1692a Sec, 803 (6) DEFINITIONS, and is not licensed as such with the Secretary of State's Office in the State of CALIFORNIA, Were deceptive in their written communication to the Defendant by using a legal letterhead on a collection notice. Please refer to United States Courts of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, KISTNER v THE LW OFFICES OF MICHAEL P. MARGELEFSKY and Michael P Margelesky DOC 07-3134.9. Debt collectors do not have bona fide right to collect as the alleged debt has been claimed as a loss, charge-off, or an insurance policy has been claimed. Plaintiff should not be entitled to collect under volenti non fit injuria as plaintiff cause its own situation.



what you guys think?

Have you filed an answer?

Is this a hearing? Motion for Summary Judgement? Actual trial?

You've got bigger problems right now than worrying whether they are required to be licensed if you have a court date tomorrow.

[usagi555]

Originally Posted by First Timer

Have you filed an answer?

Is this a hearing? Motion for Summary Judgement? Actual trial?

You've got bigger problems right now than worrying whether they are required to be licensed if you have a court date tomorrow.

THIS^^

Are they flying a witness in? Are they trying to slip all of the account statements in under the original affidavit? Are they trying to use an affidavit in lieu of testimony under CCP98?

[Coltfan1972]

Originally Posted by First Timer

You've got bigger problems right now than worrying whether they are required to be licensed if you have a court date tomorrow.

Exactly !! You can always go after them on the license issue, if there is even a private right of action. You need to worry about court and more info on what you're going to court for is needed.

[usagi555]

Originally Posted by Coltfan1972

Exactly !! You can always go after them on the license issue, if there is even a private right of action. You need to worry about court and more info on what you're going to court for is needed.

Yup. Win tomorrow, get on Webrecon later. Hell, get on Webrecon later even if you lose tomorrow. Recoup some of those costs.

[Seadragon]

If you haven't done pretrial preps you have to argue it orally.

Things that were lacking,

No bills of sale. This means they have no standing to sue. without them or a witness, or a declaration, they have no standing.

You say they have given some billing statements, but have not identified a witness to authenticate them. Or lay foundation for them.

The CA will question you " I don't recall " Is an appropriate thing to keep saying.

remember the first time you admit it you lose.

Cross examine any witness they bring with these questions;
cross examine the affiant What questions would you ask?

And I wish we had had more time to help you. The standing issue, the issues in this brief(make three copies file one with the clerk, give one to plaintiff, and use the trial brief as a guide.): change the info to your info and circumstances (plaintiff info, your info, If they didn't file a ccp98 then take out the declaration in leiu of live testimony stuff(leave the evidentiary objections for what they gave you). and be ready for them to drop the bills of sale and a witness on you and be a little prepared.

If this is just a hearing for case management disregard all that and send them a BOP then further discovery after that and pick a trial date less than 75 days from tomorrow.

If it is the Final status conference, then let the court know you are ready for trial with the exception of MIL.

get some coffee and prep a little. Get a three ring binder and hole punch and organize everything and make an index and tab pages.
any questions ask.
Sued by Midland Funding LLC California

[bored7one4]

Originally Posted by Seadragon

If you haven't done pretrial preps you have to argue it orally.

Things that were lacking,

No bills of sale. This means they have no standing to sue. without them or a witness, or a declaration, they have no standing.

You say they have given some billing statements, but have not identified a witness to authenticate them. Or lay foundation for them.

The CA will question you " I don't recall " Is an appropriate thing to keep saying.

remember the first time you admit it you lose.

Cross examine any witness they bring with these questions;
cross examine the affiant What questions would you ask?

And I wish we had had more time to help you. The standing issue, the issues in this brief(make three copies file one with the clerk, give one to plaintiff, and use the trial brief as a guide.): change the info to your info and circumstances (plaintiff info, your info, If they didn't file a ccp98 then take out the declaration in leiu of live testimony stuff(leave the evidentiary objections for what they gave you). and be ready for them to drop the bills of sale and a witness on you and be a little prepared.

If this is just a hearing for case management disregard all that and send them a BOP then further discovery after that and pick a trial date less than 75 days from tomorrow.

If it is the Final status conference, then let the court know you are ready for trial with the exception of MIL.

get some coffee and prep a little. Get a three ring binder and hole punch and organize everything and make an index and tab pages.
any questions ask.
Sued by Midland Funding LLC California

I did get a something from them saying they got a account manager from citi bank to prove those records are accurate. The address provide was within 150 miles. No bill of sales was ever presented.

[bored7one4]

Originally Posted by usagi555

THIS^^

Are they flying a witness in? Are they trying to slip all of the account statements in under the original affidavit? Are they trying to use an affidavit in lieu of testimony under CCP98?

I think thats what they are trying to do. I did get something from them stating they got some citi bank worker claiming they keep good records and it is accurate.

[1stStep]

You will have to subpoena that person to appear...use form SUPB-002 and have it served at the address indicated.

Chances are, that they will be unable to serve it - then move to have their CCP98 declaration precluded since they could not be served at the address given.

[legaleagle]

There is no bill of sale, this is not an assignment. Citibank issues all the ATT Universal credit cards. They are the OC.

they got some citi bank worker claiming they keep good records and it is accurate.


Man, I am so shocked I have to take a Tylenol and lay down. What would you expect them to say, that Citi keeps crap records and fakes statements? Wonder where THAT guy would be working after that.

[Seadragon]

I hope that the last minute preps at least payed some dividends.