Forums

So I checked the court docket for the date of my case and noticed three others listed for the same time.  2 of which also list PRA as the plaintiff.  I'm wondering if this could be a hearing regarding my motion for discovery.  Any opinions?

I am in a position now where I can comfortably work on my credit repair and have been for almost a year.   The last items on my list are the 3 collections on my CR. I can manage full payment of 2 accounts now, but would like to approach this in the most efficient manner if I can reduce the payment and MOST importantly remove them from my credit reports but I am unsure if I should be contacting all 3 agencies now or focus my efforts on 1 at a time.  DIVERSIFIED CONSULTNTS (not original collector) -  For Sprint cell contract  $687  9-10 years since contract.  Report date Dec 17, 2018 MEADE & ASSOC (original collector) - For medical treatment $660  5-6 years since treatment.  Report date Jun 10, 2014 RECOVERY ONE LLC (not sure if original collector) - For Music Store  $654  approx. 8-9 years since contract.  Report date Dec 09, 2014 I used to receive voice mails up until about 2-3 years ago about these debts but was paranoid and never called or verified any information with the collectors.  Now I never hear from a collector. With what information I have provided can anyone offer advice on what order I should do this, and what steps make sense for each of these accounts?   I assume that some are easier to work with than others. Thanks in advance for your helpful comments.  

Oh i got scammed? Dang. I know they get a cut. They did good for me besides on this huge debt with circle back lending who sold it to m&j.   The contract is for $430 a month until fully paid off. However ndr and i have tried to settle a couple times with m&j and m&j kept settlement out of my reach.   However this time i asked cuz i have some money and ndr said we cant but then told me call tomorrow.

This was from a template I got from a texas website, but the defenses were auto applied and I added the last one and the two others that stated I don't have a paypal card and asking for the original contracts I just changed the name for everything to midland funding. Every video I've watched from every lawyer on YouTube said ask for verification they own the debt with bill of sale, statements from beginning to end to make sure the debt amount is correct, and the original contract. I haven't filed this answer yet so I can re-write it that's why I asked what should I take out and what should I add because I don't know what I am doing.  I've had a paypal credit account, but never had a card bearing the name paypal. 

MOST of these are not affirmative defenses.  In fact they openly communicate to Midland and the court you have no clue what you are doing. First:  the court doesn't care you don't know who Midland is. They do not have to prove they own the debt or attach any evidence to the summons in Texas JP court.  They can wait until the day of court to produce this evidence.  JP court requires you get permission from the court to do discovery.  So, if you want to see what proof they have you need to start there. The courts in every state know there is no signed contract in a credit card debt case.  Pointless to claim this. If you have never had a PayPal account or credit card why have you not raised the affirmative defense of identity theft?  Have you had an issue with ID theft? They do not need every statement on the account or to show any charges.  You have only 6 months to dispute a charge as fraudulent.  Once that time passes the charges are valid and you are stuck with them.  The last 6 months of an account after default is when the account is closed until charge off.  There would be no new charges in that time frame.   Both Comenity and Synchrony have arbitration clauses.  You could amend your answer to invoke an affirmative defense of private contractual arbitration.  You may have a slight battle getting it approved because Texas does have it on the books that engaging in the litigation process waives your right to arbitration.  You would need to effectively argue that answering and amending and filing the MTC does not waive that right.