Leaderboard

If a pro se litigant brings an FDCPA claim in court, reasonable expenses can be added to the claim in addition to the claim for statutory damages. So while you can't get attorney fees, you can add the costs of pursuit of the claim as part of your damages. @Dan001Please post updates when you have them!

Also, the business debts are not eligible for the reduced arbitration rates so you might want to be careful with those (or aggressively settle those first).

For Synchrony, either settle or wait until they sue you. They have a great arbitration clause and even if the Magistrate Court does not accept it, you simply appeal to the State or Superior Court who will know about it. As for Citibank, that depends on if the amounts due are low enough to be in Magistrates Court. If they are, then you might need to consider a preemptive strike with arbitration. If not, then wait for those to be filed too.

Did the court order arbitration? If so, write up a motion for sanctions against the plaintiff for violating the court order to arbitrate. Include the evidence from JAMS. Include a proposed order for the judge to sign to dismiss the case with prejudice. Print out at least 3 copies. Save a copy for yourself, file a copy with the court, and mail a copy to the opposing attorney CMRRR.

I may be missing something, but I haven't seen an actual FDCPA violation here. Suing for less than the amount owed isn't an FDCPA violation, as far as I can tell. That being said, if you offered a mutual dismissal, and they countered with you paying them, you appear to be at an impass. The most likely things that can happen are: 1. They never pay the fees, the case is dismissed from arbitration. You win. 2. They pay the arbitration fees, and continue with the case. Before the hearing is scheduled, they will get a bill. You make your offer to them again. They accept,

I wanted to give a update. I went today after posting and filed the motion. I also talked to the state clerk even though she told she isn't a lawyer she has since people do motions like this. In fact she said I should now just give a answer saying I filed a motion to the compliant. Anyways I just need a little more time so I can negotiate with these people and come up with a plan they would agree upon and also doesn't kill me financially.

Depending upon how one’s courts have ruled in light of Henson v. Santander, , an entity that is still subject to the FDCPA cannot file a lawsuit after receiving a timely DV request until the debt is validated. Filing a lawsuit before validating would be considered continued collection activity.

I have been trained as a software test engineer and trust me, the statement "To error is human, to really screw things up requires a computer!" is still very true to this day. Computers can mess all sorts of things up. True, it is less likely but the likelihood is not 0. Also, when you send a DV letter, the letter must be initially handled by a human who has to then put it into the system. All sorts of errors can happen in that process. So to say it will never happen is not true. I do agree however with the big players, it is less likely to happen. As for the small Buffalo NY style players, tr

The violations with validation letter are much fewer, this is true. However, I am a big proponent of using every consumer right you have to help achieve the best outcome you can get. Yes, it is a low bar, but it is still a bar. People can accidentally trip over a bar even when they know it is there. If the law allows me to dispute and forces the collector to stop collecting until they validate, why would you not use that? There are potential violations where they might still call you before responding to your dispute letter. They may (and we have seen recently, even) sue you without respo

Requesting validation can buy time for a consumer. If a consumer requests validation before a lawsuit has been filed by a JDB, it cannot file suit until it validates the debt. In addition, you have the possibility of violations that would provide a counterclaim if a lawsuit is filed.

Considering the low bar for validation (every collection letter I have ever received already contains complete validation information), I recommend not bothering. Literally the only thing requesting validation does is tell them that they found the debtor they are seeking. Think about it - how many people do you meet in a typical day that have a clue what any of this means? Far and away, the most likely person to request debt validation is someone who got a letter for a debt they know they defaulted on and came to a site like this for answers. As a debt buyer , I'd immediately prioritize e