Goody_Ouchless

Members
  • Content Count

    2,146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    62

Goody_Ouchless last won the day on November 14 2020

Goody_Ouchless had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

506 Excellent

1 Follower

About Goody_Ouchless

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

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Arizona

Recent Profile Visitors

3,112 profile views
  1. OK. They will probably dismiss. Usually when they plan on following they don't do a song-and-dance routine.
  2. What is the status of arbitration? Was MTC granted? Has plaintiff paid any fees?
  3. At this point have they paid anything toward the arbitration? As far as amounts being "off," what are they reporting to credit bureaus? FCRA claim may the way to go if the number are different everywhere. Typically suing for a lower amount is just them being careful and dropping any interest and fees they may not be entitled to.
  4. I can't wait until the next lawyer uses the old "arbitration can be veeeery expensive line," and someone can now say, with total confidence, "yea - for your client, Bozo."
  5. Thank you so much for providing an update! That has to be chilling news to places that keep trying to recoup fees.
  6. That's awesome - is that first FDCPA violation we've seen sanctioned for taking action in court after MTC? It seems like we've seen other places try that, but I guess it's more common to seek MSJ with MTC pending.
  7. That line just means that there is nothing else pending in that court. Now you appeal since the judge ruled in error.
  8. "A frivolous case is one that is groundless . . . with little prospect of success; often brought to embarrass or annoy the defendant." United States v. Manchester Farming P'ship, 315 F.3d 1176, 1183 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation and internal quotations omitted).
  9. It's what I would do, but I'm insane. Others will argue, with eloquence, that the Supreme Court limited a consumer's exposure in these matters. My argument is based on the fact the election of arbitration, as advised on this site, is inherently Frivolous. Discuss...
  10. Unless things have change, I believe every Texas case starts with a "General Denial" as the initial Answer - like there's a form with a big General Denial box to check. Everything else is then handled through motions. Interesting case, as this law firm is the one that one than folds to pretty much any answer and PRA is currently following to arb in a couple of cases.
  11. This is the second PRA case currently in arbitration. This one had a change of council. If PRA has decided to derail arbitration as a quick way to skate on debts (as OCs like Amex and Discover have been doing for years) then the erroneous court filings make sense if this is a new policy. They may have many cases that came from court and ended up in the "let's go to arbitration" department.
  12. Which is kind of what happened in the Unifund case in Indiana. Two cases got mixed up and mistakenly mingled, but in the end the arbiter basically concluded that the two cases were about CC debt disputes between the same two parties, so he just ruled on everything, essentially using common sense.
  13. I'm thinking that PRA would argue "we're already here, and this isn't about any claims brought against us, so let's keep this case going." They would also scream FRIVOLITY in order to recoup. Very interesting to see what happens when the bills start piling up.
  14. I still want to know what would happen if OP told AAA the he wished to withdraw dispute and close the case. Does AAA let PRA keep the case alive, or are we back to square one?