ready2fight2014

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About ready2fight2014

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    massachusetts
  1. Thanks for the response Debtzapper. The fraud part would come I'm thinking if the case was reopened and It was proven that they did not actually owned the debt or had the documents to prove that they own it. Maybe it would not get that far the JDb could just dismissed the case all together if they saw the case heading down that road. I guest my lost is that it got to this point without me putting a proper defense! A lawyer that I talked with last year with regards to a case with midland offered me to participate in a potential class action law suite against midland and other JDB in MA. He mentioned that I guest there is an opening to sue the JDB in MA because in MA you must be a registered with the state as Debt collector. So my line of thinking was that Unifund corporation may not be registered in MA. They used an attorney but the grey area in what I've read in the law about this, is that it does not clearly exempt a JDB from registering in MA if they use an attorney.
  2. First off thanks to all in this community who contribute with very helpful information that others like myself have been able to use to fight off the JDB predators. Now for my current situation that I'm seeking help with. I'm in the state of MA. Back in 2012 a default judgement was entered against me for almost $10k including fees. The plaintiff is Unifund Corporation. The original creditior was Citi Card and original balance around $5k. Long story short, I did not know what I know now and have learned from being on this forum which I've used to successfully hold my own and have favorable outcomes in a few recent cases. Since the judgement I've been paying on and off $90 per month. towards the end of last year(September) I offered to settle the account for $1000 since that's all I could do and my energy was going to rework my mortgage situation which thankfully i have done. My offer was declined and counter at $6000. I told Unifund's attorney that for the time being I was not going to be able to make any more payments. In February 2015 I received a call from the the attorney and he told me that because a defaulted on a payment review conference that a Capias warrant for my arrest was issued and that unless i sent in a payment within 30 days that it would be excuted. I sent in a payment so I'm back on a verbal payment agreement. I never got a noticed from the court. The attorney stated that I was served- I never got the service. So my question is what can I do to fight this? I know that I have limited options from what I can see but was hoping that some of the great minds here can think of something that could be worth a try. In MA you can reopen a case to my knowledge if it was found that evidenced was fraudulent or for no being properly served. But here is the kicker.... Proper service in MA is the last known address of the person being served and get this; they don't have to give it to you personally. How can this be tracked? Any how I've been looking around to see if find anything on Unifund, if they can collect in MA without being registered as a debt collector or any other dirt that I can use. I know that if can get this case back open with what I know now I fight them away. Any help is appreciated.
  3. Thanks BV80 I guest my question to the court with regards to your point on preponderance of the evidence is that in this case there has to be a link established between the bill of sale and the credit card statement and affidavit, that being the account number being part of the book of accounts that the JDB purchased. If this is not the case all you 3 separate pieces of evidence that create the illusion of being linked. The way I see it any JDB or anyone can get a hold of CC statement, create an affidavit and a Bill of sale and sue anyone without showing a link between the evidence that supports the claim right? What I'm would like to find is a specific law that state the requirement to have standing to sue!! Thanks all
  4. Harry thanks for your input. To answer your question... 1. The bill of sale does not mention the actual account number other than the reference that is part of a book accounts that they purchased and that its part of a scheduled-exhibit that they did not show. In other words all they are saying is that my alleged account is included in the book of account yet they did not show this book of account or my account number in the bill of sale. The only other mention of this account number is on the affidavit that their employee made and a copy of an alleged last billing statement that shows a very questionable last payment labeled "deferred payment"(this raises some questions of SOL but we did not even get to argue this and in my opinion it should not get to this point if the plaintiff can not prove that they have standing to sue.) I attempted to raise this issue to the magistrate clerk who ruled in the case and it was as if this was not important. I clearly stated, "Mr. Clerk nothing on he bill of sale that the plaintiff introduced as evidence shows or referenced the alleged account they say I owed, this is not enough to establish ownership" and yet he still ruled against me. Is this not an error in applying the law? Must not someone clearly prove that they actually have the legal right to sue? I just can't figure out how a case is even heard without having these elements in place. Thanks for all your help...
  5. So if the initial judgment against me becomes prema facie evidence for the plaintiff in the appeal, How can I go about showing the judge that fact remains that the plaintiff did not prove that they have standing to sue. This was the basis of my appeal and it was granted. The plaintiff(Midland) only showed 1. a bill of sale that did not specifically referenced my alleged account. From what I learned here this is not enough to establish ownership right? 2. An affidavit by employee that can only testify to how midland keeps its record and who they bought the alleged account I owe from but can not testify on the previous owner manner of record keeping practices and the same for the original creditor(citibank) 3. One copy of an alleged credit card statement that shows the alleged last payment. The curious thing about this statement is that the last payment is not an actual payment that I made. It reads "deferred payment". I'm think this creates some issues with establishing SOL is it not? Can this be still argue or do I have to show something different?
  6. what should I do next now that I have the appeal in order to win and have the judgment vacated?
  7. Update & Good News: First thanks to all for your help so far. I'm glad to report a small victory in my opinion: I decided to file an appeal and just got the notice to inform that it will be heard yesterday; Just a couple of days after I filed the appeal. Now I mentioned this because when I went to file the appeal the clerk mentioned that it could take up to a couple of month before I hear anything back as far as if the appeal would be granted and a date for a trial. So I was bit surprised that I got a response this quickly and happy of the good news that the appeal was granted! That tells me a few things: 1. My appeal reason was strong and valid legal wise if it was not it would have not been granted(reason being the plaintiff has no standing to sue). I simply stated that the plaintiff failed to show that they actually own the debt that they are suing me on even though they introduced a bill of sale, an affidavit and one copy of CC statement. I simply pointed to the fact that the bill of sale does specifically show the account that they are suing me on and only makes reference to a book of accounts they say they purchased. 2. I think have very good chance of winning the case now after increasing my knowledge of the whole process after reading lots of good info on this forum in particular. Moving To what's Next? What should I do to be as best prepared as possible for the trial? Should I file a request to have the plaintiff produced actual documents that proves that they own the account they are suing me on and if so how can I do that? The Plaintiff can just fold... Potential outcomes: a) if they can not produced the documents that proves that they actually own the account, the judgement can get reversed They might just show up and let me prove my appeal which should lead to option a above. c) They may decided not to even bother and ask the case to be dismissed at this point(more cost for them if they can't easily produced the evidence needed to prove that they own the debt. d) They have additional evidence that would actually support their claim(at which point we can then move on to other points like SOL) At Trial what are some of the things I should do to NOT incriminate myself if they decide to fight and use legal tactics that I may not be familiar with? As an aside: It just boggles my mind that these JDB can just sue people without actually showing that they own the accounts that they are suing on. Doesn't the court/ judges, magistrate see this? I pointed this to the magistrate that heard my case and I'm still trying to figure out what was it that he did NOT understand about the fact of having legal standing to sue. I clearly pointed this out yet he awarded a judgement to the plaintiff, and yet it was enough for a judge(I think) to grant me an appeal based on this same fact????????
  8. If a magistrate decision becomes prima facie evidence in an appeal how should i word that prima facie evidence is incorrect in order to have the appeal go through for a trial under a judge? So the fact is: That magistrate found that a Bill of Sale that did not specifically showed the alleged account that I was sued on and an affidavit by an employee of the plaintiff were eneough to show that JDB was the owner of the alleged debt and had standing to sue. I just can't make sense how this is possible and need to show this fact on my appeal in order to have heard by judge!
  9. Sorry for the delay. Below are my answers in red! 1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit? Midland Funding 2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? (should be listed at the top of the complaint.) Lustig, Glasser & Wilson PC 3. How much are you being sued for? $1899 4. Who is the original creditor? (if not the Plaintiff) Citibank 5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?) Received summons via mail 6. How were you served? (Mail, In person, Notice on door) Mail 7. Was the service legal as required by your state? Process Service Requirements by State - Summons Complaint 8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued? 9. What state and county do you live in? Sullfok County, MA 10. When is the last time you paid on this account? (looking to establish if you are outside of the statute of limitations) According to statement they presented on 2008? 11. What is the SOL on the debt? To find out: 7 years in MA Statute of Limitations on Debts 12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed? You can find this by a) calling the court or looking it up online (many states have this information posted - when you find the online court site, search by case number or your name). Judgment for the plaintiff. 3 days left submit an appeal 13. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?) No 14. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? Note: if you haven't sent a debt validation request, don't bother doing this now - it's too late. I did but never got an answer. Pointed this out to the magistrate with no luck! 15. How long do you have to respond to the suit? (This should be in your paperwork). If you don't respond to the lawsuit notice you will lose automatically. In 99% of the cases, they will require you to answer the summons, and each point they are claiming. We need to know what the "charges" are. Please post what they are claiming. Did you receive an interrogatory (questionnaire) regarding the lawsuit? Here is an example of what the summons/complaint may look like: Sued by a Debt Collector - Learn How to Fight Debt Lawsuits 16. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affidavit? Statements from the OC? Contract? List anything else they attached as exhibits. Bill of sales Affidavits last CC statement
  10. ArtVandelay thanks for reply post. Very helpful. I will post the answer to your question shortly. Makes total sense!!
  11. I’m absolutely furious!!! That I lost my case against Midland That maybe I could have done a better job So a brief overview: I’m in the state of Massachusetts and what Midland does here is sue people in small claims court under a court magistrate and not a judge. I now can see how this also plays to their advantage, I’ll explain in minute. So I’ve been to this small claim fighting this case 3 times, The last being “the trial”. So Midland sues me for an alleged Citibank credit card debt they purchased that they say I owe. What I did: I requested validation of debt, which they did not even answered until the second court date and all they produced then was 1 copy of a 2008 statement which they claim is the last statement. They also provided an affidavit by some lady that claimed that she has personal knowledge about the account and how Midland handles it. And they also provided a Bill of sale(copy) that is to show that they own the account because they purchased it, yet the bill of sale does not make any reference to the actual account # or specifically shows the account # which is what they are suing in the first place.Based on my research I figured I had enough to prove that they did not have standing to sue in the first place because they failed to show that they specifically owned the account to begin with. I argued to the magistrate this fact and that unless they showed all the documents that the bill of sale makes reference to that contain the actual account# they have not shown any proof of standing to event sue in the first place. So I built my whole argument on this fact thinking that it is obvious that a person cannot sue another unless they actually have standing and can show that they legally can sue because they own the debt. Now to the point where this whole small claims court scenario I mentioned at the start is an advantage in Massachusetts to Midland. So before the trial begins the Magistrate goes over the instructions monologue and 2 things caught my attention: The magistrate says that since this is small claims the proceedings are very informal The rule of evidence is not in playWhat? ??? No wonder he did not pay attention to my argument of lack of standing!! So now here I am. I have 10 days to appeal for jury or judge trial, and according to what I’ve researched and the instructions, I must be very specific on the points that I’m appealing and must be a matter of law. I’m kindly asking for your help! I just can’t stand losing to the scum Midland!