Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/04/2019 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    So a few years ago I got into some financial trouble. I found this site, and it helped me immensely. I won 3 court cases, I sued Gold's Gym for collection violations, and I have been cleaning up my credit. I was at an all time low of 430. I protested every negative on all 3 credit reports. some things were removed, some were not. Some I had to wait until they dropped off after 7 years. But, last week I decided to refinance my house. I thought my score was pretty good now, so thought I'd get a decent % rate. eh, todays market, it was 4.2, but still better than the 5.6 I've been stuck with for 10 years. My credit score came back at 840! Pretty much cart blanch if your trying to get credit. I do have a couple of credit cards, with like 15k limits, but I won't go down that road again. If I have a major purchase I won't use it unless I have a plan to pay it off in a month or 2. I carry a low balance on my main card so it reflects well with payments, etc without getting socked for huge interest. Just wanted to revisit, and let others know this site is a wealth of info if your willing to invest the time. Thanks to all those that contribute! Oh my new house payment is 350.00 less per month, and will be paid off 2 years earlier. So even though I didn't get the low rates of a few years ago, it was still worth it.
  2. 1 point
    Welcome back, Shellie! We’ve missed you! 😀
  3. 1 point
    @fisthardcheese @Around The Fur Arkel Constructors v. Duplantier & Meric, 965 So. 2d 455 - La: Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit 2007 "Cases decided prior to the aforementioned amendment to LSA-C.C.P. art. 2083 consistently held that rulings denying a motion to compel arbitration were immediately appealable. In Collins v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 99-1423, p. 6 (La.1/19/00), 752 So.2d 825, 829, our supreme court held that an order compellingarbitration was not appealable. However, the court specifically noted in that opinion that Section 16 of the Federal Arbitration Act directs that orders denying arbitration would be immediately appealable. The supreme court reiterated that holding in Aguillard v. Auction Management Corp., 04-2804, 04-2857, p. 5 n. 5 (La.6/29/05), 908 So.2d 1, 6 n. 5: "A judgment denying a request for arbitration has been held to be an appealable, interlocutory order." (Emphasis added.) See also Shroyer v. Foster, 01-0385, p. 3 n. 4 (La.App. 1st Cir.3/28/02), 814 So.2d 83, 86 n. 4, citing Collins, 99-1423 at p. 8, 752 So.2d at 830, and Stadtlander v. Ryan's Family Steakhouses, Inc.,34,384, pp. 2-3 (La.App. 2nd Cir.4/4/01), 794 So.2d 881, 884-885, writ denied, 01-1327 (La.6/22/01), 794 So.2d 790. These cases were based on the implicit reasoning that to deny an immediate appeal of a motion denying arbitration would cause irreparable harm to the party asserting its contractual right to arbitration. With the omission of this language 459*459 in the amended version of LSA-C.C.P. art.2083, an immediate appeal of an interlocutory ruling must be specifically provided by law. In the absence of legislation expressly authorizing an appeal of an interlocutory judgment, a party must now seek review under the appellate court's supervisory jurisdiction. LSA-C.C.P. art. 2083, Comments-2005 (a)(b)." In a decision rendered by this court after the effective date of the amendment to LSA-C.C.P. art.2083, we again reiterated and applied the holding in Aguillard, that a judgment denying a request for arbitration is an appealable, interlocutory order, without any mention of the amendment to LSA-C.C.P. art. 2083. Johnson v. Blue Haven Pools of Louisiana, Inc., 05-0197, p. 4 n. 1 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/10/06), 928 So.2d 594, 596 n. 1. In our most recent decision concerning an appeal of the denial of a motion to compel arbitration, this court merely addressed the merits of the issues before it, without mentioning the interlocutory nature of the judgment before it, nor addressing the issue of appealability. Lafleur v. The Law Offices of Anthony G. Buzbee, P.C., 06-0466 (La. App. 1st Cir.3/23/07), 960 So.2d 105. However, in Wooley v. Amcare Health Plans of Louisiana, Inc., 05-2025, p. 10 (La.App. 1st Cir.10/25/06), 944 So.2d 668, 674, we held that Act 205, which amended LSA-C.C.P. art. 2083, was procedural and should be applied retroactively. It appears clear that the amendment to LSA-C.C.P. art. 2083 now prohibits an immediate appeal from a motion denying a request for arbitration, despite any contrary indications in the jurisprudence. Aguillard v. Auction Management Corp., 908 So. 2d 1 - La: Supreme Court 2005 "Motion to Stay Pending Arbitration "According to [La.Rev.Stat. § 9:]4202, a court shall stay the trial of an action in order for arbitration to proceed if any party applies for such a stay and shows (1) that there is a written arbitration agreement and (2) the issue is referable to arbitration under that arbitration agreement, as long as the applicant is not in default in proceeding with arbitration." International River Center v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 02-3060, p. 3 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 139, 141. In this case, unquestionably a written arbitration agreement does exist, and because the issue in this case arises from and is related to the Auction Terms & Conditions and its breach, the issue is referable to arbitration. Moreover, the record establishes the defendants are not in default in proceeding with arbitration.[16] Therefore, we reverse the court of appeal and stay the present district court proceedings pending arbitration in accordance with Section 4202."
  4. 1 point
    In Ohio they can't get attorney fees for consumer debt. They already incurred the filing fee with the court. If you don't file an answer, they will get a default judgment. Don't be surprised, if you reach out to them to settle, they string it out after the 28 days you have to answer, perhaps implying you don't need to answer since you are working with them, and they get a default judgment. I would file the answer. You can always settle after you answer. The courts encourage settlements between the parties, so both parties will be encouraged to reach a settlement by the court at your first pretrial conference. I would fight them, hard. The plaintiff is a JDB. They want easy prey for defendants. They make their money on the 95%+ default judgment rate. If you fight them hard, they might decide it isn't worth it and dismiss the case. I used this strategy with an OC in Ohio, and it worked. Yes, that was almost 10 years ago, and there are some here who will say times have changed and that strategy doesn't work anymore. Maybe it does in some areas, maybe not in others. There are some judges out there who hate JDBs. You never know what will happen. I don't see any downside to fighting them. Remember, you can always settle at a later date.
  5. 1 point
    In light of the events that have transpired in your case, and the fact that you have done nothing to keep the arbitration ball in play , I doubt an appellate court would agree that they violated the agreement if they were to return to court in order to collect this debt.
  6. 1 point
    As BV80 pointed out, this only applies to cases filed by the business in debt collection cases. Several years ago, arbitration companies got in a lot of trouble for being in cahoots with credit card companies. This is the "public discourse and evaluation" they are talking about. As part of their 'reform', they voluntarily established a policy to reject debt collection cases filed by the businesses. You can file the case yourself and they will absolutely accept it. Just curious: what's your objective with taking Citi to arbitration, if you don't mind answering?