Clydesmom

Members
  • Content Count

    5,343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    91

Clydesmom last won the day on February 7

Clydesmom had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,090 Excellent

About Clydesmom

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Nevada via Michigan via Georgia

Recent Profile Visitors

4,122 profile views
  1. Clydesmom

    Medical bill not mine

    I understand your frustration but even the FDCPA allows for bona fide error. If you are certain your daughter did not accidentally or intentionally list you as a guarantor then first check and see where the error happened. If she got care there as a minor under your care in the past it is very easy for a computerized system to assume that is still the case. Unfortunately many are not set up to note the date of birth and when a minor is no longer a dependent. I have to quote a mentor of mine: never attribute to malevolence what can be explained by stupidity. 😀
  2. Clydesmom

    Being Sued in Texas by Portfolio Recovery

    Let me guess: you made a more than valid point and stated what your religious belief is in doing so? Told ya he is a religious bigot. At least we now know it is universal and directed at everyone who disagrees.
  3. Clydesmom

    Medical bill not mine

    No. The computer billing system most likely linked her via the database based on past accounts. No. No. Send a letter certified mail return receipt to the hospital billing department. Specifically state that she is not a minor nor is she covered by your insurance plan. You are not legally responsible for her bills. Enclose a current address for her on where to contact her for the debt if you know it. Call back 7-10 days after you get the green card back and verify they have updated the account information to reflect the bill is not yours to pay. If it lands on your credit reports after that letter do not contact them again just sue them.
  4. Clydesmom

    Credit repair/dispute

    There is no magic method to remove accurate information. You have already disputed once too. The bureaus are not required to keep investigating absent some compelling new information. If you manage your debt your score will improve. Based on your other threads you have bigger problems than your credit score with at least one lawsuit under way and potentially others to follow. Sending in frivolous disputes now could escalate the speed at which they file their own lawsuits.
  5. Once the suit is filed with the court the SOL is tolled until a verdict is entered rendering the SOL moot or the case is dismissed. If the case is dismissed without a verdict then the SOL continues to run as if it had never been filed.
  6. Clydesmom

    Being Sued in Texas by Portfolio Recovery

    Well we all know who that refers to. I do not even have to unblock the poster to know a thread that should be one page and has turned to 4 to know yet another hijack has happened for their own warped delusional agenda and ego. By my account that makes at least a half dozen or more threads where the OP gets lost in the process due to offhisrocker's ego laced ramblings. What a shame.
  7. Clydesmom

    Amex: Best opportunity to settle?

    Not really helpful to keep starting new threads asking the same questions we have already answered for you. BUT here we go again. There are few opportunities to settle with AMEX and they play their cards close to their chest. We have seen cases where they flat out refused to settle. Problem with your theory is it isn't popular wisdom it is straight up fact based on past results. Your theory won't hold up because AMEX knows the SOL in CT is 20 years on the judgment they will get after confirming their arbitration award. They also know that at some point in the next 20 years you will want or NEED new credit and have to deal with them. They can put a lien on your house preventing sale until they get paid. Not to mention post judgment interest. I put the odds on that happening at zero. Settling now for a fraction of the debt is based on having a lump sum payment. If they agree to payments they will want a consent judgment so they do not have to sue you if you default again and a higher amount if not the full amount. You are looking for a result that just is not likely to happen.
  8. You and/or the court. You engage in discovery and demand the proof. In some cases before the Defendant can do that the Judge does it for them telling the Plaintiff what evidence they must have to prove their case. You are defending yourself pro-se. It is expected that the other side may need or want to communicate with you regarding the discovery, depositions, court dates, and settlement talks to name a few reasons. If you had a lawyer they would communicate directly with him/her. This is something that pro-ses often over look: that the Plaintiff's counsel may contact them and it is a normal part of the trial process.
  9. You can ask for it in a DV letter but they can ignore it. ALL that is required in response to a DV is the name of the original creditor and amount you owe. Unless there is already a judgment they are not required to produce any proof and they are in compliance with the FDCPA. Unless they sue you they are not required really to prove anything.
  10. They do not need the application to establish that the account is yours. 18 months worth of statements is plenty. They also do not need this either. Rarely does a Judge want to see a signed application. The charge slips are also irrelevant because the copy would have been given to you not Barclays so the only one who could produce that would be you if you kept every one. This they do need to show standing. They filed suit before you asked for arbitration. That isn't a refusal. The card agreement says "MAY" arbitrate it does not say it is required as the only method of dispute resolution. Hopefully PRA dismisses on their own and it never gets to a hearing on the MTC.
  11. The major problem I have with this type of collecting for tolls, fees etc. is that even though the FDCPA does not apply it gives they consumer absolutely no mechanism to challenge if the debt is even valid. There are scores of posts where people were dunned by this group for tolls, fines, taxes, tickets they never had. The consumer received a similar letter and when they contacted LBGS the representative was rude, disrespectful and abusive accusing them of avoiding their responsibilities. Refusing to provide proof of the debt. When consumers checked with the agency where the money supposed to be told they were informed they owed nothing. The law firm refuses to believe it when presented with proof. WHY is that kind of collection activity allowed to go unchecked?
  12. True but a quick Google search reveals that the majority of posts from consumers indicates that after they received the letter from these scum bags the logged in to their toll account and paid it directly to the state. There is also a lot of posts about people paying them and then the money not going to the toll authority and getting dunned AGAIN on the same debt they already paid. A typical contract with this "law firm" allows the debt collector to tack on a fee. The problem with that is the consumer is not a party to that contract. There is plenty of evidence that they are tacking on fees on their own that are egregiously large. Unfortunately this firm is a nationally located law firm and has offices in many many states. The good news is they make a LOT of threats including false ones of imminent arrest when not only is there no warrant but no debt but I can find no record of them suing anyone. They have been sued quite a bit though.
  13. Google that "law firm" (and I use the term loosely when discussing these guys) and you will see they have a litany of complaints against them for their tactics. They give new meaning to bottom feeder. It also gives new meaning to aggressive. https://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/debt-collector/threatening-letters/index.html https://www.insidearm.com/news/00041947-texas-law-firm-to-pay-34-million-settling/ The best thing that ever happened to Texas was a Judge ruling that red light camera tickets could not be placed on a credit report (this was prior to the bureau changes) and that left their only method of collecting in Texas beyond letters was to notify the county the debt still had not been paid and then owners are prohibited from re-registering the vehicle until it is paid. All that said be very careful. They have seized state tax returns, levied accounts and done all kinds of shading things to line their pockets. Including adding on fees 1000% more than the fine involved. Despite warnings in their letters NOT to contact the authority the money is owed to you can and SHOULD call who ever issued the fine and work it out directly with them. There is a ton of stories of people paying this business and them not forwarding the money to the state owed. DO NOT TRUST THEM.
  14. Clydesmom

    Being Sued in Texas by Portfolio Recovery

    It is an answer that has been used for more than a decade so the odds are pretty good they have seen it before. It also isn't a new argument either. Be prepared they have a response for it.
  15. Clydesmom

    Being Sued in Texas by Portfolio Recovery

    It still works with your structure. The retainer contract is written that the JDB is paying $1,000,000 per year for representation. The fees are capped at $1500 per case requiring X-Y hours; $150 per case for W-X hours i.e. default judgments. What isn't being factored in is that these contracts often can and do include a clause stating that the law firm also gets a percentage of any money actually collected. Can be as high as 40% similar to personal injury cases. It is an additional profit for the firm that offsets the few cases that require more work than the majority. I know these contracts exist because when I had a claim against a bureau the retainer one firm wanted to represent me the agreement stated that even though the bureau would be paying my attorney fees that I also agreed they got 40% of any award. I paid nothing if we lost. I spoke to a half dozen NACA law firms and they all had retainers like this.