• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by h8spleadingpaper

  1. Okay, I’m sure folks are probably busy enjoying their well-deserved weekends. So I’ll just throw a few more questions out and see if anyone chimes in: 1. One of the pieces of evidence I filed an Objection to was an alleged Affidavit of Assignment from an Angela Tucker (a supposed “representative” of Capital One). I objected on the grounds that affidavits are inadmissible at Trial (Elkins vs. Superior Court), along with the fact that her job title is not stated as Custodian of Records (or other type of qualified witness). My Trial Brief and Objections have already been filed, but I stu
  2. Update: I recently found this copy of a Class Action Complaint against a Plaintiff that used a “c/o:” address in their CCP 98 Declaration. Since the Plaintiff in this old case of mine did the same thing, I’m wondering if they committed an FDCPA violation in so doing? http://www.slodebtdefense.com/uploads/2/5/8/1/25816994/shohdy_-_conformed_complaint.pdf
  3. BUMP (I have several other questions, but don’t want this one to get lost in the shuffle - thanks!)
  4. @CommoSGTYes. Are you recommending that I fax a copy of the request for a Statement of Decision to the Plaintiff? Would that be something that’s required (don’t see anything about it in CCP 632), or merely a strategic move? Also, I just re-read the Case Summary and I think that the entry about the Plaintiff filing it’s Trial Brief may be a mistake. Last week, I filed written Objections to the Affidavits and my Trial Brief with the Court, all on the same day. There are entries on the Case Summary for my Objections, but not for my Trial Brief. Instead, there is one for the Plaintiff’s
  5. Hey, all. Sorry to beat this dead horse again, but it looks like I’ll probably be going it without a court reporter. Most of them I contacted didn’t get back to me. One that did wanted $995/day or $550/half day, plus minimum of $120 for transcription, which I can’t afford. Another quoted me $750/day or $375/half day, but told me they’ll have to call me back on Monday to see if anything opens up (they want to reserve their people for trials that last more than one day). So I just don’t think that the court reporter thing is going to happen. Does anyone know if asking for a Statement o
  6. Hey, all. I’ve been completely unsuccessful in finding a court reporter for my upcoming trial (99% of the places I contacted didn’t even reply and the others were busy). So I’m thinking that the next best thing would be a Statement of Decision and someone here on the site has kindly sent me an exemplar to use. While I’ll never know for sure who my judge will be, I do know who it’s supposed to be, based on which judges usually take even and odd days at my courthouse. I’ve watched this person try cases before and he/she seems very fair to defendants, IMO. So my question is, do requests
  7. Thanks, @shellieh98. So you’re saying you think I should send a written Objection to the CCP 98 Declaration even though the declarant was successfully served? I’ve done written Objections to all of the evidence so far, but didn’t think it was necessary for the Declaration, since the witness has been subpoena’d (?) I’m pretty sure that calawyer’s post on 12/28 is saying that I shouldn’t have to. Maybe I misunderstood?
  8. Happy New Year, everyone. I had a quick question regarding the CCP 98 Declaration. It was listed on Plaintiff’s CCP 96 Response, but I’ve since had the declarant personally served with a subpoena. This should render the declaration obsolete, but I’d like to send a message to that effect to the Plaintiff, while also letting the court know that it shouldn’t be admitted (I can imagine Plaintiff showing up without a witness and trying to get it admitted as evidence anyway). Normally, I’d send a written Objection based on deficiencies in the CCP 98 declaration, but again, it doesn’t really
  9. Still no luck with finding a court reporter. Several people have said they were unavailable, while most haven’t bothered replying. One sweet lady that I contacted doesn’t do court work but has reached out to several others who do on my account, none of whom replied. I think she’s more annoyed than I am about it. Anyway, I’m currently working on my Trial Brief and am wondering if anyone has a defense for the “Indebtedness” Cause of Action. Also, I used to have a great site for looking up caselaw by party name, but can’t seem to find it anymore. Same for looking up causes of action; I thi
  10. Wow, you guys make excellent legal arguments. I wonder if anyone has ever tried pushing this issue and what the result was?
  11. No sir (or ma’am). They've never sued. I was just trying to clarify, since stick&rudder asked me to differentiate whether I was referring to suit SOL or reporting SOL. So I was just referring to the SOL for lawsuits, which Midland missed without filing a Complaint. Thanks and sorry for any confusion.
  12. Thanks as always, calawyer! That’s great info to have. ​This is a total aside, but I just saw this old post of ASTMedic’s on sweatinginca’s thread: "As for the various BOS they have to conform to both CCP 98 and CCP 2015.5. If they don't then you can object based on those grounds too." The Bills of Sale obviously aren’t my biggest concern right now and I'll have other arguments against them anyway. But I’d never heard of any such requirements for the bills of sale. It seems a bit bizarre, no?
  13. Hey, @caligir2012. Just received notice from Valpro that the declarant was personally served on the first try. Thanks again for the referral!
  14. Thanks, @stick&rudder. Midland got in their first communication before the SOL for filling a Complaint (suing) was up, but have continued to send collection letters right up to the present. They get a pass on the initial collection letter (since SOL had not lapsed at that point), but I’m wondering if the more recent letters would be required to contain the “can’t sue” language due to the SOL for suing having lapsed last year. I’m assuming now that they wouldn’t have to send me anything with the “we can't report” language until 7 years after the alleged delinquency, based on the info BV8
  15. Okay. So in my case, they sent an initial collection letter before the SOL kicked in (as well as many others since), but none have contained the language about not being able to sue or report, despite the fact that the alleged debt was supposedly purchased in mid-2014 (after the new rules took effect). So is there a violation here, or did they never need to send a letter with the “not able to sue/report” because the first correspondence was sent before the SOL was up? Also, according to my credit reports, Midland has continued to report on this alleged account well into 2015, despite the f
  16. Sorry to bug you again @BV80, but I just have to ask one last question about this. Midland is claiming that the last payment on this alleged account was made in February 2011, while their first correspondence with me was in September of 2014. So at the time of their first correspondence, the alleged account would not have been time-barred for legal recourse (though it is now). Does CA Civil Code 1788.52(d)(2) & (3) indicate that they would have to include the language about not being able to sue or report only if the initial communication is delivered after the SOL has expired? Or d
  17. Thanks, Anon. Out of curiosity, why would they dismiss if the witness doesn’t show? In my case, the witness is also the CCP 98 declarant (president of the JDB firm). According to their CCP 96 response, they intend to either use the CCP 98 or his live testimony. Personal service of the subpoena on him has been successful, by the way. Still having trouble finding a court reporter, if anyone knows of someone in my area or another way to look. I did Google and Yelp searches and emailed a bunch of companies, but the only reply I’ve gotten back has to express that they’re unavailable. I’m ki
  18. Also, on a side note (and my above question is actually more important to me), I just happened to notice this language on form SUBP-001 (CA Subpoena form): "DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS SUBPOENA MAY BE PUNISHED AS CONTEMPT BY THIS COURT. YOU WILL ALSO BE LIABLE FOR THE SUM OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND ALL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM YOUR FAILURE TO OBEY." Does this only apply if personal service on the Declarant is successful (as opposed to leaving it with whoever will accept it after 3 tries)? Does it “go away” if the case is dismissed right before Trial? Who initiates the punishment? The Court? Th
  19. So I’m going to try to get a court reporter on this one. I’m about 3 weeks out from trial, so there should be time (I would hope). Just throwing a few general questions out there, in case anyone has any experience with this process: 1. Is there a good way to find a Pro Tempore court reporter? I thought that last time I found a link on the court’s website that provided some names, but I can’t seem to locate it now. 2. About how much should I expect to pay? I think I’ve heard estimates of $200 elsewhere on the site (?) 3. Anyone know how far in advance a court reporter generally nee
  20. Got it. I had read elsewhere that entry of a tradeline constituted first communication. Obviously, that was incorrect.
  21. Hmmm... I thought I had something here, but maybe not. It appears as though the alleged account was supposedly sold to Midland by the purported OC in late August, 2014 (roughly a month before the SOL in California) and immediately began reporting on my CR. So nothing I can burn them on there. But then there’s this: "FDCPA 809(a): Validation of debts a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid
  22. Oh wow, CommoSGT! Do you happen to have the thread that the above quote was taken from? I looked up CA Civil Code 1788.50, but it essentially just gives definitions for what a “Debt Buyer” is and what is considered “Charged Off Consumer Debt” from January 1st, 2014 on. But I’m VERY interested in the idea of hitting Midland with violations, as it definitely looks like there have been some violations here. Does it usually end up being worth the cost of using a CA consumer attorney (I’m guessing this was recommended because it’s too much for the average pro per to handle)? By the way, I l