RyanEX

Members
  • Content Count

    1,181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    65

Everything posted by RyanEX

  1. There is a CA attorney or two that post on occasion, but not very often. Mostly it's non-attorney members doing the posting. Are you being sued?
  2. Gotcha. To be clear - they didn't file a CCP 98 (a Declaration/Affidavit in Lieu of Testimony)? They would have served you with it around a month before trial. Also, it would show up in your online case file - double check that since it's an important item. When is your court date?
  3. You should start a new thread to get a little more attention to your situation. Get a few more details in there: when was suit filed, when was the default given to Midland, where was it filed (same county where you live?), did you get/not get served, what type of service did they claim (personal/substitute),who was the original creditor etc.
  4. SOL in CA on written contracts is 4 years. Generally speaking, you start the SOL clock when a payment is missed (the due date comes and you no dot send any money). Regarding the account where you made a payment on 04/2019 - that would have reset the SOL clock, so them filing a lawsuit 3yrs & 11 months later is within the SOL.
  5. You would have needed to object to what was happening, the extension itself vs insufficient evidence. http://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=three&linkid=rule3_1332 #1 if they needed a continuance they should have made a noticed motion/ex parte application ahead of time and # 2 have a good reason. "Witness couldn't make it" isn't a good reason. What happened was, seeing that you weren't going to settle at the last minute, they tried this delay tactic and it worked. You should print out a copy of CRC 3.1332 and take it with you next time. As it is, they bought themselves some more time to try and get you to settle. Have seen this before. What did you do ahead of trial? Did you make a CCP 96 request? What did they do, did they file a CCP 98? Copies & reproductions of documents can be submitted, but are subject to CA rules of evidence, you can object to those.
  6. You can always go to the courthouse and get a copy to find out the details - otherwise you can wait, sooner or later they will get around to serving you . Keep an eye on your online case file for any updates. In the meantime you can browse the forum, get a feel for CA cases, etc. Hard to say anything else without knowing the nature of your suit.
  7. I haven't dealt with this code before - but I always understood that the plaintiff needed to file for a default judgment in order to get one. @wakingupnow If you haven't done so yet, file an answer.
  8. Oh no, don't do that. You don't want to admit to any details of the acct, ownership of the account, anything that ties you to the acct. If you do that, you're giving them evidence against you and, potentially, a trial victory. Force them to prove anything and everything, don't help - that is the basic CA game plan and it works very well in these lawsuits because CA code places the burden of proof on them to show that this is your debt, not the other way around Besides, the answer forms don't require you to explain anything anyway, if you'll be using the general denial it'S just a simple fill-in of your name on the correct line & that will deny the complaint in it's entirety (you don't have to check box #2 if you don't want to). https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/pld050.pdf This is a good read on CA strategy, it's from 2012 but most everything still applies: https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/
  9. Regarding Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, everything is fine. See calawyer's thread: https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/330400-ccp-98-decision/
  10. Don't concern yourself with CCP 98 at this point - that comes into play if you answer the lawsuit as is and you are further along in the process, approaching trial. It will indeed help you if that's what you end up doing. Your bigger questions are 1) dealing with the issue of your address, that you live in Los Angeles but are being sued in a different county. 2) whether it was appropriate for them to sue on two accounts in one lawsuit (maybe it is, but I have not seen that before). And 3) exploring arbitration as an option.
  11. You'll be fine. What I wrote is the "proper" procedure, but many (including plaintiffs) have done it the way you did. Yes, ASTMedic's thread/strategy works for Account Stated.
  12. Procedures vary from county to county. I didn't have MSC in mine (San Diego County). Though I think an MSC is likely to be scheduled closer to a trial date? Anyhow, keep an eye on your online case file, if you just filed your answer then the case file will probably get updated in the nest few weeks.
  13. a & b: Put the name & address of the attorney; send it to them. Proper procedure is for you to fill out and sign the answer, then the person serving it will fill out the POS-030, but nor sign it, yet. Make copies of the answer & POS, place the copies in the envelope (POS unsigned) and seal. Person serving will then sign the original POS and can now mail the envelope. Then you take the original signed answer & POS to your courthouse, get the answer time stamped, make copies of both, and file the originals. Keep the copies for your records. Hope that's not confusing. Welcome to the board!
  14. You will need to pay the filing fee when you go. Don't remember the amount, but it would be the same amount that Portfolio paid. If you don't have the money, fill out a fee waiver request, even if you don't qualify - it'll buy you time to get $ together and allow you to file the answer. http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/SDCOURT/GENERALINFORMATION/FORMS/CRIMINALFORMS/PKT010.PDF
  15. YES! Answer now!! Today if you can. You didn't lose your chance to answer because you didn't get it in within 30 days, you can still answer - but it's a race as to who files first, you with your answer or Portfolio with a request for default. Whoever gets it in first wins, so to speak. I don't have any details regarding your case - if the complaint is unverified then you can use the General Denial https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/pld050.pdf. It's a simple form, just your name & case info and a check box + signature. Fill it out along with a proof of service https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/pos030.pdf , make copies of both. File the GD & POS with your court and then send plaintiff the copies. (Normally the proper procedure is to have the copies mailed first & then file - but you're up against the clock, prioritize filing but get them both done same day). It's very important you file your answer before Portfolio takes files for default.
  16. I don't know much about arbitration, to be honest. But, to your question, I would think you can invoke aarbitration without acknowleging it was yours...language like "alleged account" or "card agreement that would govern alleged account" etc. Far as I know, you want to use pleading paper when filing such things with the court, if there is no state supplied form that would substitute. You can find pleading paper templates online that will work, just do a search. Example: https://templates.office.com/en-us/Legal-pleading-paper-28-lines-TM03992040
  17. You're totally fine. Obviously you lost this particular battle, if you would have been able to compel arbitration you could have won this quickly - now you'll have to settle for winning over a longer term. Midland is very beatable in CA with a trial. Read more here: https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/ By the way, the nitpicking the court demonstrated in denying your motion (for POS, formatting)... is the same nitpicking you can employ against Midland when it comes to their evidence. Having to proceed with adherence to the CA Civil Code of Procedure: it cuts both ways. Do you have a trial date?
  18. Yes, you can send a BOP (Bill of Particulars) right away. There some examples in the CA threads. As far as arbitration goes, I don't know if that's the best course in your case, you may be better off fighting via trial. I didn't use arbitration, nor am I versed in the procedures - but as understand it, the appeal of compelling arbitration is that it makes most cases cost-prohibitive to a plaintiff. They may be saddled with most of the costs, which would be several thousands of dollars, so they often back down because it doesn't make sense to pay $5,000 (or more) in arb fees in order to win a $3,000 case. But since you're being sued for $20K, they might find it worth the cost. Hopefully a few others will chime in with their opinion. If you do fight via trial, know that CA laws are favorable to defendants in these cases. In CA, a JDB like LVNV bears the burden of proof in this case. You do not. This enables you to focus solely on playing defense. LVNV will likely need your help to prove their case, meaning they will need you to admit to it in some form or another; your best strategy, in a trial case, is to deny them any such help. Read this thread for more on trial strategy: https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/
  19. Okay, from what you described you were Substitute Served - meaning the summons was given to an adult (not you) at your residence (or place of business). They are still required to place a additional copy of the summons in the mail and send it to you, service is considered complete on the 10th day after that 2nd copy is placed in the mail...then the 30 days begins. So, in summary, wait for the copy that comes in the mail and whatever date they state it was mailed... you have 40 days from then to file your answer. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=415.20
  20. JDBs tend to use the same discovery requests over & over & over... I still have mine from Midland so I'll compare to yours, should be similar. The date of service on these requests was Feb 11, so you need to place your response in the mail by March 18 (30 days + 5 days because it was mailed to you). Plenty of time.
  21. It's legit. Forgot the details of the explanation, but it benefit you as well because you automatically get the reduced fee too. Better for us, IMO; people who have had the kind of financial trouble that led to a default could probably use the reduced fee more than some JDB.
  22. FYI on 1099 debt cancellations, if you get one look into the IRS insolvency worksheet - you may be able to exclude the 1099 from your income.