Clydesmom

Members
  • Content Count

    6,308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    127

Clydesmom last won the day on June 13

Clydesmom had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,268 Excellent

About Clydesmom

  • Rank
    500 posts and hasn

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Nevada via Michigan via Georgia

Recent Profile Visitors

7,068 profile views
  1. The simple answer is if the SOL is still active in NC when you move then it remains active in AZ until the 6 years from the default. The second problem is AZ is VERY creditor friendly. Your option is to remain in NC until the SOL expires completely (and not by a day or 2) then move to AZ or roll the dice and take your chances by moving while the SOL is still alive. One more potential problem is they can still sue you in NC. Some states (and I do not know about AZ specifically) require that you be established for at least 3-6 months before you are considered a resident with the full p
  2. They do not have to offer you a payment plant at all. They do not have to wait to sue you either. Fair has nothing to do with it. It is legal. If they agree to another payment plan you have to realize that it carries twice the risk for them since you already defaulted once. Most likely if they do agree to a payment plan they will expect you to sign a consent judgment which means if you fail to make even one payment they do not have to sue you to collect. They can file that judgment with the court and go straight to garnishment or levy. There is no third chance. Because they have al
  3. To get a reduced percentage you need to be able to make a lump sum payment. If you need to make payments then they are going to want the full amount because they are taking a big risk you default again. They will also require you agree to a consent judgment. What that means is if you default again they do not have to sue. They simply file that consent judgment with the court and can go straight to garnishment and/or levy. DO NOT agree to the payments if you are the least bit uncertain you cannot handle all of them. There is no margin of error the second time around.
  4. Based on your opening date of 2015 it isn't an option. Cap1 removed arbitration from their card agreements over a decade ago. It isn't an option on their accounts.
  5. A big reason why they do it. Not likely. Not reporting is about inducing payment and eliminating counter claims. Once the suit is over they can still report.
  6. Nope. 40 years in healthcare. However have had to rebuild my credit twice and learned a lot in the process. None of which is admissible in court or arbitration. It is merely the rantings of unhappy customers on the internet. Keep in mind that MOST of what consumers believe is false reporting is not. And there is the problem. YOUR opinion carries no weight legally. You need case law even in arbitration to back up your assertion that their information is false. When you have a dog in the fight it is. Unfortunately sometimes the better and cheaper option is to settl
  7. The account was deleted when they sold it to Midland. Part of the sale is the agreement that Credit One delete their trade line to eliminate any counterclaims when Midland sues. They also have a carve out for debt cases in small claims court which is what Magistrate Court is. Arbitration would not be an option. They typically do not offer settlement amounts in their letters and are not required to. You can settle any time prior to a verdict though. Send a DV letter tomorrow. That buys you some time until they answer it. Hopefully at least 30 days. They will sue.
  8. What physical i.e. written proof do you have of any of this? Absent something in writing changing the terms of the card agreement you are out of luck. Arguments you could have easily made had you not thrown a toddler temper tantrum screeching you refused to pay until they did what you want. The problem you have is there is NOTHING in the card agreement that excuses you from paying until you get your way. You did have leverage until you refused to pay. Then you gave it away. LITERALLY. How hard would it have been to make the minimum payment and then tilt at the win
  9. The arbitration threat works best against JDBs NOT OCs. CITI apparently has now joined the ranks of OCs who are not the least bit deterred by the arbitration threat. Not surprising because CITI has won big awards in arbitration before. Your legal basis for that demand was what? According to the terms and conditions of the card agreement NOTHING allows you to make that demand. So you tanked your credit and defaulted on a card over this one issue? Would it not have been smarter to pay the amount due and bring the account in to good standing and then mount a good will camp
  10. Once a week (my suggestion is Thursday) call the clerk's office and ask for an update. If nothing happens repeat next week. Record the calls if you can. See if there is an online docket you can watch too for motions filed, schedules etc. If one year elapses since you answered and no movement happens then you file a motion to dismiss for want of prosecution. Right now it is a waiting game and the only answer you can rush is one you do not want.
  11. Keeping in mind that PRA is the one JDB that has started agreeing to arb and followed at least one poster that we know of all the way through to the end.
  12. Not only can they, Discover WILL sue you. Discover is one of the top 3 most aggressive creditors in pursuing litigation to collect on bad debts and they don't sell their paper. They will sue you themselves. Unfortunately hiring a "credit cleaner" when the SOL was very much still alive and the entire country is making big moves to return to business as usual was a bad move. All you did was tell your creditors you either needed or wanted new credit and that there was likely a financial change in circumstances that you were able to pay. The defenses you read about on sites like this on
  13. Nope business as usual. I agree with the lawyer. Lay low and they will probably do the same. Now that they know you have a lawyer they are not likely to come back. They want the easy low hanging fruit of payment or default judgment. They do not want to go to court and have to actually prove their case. They also know they filed in the wrong jurisdiction creating a bold plated counter claim. You have one year from the date they filed that claim to pursue an FDCPA claim. Does the SOL to sue where you are expire in that time frame? If so, you don't need to do anything. If the SOL
  14. Doubtful. Settling for less is about leverage. With an OC you don't have much. With BoA the SOL is expired and they know it so some money is better than none. Leverage shifts to you. Credit Unions are membership based and they have a duty to the other members so they tend to be extremely aggressive at pursuing bad debt. Leverage shifts to them. There is no legal basis to force them to settle for less. They will either do it or they won't. The CU has pretty much drawn their line in the sand: they will not settle for less.
  15. NO. Just NO. HIPAA relates to MEDICAL information only. It has NOTHING to do with credit cards. NOTHING. The information you received on another litigant's case is a violation of the FDCPA that person can use not an FDCPA violation you can use in yours. What I would do is send that information to the litigant it does belong to and alert them to the FDCPA claim. I would also use copies of it in my defense to challenge the accuracy of their documents since their upkeep and tracking is so sloppy and unchecked they sent another party's case information to me in direct violation of the FDCPA