All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    How can you know this? This is incorrect. I have spoken with JAMS and read their rules. The rules are absolutely ambiguous. That is a fact. The representative I spoke with at jams was considerably less ambiguous. She was pretty certain costs and fees could be reallocated back to the consumer. I know you have your own version of this, but the fact that two people can have diametrically opposing interpretations of the same set of facts is, by definition, ambiguity. Also incorrect. I'm reading AAA rules that expressly state that costs and fees cannot be reallocated back to the consumer except in a case where a the arbitrator finds the consumer brought frivolous or harassing claims. (If the consumer never brings their own claims, no fees can be reallocated.) Yes, you said this already. Please do starting now.
  3. Subjective experiences are important in these fights because each case, court, judge, and state are different. What I have experienced has influenced my dealings with these cases and the actions taken have been positive for me. Had I followed a less 'personally biased' approach suggested by others here or elsewhere, I would not have been as successful as I have been. We must always balance the subjective and the objective. I am hardly backpedaling. You are making an assumption about JAMS based solely on two cases where fees have become an issue and you are doing the same about AAA because you think there are no issues. I am experiencing one now and it is confusing, and instead of detailing it and working through it here, I will wait and share it in another thread so it may be helpful to others and not distracting from this particular OP.
  4. Yesterday
  5. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    Of course, but I'm not speculating based on a single personal experience. I'm amalgamating dozens of reports of nearly identical experiences. None of which are my own, by the way, so that rules out personal bias as a factor. This is appreciated because it's confusing that you now seem to be backpedaling on your earlier implication that they aren't following the fee structure rules and/or colluding with JDBs.
  6. fisthardcheese

    In arbitration

    The only thing I would do aside from waiting is to send a settlement offer to the OC.
  7. Oh, I didn’t mean you had to look at the articles. I was addressing your question about the attorney. The articles are just extra information about the FDCPA and information about how to determine if an account has been sold to a debt buyer.
  8. Ihatelawsuits

    Received Motion for Summary Judgment

    Thank you, I will look at these articles.
  9. Since you’re representing yourself, you’re acting as your own attorney. Attorneys contact each other. Do you have his email address? Perhaps you could send him an email and tell him that you prefer to communicate via email.
  10. Possibly but it is really just speculation on both of our parts. This is true about mediation. I only had to attend one and I simply told the opposing counsel that I had filed an MTC arbitration and that this was not the proper venue to resolve our dispute. He pushed a little but then it was over. Prior to our first court appearance, we worked out a settlement. This is not about them not following their own rules. Once I have a better sense of what is going on, I will start a topic for discussion. I don't want to take this OP off-topic.
  11. Ihatelawsuits

    Received Motion for Summary Judgment

    The opposing attorney left me a message to call him today, should I ignore it? I really don't want to talk to this guy. I haven't heard anything after filing my response from the court yet.
  12. Harry Seaward

    Received Motion for Summary Judgment

    Oh, so you never signed anything in wet ink? If that's the case, the same principal would apply as with a credit card. Your "i agree" digital signature is sufficient.
  13. Ihatelawsuits

    Received Motion for Summary Judgment

    It was for an loan that was online.
  14. tvaughn

    In arbitration

    So would you guys recommend leaving this alone for now or should I reach out to the arb org to check on the status? I know everyone said that the longer it takes the better it is for me, but I want to make sure I'm doing the right thing by waiting.
  15. usctrojanalum

    Sued by Cavalry SPV I, LLC

    If you are sued in Supreme Court - motion to compel arb is expensive - $140. If you are being sued in the district court, it's free. I don't know if that changes your thoughts on how to attack this. I don't think you need arb to beat them. A law firm I interned at 2 years ago beat two JDB's without using the arbitration technique, just keep pressing the other side in discovery for documents and witnesses that the JDB could not provide.
  16. Yes, You are permitted to use efiling. You have to make an account with NYSCEF. By using efiling system, you can just scan and upload your files and it is considered served. No need for affidavits of service or having other people mail your documents. And you do not need to go to the courthouse.
  17. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    Did you ever have a debt collection case with that judge without a MTC? What I was saying is that there are certain JP that always use meditation in debt collection cases, and sometimes those same judges will never rule on anything in the consumer's favor. The fact you used a MTC there is likely irrelevant to the fact that you would have ended up in mediation or with a judgment against you regardless of any actions you took. Just to be clear for the sake of @antonz, court ordered mediation doesn't mean you have to make a deal with the JDB. It's merely an attempt to get the parties to speak to each other to try to work out a settlement. The parties can walk in knowing they won't settle, and spend 20 minutes talking about football, for all the court cares. You go back to court and tell the judge you couldn't reach a deal. Sometimes the judges will try to give a guilt trip, but the message there is the judge really wants nothing to do with hearing the case and should be delighted to move the case to an alternate dispute resolution method, such as private arbitration. The AAA rules couldn't be clearer on this issue, so if they aren't following their own rules and demonstrating a bias toward the other party, you need to have that issue addressed immediately.
  18. I have had a half a dozen cases now in three different Justice Courts. Out of the three, the one that is on auto-pilot and schedules mediation immediately upon acceptance of the Answer and my MTC, my MTC's were denied. Thankfully, I was already in settlement discussions with the JDB since I had opened cases with AAA and JAMS so I was not forced to appeal. Perhaps it is just coincidence but it was certain enough for me in my own experience that I now request a Change of Judge for Right when a case appears in that Court. I suspect that the logical link is that some of these courts are not presided by judges but rather by Justices of the Peace with minimal legal training and the clerks are on auto-pilot when it comes to dealing with the slew of debt lawsuits that come through in any given month. AAA is not always an option depending upon the CMA. If there is an option, then yes, go with AAA first. But even then there can be some gotcha's depending upon the JDB and their relationship with AAA. I am experiencing one such issue right now with a case.
  19. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    Not to say it's never happened that a court pushed mediation and then denied arbitration, but I can't think of a logical link between the two, and would chalk it up to a coincidence more than anything.
  20. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    But still no official outcome at this point? I'd not roll the dice if it were my own case. Especially when the alternative is bulletproof.
  21. This (as was your last response) is a response to what I said about how they stay in business. Why didn't you respond to what I said about them proving they own the debt? What does it say that you did the same, but instead of using my actual words, you made up your own version of what you think I would have said in some alternate universe? I misunderstood. My bad.
  22. I took personal responsibility for my circumstance and didn't blame my creditors. We've had this debate - I never said I'm a nice guy, but I own the consequences of my actions. If I hadn't beaten them it would be worse, but I'd still own it.
  23. Goody_Ouchless

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    Is there evidence of this? I never sought Arb, but in courts where there was "mediation," it was early in the process and treated like a formality.
  24. OK, so if our lack of "personal responsibility" is so confounding to you then where did yours go? If you practice what you preach then you would have applied that check towards paying off your credit cards. All lenders of course are not evil but the excessive greed of a good share of them is what caused the economic meltdown. The "victims" had a lot cleaner shirts than they did as it is doubtful that they felt like they were participants in the scam. When they were approved it was just happiness and glee to finally be able to qualify for a home loan. In my opinion I did but let me rephrase it then... JDB's do not stay in business by proving they own debts, rather they stay in business due to the default judgments of the more than 95% of their lawsuits that go unanswered. I shouldn't even answer this as you know exactly what I am talking about but maybe other dear readers do not so here goes... You use a few of my own words and then formulate your reply to make it appear that I said something completely different. You did it at least twice in this very thread and you have done it virtually every time that you barged into Texas threads to spread your pessimism and misery in the last couple of years. I have been on to your ways for too long and as I said in a recent thread how pathetic it is that you have to resort to such deceptive schemes in order to win a debate. All it results in is throwing a thread so much farther off than the debate itself already has thrown it off when I am forced to explain again and again what I had actually said. For example, when I said that you always try to intimidate Texans from listening to anything I have to say and I jumped to your challenge to look up the definition in a dictionary. You came back with, "When did you ever feel afraid? And you dish it right back so you can't say you are in a weaker position either" so anyone reading it would see it as I had accused you of trying to intimidate me as opposed to what I actually said and that I felt afraid of you which is pure malarchy. Now may the unquestionably true guilty party to "make stuff up out of whole cloth" please step forward...
  25. I always put down that I am disputing the alleged debt in a Justice Court case and state that a formal complaint will be forthcoming when the arbitration gets under way. That has been fine with both venues in my experience so yeah, we are in sync there. I agree. Though I have seen that some changes are occurring recently with AAA that I may detail in a new thread. Recent communications from JAMS in another case of mine suggests that they are not as ambiguous as suspected.
  26. Harry Seaward

    Arbitration Question in AZ regarding lawsuit by PRA

    I have no objection to filing/initiating arbitration at this point, but I strongly caution against alleging claims of your own (see below). When the form or whatever asks what your claims are, just say you want to arbitrate PRA's claims against you. Also, I would go with AAA. Their rules are crystal clear that, as long as you don't bring your own claims, you can never be hit with any costs or fees beyond the initial $200 filing fee. JAMS rules are, at best, ambiguous on the subject.
  27. "Right to Cure" might be a state thing but not a federal thing. I do know that technically a creditor can sue you the day after you default. Most don't because it would most likely raise the ire of the judiciary and possibly the legislature. That said, most JDBs probably send dunning letters mainly as a CYA method. If no response after 30 days, they can sue. If there is a response, they can get their evidence together, send their counter-response, and then sue. There is really no gain or loss by sending out the dunning letter. Most of my point is still valid though that actions to thwart JDBs that are suing you that worked 10 years ago might not work today (or might only work in certain locations today). The legal system is very fluid and will change as needs and wants from it change.
  1. Load more activity