Coffee_before_tea

Members
  • Content Count

    793
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Coffee_before_tea last won the day on May 27 2017

Coffee_before_tea had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

268 Excellent

3 Followers

About Coffee_before_tea

  • Rank
    500 posts and hasn't been banned yet....

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Lower 48

Recent Profile Visitors

1,227 profile views
  1. Please review and respond to my question on your Sued by Unifund post/thread.

  2. My guess is that they will sit on this and the SOL will expire in 2017. The SOL is tolled while a lawsuit is filed; however, once the case was dismissed w/o prejudice, the clock continues on it's regularly scheduled program. Meaning they don't get to add 4 months to the SOL just because they filed a lawsuit and it was dismissed after 4 moths (or whatever the time is). The clock continues as if the lawsuit was never filed.
  3. In regards to Velocity & Arbitration, you've done your part. You've filed with JAMS, and paid your side. The court agreed and dismissed the case. As of right now, the ball is in Velocities hands. I don't think you have to send velocity anything. They will receive copies of the judges decision, you don't need to do their job. If this were me, I'd sit and wait it out until JAMS dismisses/closes the case (which won't take long, if they wont pay). With the Court Case being dismissed, this leaves you with plenty of breathing room. When does the SOL expire?
  4. @scarab Did they order them to Arbitration? If so, what did it say?
  5. Is there any way you could redact personal info and post the contract here? How long has the collection agency been trying to collect? Letters/phone calls/etc...?
  6. Did they provide the contract with the complaint? Who is the lender;bank?
  7. Check your state UDAP & TCPA laws, they often have mirrored statutes that can be used as well. Many of the State UDAP statutes have injunctive relief, so have your attorney (if applicable) seek for a permanent injunction against their collection practices. If this is directed at an Attorney/Lawfirm this will increase your leverage.
  8. If your son is not named/co-signed on the contract, yet they are sending him letters & contacting him via telephone, then they are also violating the FDCPA 3rd party disclosure. 1692b &1692c. The debt is yours, not your sons. You are the one named & signed on the contract, so you are the one who brings the suit. Write up a Federal complaint, and send their registered agent an Intent to Sue letter, give them 30 days to respond, then file the complaint. Or, the easy way is to get a consumer attorney, if you can find one that will take the case.
  9. Redact the contract and post it if you can (or does the actual contract contain an Arbitration provision?) Is your sons name on the contract, or just your name? Are the calls from an automated dialer?
  10. There's no reason to wait, you said you were filing your MTR tomorrow, file the request for decision for you MTC at the same time.
  11. You're providing the authority for you argument. It doesn't have to be extensive, but it needs to convey it. I believe the citation is correct. I see that the rules required you to submit a 'request for decision' on your motion. I'd file that, at the same time, for you original MTC. It also may be worth noting it in your MTR, that not asking the court to hear your motion was a simple oversight per rule 60.
  12. You need to add the SCOTUS cases mentioned in this thread. Volt, AT&T, MOSES, CompuCredit etc... There can be no question that the NV rules are preempted by the FAA. Here's a NV case for you to cite as well. Bullet point 10, I would remove or change the wording. You're leaving too much wiggle room for the court to determine the difference between Private Arb & Annexed Arb. In my opinion, your bullet point should say something like:
  13. @scarab There is no reason to feel like you haven't done enough, or feel badly for not understanding the complex legal system. Know this: You have made an informed choice to defend a lawsuit, one that you caught before you were served. You've thought strategically, and educated yourself as much as you can to defend yourself. This alone places you ahead of 95% of consumers in the same situation. When you're finished with this situation, you'll know more about Arbitration than most of the consumer attorneys. Win, lose or draw, you are facing this head on. Kudos to you
  14. Your answer was unnecessary, your MTD & MTC would have been sufficient. I also would have waited until I was served, there was a chance that Velocity would not have served you and you could have dismissed the case after 120 days (or whatever your rules say). It's irrelevant now. You can file a MTR with your Objection to the court annexed arbitration. Point out the court failed to follow the NRS Statute, nor the FAA as required. You can appeal if they deny your MTR. But, all of this needs to placed into the court record. I suppose the other option (one I wouldn't take), is in the Court Annexed Arbitration hearings, you can move the Court Arbitrator to compel the parties to JAMS & private contractual arbitration.
  15. You must be referring to Rule 5 objection. I'm referring to a written objection to the order itself, not a rule 5 objection. And yes, the court is confused. When a MTC Arbitration is filed under the NV & FAA statute, then the statute requires the court to determine if there is a valid arbitration agreement, and compel the refusing party to Arbitrate per the terms of the contract. Rule 5 doesn't apply, as the court has a very narrow scope of jurisdiction in regards to Contractual Arbitration. OP didn't waive anything, he filed an answer and a MTC Arbitration before the service was perfected. Now, I disagree with his method (by filing an answer), but he certainly didn't waive anything. In regards to the alleged agreement, the Court needs to determine validity, and the court did NOT do so. There was no hearing regarding OP's MTC as required by NV statute & the FAA. The agreement is only permissive until a party elects arbitration, then neither party has the right to have claims heard in a Court of Law. OP elected arbitration, therefore, per the contract Velocity cannot have it's claims heard in Court. @scarab Did you post your MTC and answer in this thread? I can't seem to find it, maybe you can point to it, or post it for us to review.