• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


stick&rudder last won the day on December 31 2015

stick&rudder had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About stick&rudder

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,420 profile views
  1. It should. And I think the OP said he already sent them a letter invoking arbitration. It's hard to remember what really happened on topic thanks to hyper-witch and the case of the over-loaded ego. Seems that any response from the OP would not involve the court, since the court clerk said they cannot accept an answer until a complaint is filed. As long as the OP sent sufficient notice to the plaintiff that arbitration was being invoked, what do you think about the OP sending that demand notice? Might paint the plaintiff into a corner where they are forced to make a decision and eithe
  2. Well, yeah, if you choose(as you obviously did) to ignore everything else I said in that post and take one sentence all by itself, completely out of context. But the thing is, you cannot just do that and then pretend that the one sentence alone shows everything that was meant in the whole post. I said that the federal law trumps state law, but I was MUCH more specific than that in the post and you know it. Do you really have this much trouble with arrogance that you cannot even just state truth about what that post said? Never mind, I guess you do. Everything I said in that p
  3. I'm referring to the FDCPA, I showed you what the FDCPA says. So, you get up on your high and mighty horse, and go COMPLETELY away from the FDCPA to show something that I was not even talking about???? And THIS is how far you feel you need to go to try to show that I am wrong about something? Wow, you don't get out much, do you? I suppose I could do you the favor of pointing out your error. It should have been obvious, but it is what it is as they say. Here's a snap shot of what I told you earlier: Clearly I was talking about when there IS a conflict between state and
  4. Why would the OP contact a MA consumer attorney when he's in North Dakota? Just wondering. Please indicate to me where the law states that NO complaint needs to be filed before default can occur? If you claim that the law allows it, then CERTAINLY it would have to say so in there. So, you're content to pick out one sentence and pretend that it does not need to be taken in context with the rest of the post? Thanks, good to know. NO, it is NOT. The Supreme Court does NOT create those laws that create the standards for procedure. The LAWMAKERS do. And if you need any fu
  5. Does it now? Please, then, with your infinite expertise, show us where the law in question does NOT say just what I posted that it does. Don't worry, we'll wait. Aren't you the one who tries to have her cake and eat it to as they say in here? criticizing people because they do the same thing you think you are entitled to do here? Why do you choose to get so offended at people? It's a forum, clydesmom. We are not all going to have the same answer. So far, I have posted about the law, quoted the law, spoken my opinion about the law. All you have done is try to insult me. Wha
  6. The reasoning is because debt collectors had their hand in some laws being written. It's a way to get the state to help debt collectors file lawsuits without having to spend all sorts of money to ever file complaints. Here's how they use it: First, they send this "summons" to the consumer. They wait to see if the consumer responds at all. If the consumer never responds, then they file their complaint and get the default judgment. If the consumer DOES respond, they look at the response. If the consumer's response has any merit to it at all, the JDB can avoid losing money on the cost
  7. Does not matter. How can there be a default judgment when no complaint has ever been filed and the court has no jurisdiction? You're swinging away at the nearest tree, but missing the entire forest in the process. If the plaintiff never actually files the complaint, and the defendant never "Serves" an answer, how can there ever be a default judgment in the court? You are still missing the fact that there MUST be a complaint filed before there could EVER be a default judgment. That's why this could potentially be misleading, and in violation of FDCPA. It fails to inform the least sophisti
  8. You do have another option, I think. You could file the arbitration now. There is nothing that requires you to wait to use arbitration until this ends up in a court. So, you could file the arbitration now. They will most likely refuse to go into arbitration with you. So, you will have paperwork showing that they refused to arbitrate the dispute with you. Then, if they do try to sue you, you can present a copy of the arbitration paperwork to the court and explain that this plaintiff already had the opportunity to address their dispute, but refused to abide by the terms of the agreemen
  9. You misread my post. I am talking about FDCPA, not state rules of procedure. It's not permitted in FDCPA for a JDB to state that something WILL happen simply because it CAN happen. Since the defendant's act of filing an answer REQUIRES the plaintiff to not only serve the summons, but actually file the complaint in ND, then there is no possible way for the defendant in ND to do what that summons says. it states that you WILL get a default judgment against you if you do not file. Courts have held that this constitutes a threat of an action taking place, as opposed to saying that you "MAY" e
  10. Is there anything in the court filings that would show that they were aware of the more recent address? Sometimes, they will actually list out an address in their complaint, stating that you live at such and such, and therefore venue is proper. Or, do you have any correspondence between you and the debt collector(or their attorney in this case) that shows they knew you no longer lived at that old address? If they ever sent you a collection letter, or the law firm ever sent you notice that they represent the JDB? I can see them claiming that it was a bona fide error because that addres
  11. This is incorrect information. You cannot answer when no lawsuit has ever been filed. How can he answer if the courts do not accept an answer when no complaint was filed? OP, read the rule that CommoSGT posted. If they do not file the complaint, you can send them notice demanding that they do. From that point, if they never do file it within 20 days, then the summons is void. The defendant's notice demanding that they file the suit must contain the statement that if they do not file the lawsuit within 20 days of receipt, then the summons is void. You might consider sending them that
  12. Well, when you have more than 200 calls, recorded, when you've constantly been telling them that you revoked their consent to call and their response has always been, "we can call you anyways, we dont need your consent, and these calls will continue until you pay up, no matter what you think or say", I'm pushing for that judge's discretion. If it is supposed to be reserved for the most willful, intentional cases, well, then, I think that this one certainly qualifies. This JDB has no doubt been very deliberate in its choice to continue harassing me all this time, even though there is no debt
  13. You can disagree all you like, clydesmom, but that does not change the letter of the law. Claiming that a debt has gone undisputed when it HAS been disputed is mischaracterizing the status of the debt. You dont have to like it for it to be the truth. Can you provide case law examples where a similar situation happened and the court sided with the JDB, who ignored a legit dispute that was timely? Please let us know when you can. In the meantime, I'll rely on what the law actually says in lieu of what you do not like, thanks. Simply telling me you dont agree does not change the status of w
  14. As I recall there are two general violations for cell phone calls. First is autodialers. Second would be using prerecorded messages. They need express consent to call a cell phone using either. In my most recent situation, I just record the calls(legal in my state so I do it every time lol) and I got the reps on the phone to admit that they use autodialer systems. Got it on the digital recording. Brought it to an attorney, he laughed at it. He thought it was funny that it seemed so casual that these violations were happening, and the reps were so willing to discuss it. But be careful,
  15. I thought it was $500 per call unless you can show that their calls were intentional. then, it jumps to $1500 per violation. Wheels up, Stick