fisthardcheese

Members
  • Content Count

    3,473
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    187

fisthardcheese last won the day on September 16

fisthardcheese had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,323 Excellent

About fisthardcheese

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

Profile Fields

  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

6,646 profile views
  1. This is true and something to take serious if you were filing UDAP claims against them in court. But you are doing it in arbitration. This means that Midland, a jdb that we know has yet to complete ONE arbitration case, would have to pay the filing fees, pay the arbitrator's retainer fee and pay for a hearing to argue that your UDAP claims do not meet the requirements under NY case law. This is why I, personally, have used UDAP in several GA arbitration cases with similar lamguage AND with the added issue that only actual real damages can be awarded. In otherwords, I could only be awarded $0 if I prevailed, but it still forced the other side to have to pay for arbitration to get that win, which is in itself your leverage against them. So how you proceed is up tp you. We cant make that decision. This is just the information we know.
  2. Ask for a hearing. The thing about all of this is that the Case Manager is not going to decide on any questions. They will simply ask for the JDB to pay the fees and let the arbitrator decide if the claims are eligible or not. This is also a potential argument that they will use in court against your MTC, so you will need to watch for that as well. When in doubt, go with the option that is more precise and clear.
  3. I would at the very least call the clerks office tomorrow and verify if the case is dismissed and the hearing is removed from the calendar. If so, then no need to go it. If there is any question about it at all, then I would still go in just to be sure.
  4. It is highly unlikely they would sue you again. I don't think I have ever seen it happen with Midland. When I file the JAMS case, again, I would send no filing fee in, and I would also include the judge's order granting the MTC to both JAMS and the attorney. Shortly after JAMS sends the confirmation of the case, I would contact the attorney and see if they are willing to settle for a mutual release. If you can get them to settle for a mutual release, that language should include the standard which "forever discharges" you of any liability to the account and debt. This agreement would prevent them from suing again and would be as good as a dismissal with prejudice.
  5. In that case, to answer your other question, there is nothing you can do to change it to 'with prejudice'. Just be happy and celebrate your very fortunate win!
  6. I dont know the specific court rule or case law without doing research, but common sense tells me that a party can not just willingly disregard an ordercof the court without recourse simply because part of the order stipulates the plantiff may reopen the case for nonperformance. The order does not preclude other actions, and there must be a way for the Defendant to notice the court of Plaintiff's non action. I would say that Defendant is not looking to REOPEN the case per se, but to motion to sanction the Plaintiff for not performing a court ordered action. Anyone should be able to file some type of petition or motion for this.
  7. It is rare that they will dismiss just on the filing of an MTC, but you did a great job. Congrats!!
  8. Dispute inaccurate information with ample documentation. CMRRR and copies of everything you send the CRAs. If inaccurate information remains as 'verified' by the collection agent or OC, then my next move is to file an arbitration case against them if arbitration is in the original card agreement.
  9. I wouldn't pay a penny. I think you are really over thinking this. Is your attorney still working on this case? He should have known how to handle things. If this were me, I would immediately file the JAMS case and send NO money. I would wait to see what Midland does. I believe there is a 95% chance they will completely ignore the case or ask for a settlement once their deadline to pay is sent by JAMS. If the arbitration is closed due to non payment, then you have the option to file a motion with the court to sanction the Plaintiff for not following the courts order and perhaps ask them to change the dismissal to a dismissal with prejudice as part of the sanctions. If Midland chooses to settle, the settlement should include language that says you are released of all liability of the account and debt. This release means they should remove it from your credit reports upon a dispute to the CRAs. They will not be able to verify a debt that you are released from (without violating a few consumer laws) and therefore the CRAs will have to delete it. Lastly, if all the dates and amounts on your credit reports are 100% accurate down to the penny and that all those amounts are the same amount they sued me for to the penny (which would be unusual), then I would check phone records and see if they called my cell phone in potential TCPA violations.
  10. This is nothing to dwell on. Midland works by computer. You have thrown a wrench into their machine and it is now spitting out things in random order. MCM letters and removal of credit reports has nothing to do with what the attorney does. The 2 machines are not talking to each other and never will. Your only concern should be with the attorney and nothing more.
  11. The letter from Midland about verifying or investigating the debt is irrelevant at this point. That is just a computer generated response when they get anything they consider a "DV" letter or any dispute. I would respond to AAA with the attorney copied and state that you object to the attorney's misrepresentation of your claims. I would state that your Arbitration Demand clearly states what your claim is about and in no way does it mention debt collection. I would then go on to state that you are now amending your Demand to include Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices (or the equivalent law in your state). I would usually say I would include an FDCPA violation at this point due to their lies about your AAA filing and the fact about paying the fees, but I would just steer clear of all "debt" related laws for right now and just make it a state UDAP violation instead. I would also state that I object to the mischaracterization of the contract language which clearly states that the company Respondent is responsible for all filing fees. Just keep in mind that right now, your claims in AAA have nothing to do with THEIR court case, but only your non-debt claims. This is what will trip them up. They are conflating it and believing that you are filing AAA claims about their lawsuit. But that is not the case, especially since no MTC has been granted.
  12. He called it a consent judgement, though? Have you gotten anything in writing yet? What was the judge's order in the end? Calling it a consent judgement sounds fishy to me.
  13. This is just an option. It is what I would do personally. However you can also just accept the dismissal and be done with it too.
  14. This is very good, but if it were me I would check my court rules on dismissal. It is very likely that due to your motion being filed, they are supposed to get your agreement for a stipulated dismissal. If the rules say this, then I would personally file an objection to their lack of contacting you to stipulate and agreement but state in my objection that I will agree to a dismissal with prejudice.