Jump to content

browniebrownie141

Members
  • Posts

    305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by browniebrownie141

  1. Gentlemen/ Ladies: Sorry for being away for a almost 2 months, I have been very busy with tax filing and also helping with a family member regarding Obama Care health insurance,...almost done....as soon as I finish with my tax filing, will jump right back to this forum here,... I also have been reading some info regarding "Rules of Evidance, admissable vs. in-admissable, hearsay...and how to get document become admissable, and I have a few questions....once again, I will jump right back ASAP.... Thank you Thank you Thank you all ....
  2. what about the point that the Judge took side with the JDB--asking you to waive the ccp 96/98 right in order to continue the trial on the same day !?....I don't understand !! Can we point out the fact the judge was supposed to be unbiased, asking you to waive the right for something you already entitled to--in fact you were already at trial. --the Judge was over the line ?!...Or was he based on certain court rules we don't know ?? Is'nt that true, the appeal court can take a look at this issue ?? Million thanks
  3. Yes, the DEPO was cancelled by the JDB at the last minute. And specially thanks to Anon Amos and Calawyer, great suggestion-- asked for a translator and required the transcript ( to be issued after DEPO also to be translated ) and also, I reserved my right to make changes/ further explanation &/ or correction after the DEPO in writing after reviewing the transcript..... Not only I requested in meet & confer letter & pushed them to respond, but I also case filed with the court. Since they were the one who asked for the DEPO ( after the written doscovery), they would be the one responsible for the fee -translator and translation fee for DEPO transcript. The JDB's attorney locates in Northern California, told me to go like 65 miles away from my home ( I am in Los Angeles area) to a 3rd party location for DEPO. Anon Amos & Calawyer were preciously correct, JDB 's attorney trying to pressure me, yet we figureed it out all these, would increase how much $ they are going to spend on my case,....3rd party location, someone who would do the DEPO Vs. me, then translator ( paid by the hour) then translation fee for the whole DEPO ....do the math... Million Thanks again to Anon Amos and Calawyer !!
  4. Congrats ! You got this over-with ! Hopefully, the JDB you were dealing with would NOT sell the account to another JDB and DeJaVu again.
  5. Besides CHASE, any other bank(s) that was/ were hit by the Feds that also need to make some sort of settlement ? Or, any other bank(s) in settlement talk with the Fed ?
  6. How about California ? Can anyone check to see "is this mandatory to file a motion to compel" otherwise defendant will lose this way ? Also, 2nd question: will it be better to do the MTC right before the discovery cut-off ( before trial ) ?? This is an EYE OPENING lesson !
  7. @CreditVortex: Thank you so very very much for the info,...believe me, it's very very useful and helpful,... Million thanks
  8. Gentlemen/ Ladies: This is GOOD, we NEED this ! If anyone can find more, pls....post it here,....let's help out each other...
  9. Gentlemen/ Ladies Please kindly,...take a look at my #233 posting,...ok to go or no-go....any suggestion please... Oral Depo will be at February 26, .....if the above letter is a GO approved by you all, will first send to case file, 2nd copy to be filed stamp before sending to plaintiff's attorney,...some turn around time,...that's why I do this earlier,...hope you all don't mind... Thanks
  10. Sounds like Portfolio Recovery Associates is the JDB, and is their attorney Hunt & Henriques ? I am fighting the same JDB and same attorney,..but your court date come first. You can check out my own posting,... 3 things perhaps you can ask around for confirmation: - the CCP 96 form, it will need the file stamp and signature/ date by Court filing office clerk/officer in order to be VALID ( but they say it does NOT need to be case filed with the Court ?!!?....Can anyone confirm ?? - After you receive their CCP 98, you subpeona their witness, right? If sherriff cannot hand the witness the subpoena at the location after several attempts, the sherriff has to drop off the subpeona, right? If it is the case, can we can the sheriff to make a note of this --that witness is not available at location, is this called "Due Dilligence Declaration" ?? -the MIL motion, is it 1 motion covers all their hearsay evidence OR will it be each hearsay evidence requires each separated MIL motion ?? Best wishes to you,...
  11. Just a quick question--JDB is Portfolio Recovery Associates, and they brought in a witness from OC-Citibank to the trial ? Or was someone (a employee of PRA) to authenicate the evidence(s) ??
  12. @willingtocope: I totally understood what you are saying,....if you take a look at the articles at the front page of this posting, from the magazine.... I guess, what I am trying to say is: the judge ruling was that,...as the OC took the loss, issued the 1099, suppose to be the end as far as the debt/ collection goes,.... ( except WE need to deal with the 1099 with IRS.) BUT in reality, it is NOT.... This is why I want to confirm with anyone, or attorney(s),...if showing the 1099, would it be a solid reason to kick the lawsuit at the start? Can it be used for motion to dismiss/ or MSJ as the credit card/ or any loans related to that 1099 is simply cancelled, discharge/ write off ??
  13. @daxbr: Thanks for the pdf form 982, I am sure many people who take a look at this posting, will found very useful the form you provided. Again, what you encounter, is exactly and the reason why I started this posting.... And my concern is: Not only now they are double edge "sword",....Suppose we fight the lawsuit Vs JDB, can we still use affirmative defense-Lack of Privity/ Lack of Legal Standing ? ( if we show them the 1099, and do what we need with the IRS, that means we acknowledge the debt to JDBs? ; if we don't not only we will spend countless hours to deal with the lawsuit, plus, a RISK we may lose in court !? )
  14. Gentlemen/ Ladies: I drafted a letter responding to the plaintiff's request for Oral Depostion ( we did written discovery, I filed MSJ vs. them, motion denied and now they want a oral depo) I would like to send this to the Court for case file ( will be in pleading paper), to protect my right. So, seeking suggestions and advice here. Earlier, plaintiff attorney asked me for the available date(s) and I replied and demanded language interpreter. They acknowledged and accepted that. Here it is: The Defendant replied to Plaintiff’s request for oral deposition and hereby would like to receive confirmation and additional information from plaintiff’s attorney. A chinese language interpretor (Cantonese-chinese) was requested by defendant for the above mentioned oral deposition, and plaintiff’s attorney acknowledged and accepted. ( see exhibit A- meet & confer letter /e-mail exchanges between plaintiff’s attorney and defendant ) The fee for chinese interpretor will be paid by plaintiff’s attorney and plaintiff as the oral deposition is demanded by the plaintiff’s side. Besides the copy of the oral deposition transcript is required by defendant, a 2nd copy of the oral deposition transcript is required and is to be translated into Chinese-cantonese language and writing will be in complicated form, ie, Taiwan / hong kong writing version. The defendant exercise his right (according to CCP 2025.510-2025.570 and 2025.610-2025.620 ) that: The copy of the oral deposition transcript is to be mailed to defendant for review. The defendant reserve his right to make clarification(s), changes, and/ or correction(s) to the above oral deposition should it is necessary. The defendant would like to seek additional information (see below) from the plaintiff’s attorney regarding the address for the above oral deposition. 1325 Spruce Street, suite 310, Riverside, Ca 92507 ( Riverside County, East of Los Angeles county) Please provide the name of the premise(s)/ facility, the contact person’s name at that address and the contact telephone number.
  15. @thebigjdoe: when you said the 1st was settled for less, did you settle with OC, or JDB? And, the 2nd one you described "ignored"...what exactly do you mean? And @ willingotcope/ GDaymateAZ & daxbr: that's exactly what I am talking about....the whole has been a "double edge sword" coming from OC and JDB. OC took charge, claiming the tax deduction, issues 1099. We got the 1099 either to show "insolvent or pay tax", suppose the end of it, BUT NO...; JDB jumps IN, filing lawsuit using the same credit card debt and in issed 2nd 1099 WOW....( refering to the article at the first page) This is the reason, why I really want to see how other members, especially Consumer Attorneys here with this forum, what do they make out of the whole thing ?? ..... Are these gounds for mutli States class action lawsuit Vs JDBs ??
  16. In scenio 3: -- If OC issues 1099, then , sell the credit card debt to JDB,....JDB takes legal action AND issue 1099 Vs. people....the whole thing just CRAZY.... On 1 hand, we deal with 1099 from OC. Yet at some point, JDB sue us, we present the 1099 from (OC) to Court, in way, that's a admission from us, isn't it? "Look the defendant even present the 1099 from OC, indicating indeed defendant owe $."..... SO the general deniel is out the window, isn't it? You see that's what I am worry ! Yeah, according to IRS, the 1099 itself is NOT a indication that WE admits, but,...if we present it to court, that's admission, right ? Or,...does that work the other way....it can proves to Judge that once WE deal with 1099 from OC, that's it !?? But again, then the whole thing does'nt make sense....OC issue 1099 then sells to JDB and JDB sue for for the FACE VALUE. Consumer Attorneys,....what are you guys think ??
  17. Here are what I see: 1. If OC issues 1099 and cancel/ write off the debt, no collection, legal action, no sell to JDBs, case close, .....it makes sense to me. 2. If OC issues 1099 say 2013, then they come after people say 2014 or 2015,.....it does NOT sense to me. 3. If OC issues 1099, then , sell the credit card debt to JDB,....JDB takes legal action AND issue 1099 Vs. people....the whole thing just CRAZY. Another interesting situation, seems to me, CHASE already indicate, the amount $ on 1099 issued is NOT the same as they reports on 3 credit rating agencies. Is'nt that a violation of FDCPA/ or FCRA or any kind ? Can anyone share some info here: Which OC, DO NOT do collection, simply issue 1099 ? ( Is Chase one of those NOW??) Which OC, SELL their accounts to JDBs ? I don't ask which OC do their collection/ take legal action,...I guess everybody know--American Express, Wells Fargo, Citi, Cap 1, BankAm, Chase ( was, not sure what they are up to)
  18. @SkippieB and RyanEx: I am from Southern California, Los Angeles, there are 2 courts ONLY now doing debt collections, Norwalk and Chatsworth. But I do not know how tough or friendly these 2 courts are? May be someone who had experience, please share.... And I heard, in San Francisco/ San Jose area and or Northern part of California, it's tough. HomelessinCa, I believe, he is from Riverside county, about 1 -2 hours east of Los Angeles, Southern California. May someone also share, how tough and friendly the court/judges San Diego. But 1 thing is for sure, so many things need to be done within 45 days prior to trial date. ...So many...
  19. @TomnTex: Then, like I mentioned, say, OC issued 1099, we got that, and becomes a taxable event to us, then, OC original creditor sells the credit card debt to JDB, the JDB also 2nd 1099.... Then,...what can we do to counter these ?? ( referring to the law suit and 1099 filed by JDB. ?? ) And since, from the article, since a JDB wa actually doing it. ... Do anyone think it will sparks a class action lawsuit Vs. those JDB ??
  20. Gentlemen/ ladies: Can anyone explain to me...in a easier way so that I can truly understand WHAT AND HOW the DECLARATION is done?? I found the BELOW from the local court rules section of Chatsworth, California, courthouse, .... 3.57 MOTIONS IN LIMINE (a) Required Declaration. Motions made for the purpose of precluding the mention or display of inadmissible and prejudicial matter in the presence of the jury must be accompanied by a declaration that includes the following: (1) Specific identification of the matter alleged to be inadmissible and prejudicial; (2) A representation to the court that the subject of the motion has been discussed with opposing counsel, and that opposing counsel has either indicated that such matter will be mentioned or displayed in the presence of the jury before it is admitted in evidence or that counsel has refused to stipulate that such matter will not be mentioned or displayed in the presence of the jury unless and until it is admitted in evidence; (3) A statement of the specific prejudice that will be suffered by the moving party if the motion is not granted; and (4) If the motion seeks to make binding an answer given in response to discovery, the declaration must set forth the question and the answer and state why the use of the answer for impeachment will not adequately protect the moving party against prejudice in the event that evidence inconsistent with the answer is offered. ( Summary Adjudication Improper. A motion in limine may not be used for the purpose of seeking summary judgment or the summary adjudication of an issue or issues. Those motions may only be made in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 437c and applicable court rules. © Bifurcation of Issues Improper. A motion in limine may not be used for the purpose of seeking an order to try an issue before the trial of another issue or issues. That motion may only be made in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 598.SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Page 56 of 217 LOCAL RULES - Effective January 1, 2014 (d) Timing of Ruling. The court may defer ruling upon a motion in limine, and may order that no mention or display of the matter that is the subject of the motion be made in the presence of the jury unless and until the court orders otherwise. If the court so orders, or if the motion is granted, it is the duty of counsel to instruct associates, clients, witnesses, and other persons under their control that no mention or display be made in the presence of the jury of the matter that is the subject of the motion. (Rule 3.57 new and effective July 1, 2011) Million thanks....
  21. Gentlemen/ Ladies: I agree with you all, yet what's going on out there now, is what really confusing... 1. JDB Portfolio Recovery Associstes, is doing it, (see the article on the top, so it is NOT a question "can they do that!?"...., the Question should be "What can we do about it?"....I mean if we receive 2nd or even 3rd 1099 from those JDB ... 2. Insolvent-- in IRS 's definition or in Court's definfition ?? Or does 'nt matter ?? --As long as bankruptcy was filed? Yet many of the people I believe are still in early stage, ie, fighting the lawsuit. If we all already filed bankruptcy or in the process of doing so, then would'nt it the easier way is to include "that debt and 1099 into bankruptcy "listing account/debt"? How many of the people here will believe, a BIG national scale of class action lawsuit among all States, will be filed VS. those JDBs who issus these kind of 1099 to people ? And how many people believe also need to Federal / IRS need to step in to crack down these 1099 issued by JDBs....( the fact the it's tax deduction to JDBs FULL FACE VALUE, not the cost )....is'nt that violation of TAX codes or some sort...is that tax cheating?? ....I am very confused truly,....I hope some the attorneys here can jump in and share your understanding ?? ,
  22. http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/06/09/tax-court-rules-1099-c-from-portfolio-recovery-associates-not-valid-for-year-issued/ the 2nd article, talks about Portfolio Recovery Associates clearly issued 1099C on the debt that way past SOL....can't believe they did that !! People would have to fight at Tax Court ....OMG
  23. Gentlemen / Ladies, I came across with these,...and I feel that I must share these with you all, and perhaps everyone can jump in and discuss about it... Chase, one of the biggest bank, has started sending 1099C, in the letter, they provided codes: Depending on the code entered, the OC may give up rights to collect the debt. The reason codes are: A—Bankruptcy; B—Other judicial debt relief; C—Statute of limitations or expiration of deficiency period; D—Foreclosure election; E—Debt relief from probate or similar proceeding; F—By agreement; G—Decision or policy to discontinue collection; H—Expiration of nonpayment testing period; or I—Other actual discharge before identifiable event event. Can anyone share some knowledge here then.... 1) ....given they are going to issue the 1099 and stated they are no longer to attempt to collect, what are the chance these credit card debt be sold to JDB ? 2) ...If...& most likely,....the $amount they report to 3 credit rating agencies is different from the $amount they report on 1099, is this a violation of any FDCPA or FCRA rules ? 3)....If #1 question is a YES, then,...when the JDB takes legal action to us, can we simply pointing the fact that 1099 is issued by original creditor, thus, JDB should not be in any position to "lawsuit" us ?? There is a article in Forbes magazine: http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2013/05/20/bank-cannot-issue-1099-c-and-subsequently-try-to-collect/ The Internal Revenue Service does not view a Form 1099-C as an admission by the creditor that it has discharged the debt and can no longer pursue collection. Section 1.6050P-1(a) of the regulations provides that, solely for purposes of reporting cancellation of indebtedness, a discharge of indebtedness is deemed to occur when an identifiable event occurs whether or not an actual discharge of indebtedness has occurred on or before the date of the identifiable event. Not ONLY the above codes troubles me, but, when taking a closer look at the article, Portfolio Recovery Associstes, a JDB, actually issued 1099C !! Although there was a court ruling, as we all know, case-law only applicable at where the State. So, it bakes the question: Suppose, CHASE issue 1099 to people, then sell it to JDB, and JDB not only takes legal action Vs. people, but also issue 2nd 1099 C, does that mean, we get double hit two 1099C, and as always double hit on credit reports. Say we are lucky to follow all the steps have been discussed here at the forum, say we get the case dismissed or win the case. We then can try to remove the tradeline posted by JDB ( not OC), but how can we deal with 2nd 1099C ? Also, it bakes another question: from the IRS codes, they always let entites report using cost basis, rather the face value, when it comes to tax deduction while often JDB pays pennies on dollar then filing lawsuit for the face value: -when the JDB issue 1099C face value of the debt, is'nt that tax cheating?-Or: if they issue 1099C cost basis (which reveals how much they pays), isn't it true, they can only filing lawsuit based on the cost , not the face value ?? Gentlemen/ Ladies...can anyone share with some idea? Thank you
×
×
  • Create New...