Inundated

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Inundated last won the day on January 9 2017

Inundated had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

About Inundated

  • Rank
    CIC Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just a little update: we received checks for our costs on the last two suits against us. The one for the case that they'd dismissed in December, not so much. Still, the two came at a good time...and the last one might have been filed a bit late (over a month after we filed). We were able to recover the costs for our postage (over a dozen letters sent CMRRR), the subpoena service, the and the initial cost of filing a general denial ($240 in our area, for each case). Had we filed any motions, we likely would have been reimbursed for those as well. The MC-010 forms don't make any a
  2. Posted a link in the winner's thread I think it goes without saying that defendants will occasionally lose, but the only thing you really risk is the court fees and time. I'd say the odds of winning far supercede the cost, especially given the high success rate in defense of people that invest the time to do it properly.
  3. With the help of the posters in this forum, we managed to get three cases dismissed against us: In total, we were able to prevent about $4,500 in judgements against us. We were so terrified when we were served with the first two...and then the third came, and we were just about pushed over the edge. A few days ago, the last (and largest) of the three suits was dismissed by the plaintiff. For anyone out there that's just been served, who may be terrified and afraid at what may be coming, we say to you this: turning your back on the monster doesn't make it disappear--it only m
  4. They seemed pretty familiar when we tried to submit ours originally, but we'll deal with any sort of misunderstanding as it comes. Getting (or not getting) our court fees + costs back is small potatoes after all of this, in terms of what's at stake and level of difficulty
  5. So we kept our eyes on the docket, and the dismissal never showed up...so we stayed up late last night (well, my wife mostly), preparing for battle. We printed out the tips that we got in this thread and some of the tips from "Sued by CACH, LLC" (skates97's thread). I went over everything with my wife, explaining why the evidence was pertinent and what to do in which situation. And we went down there with the dismissal notice in hand. We got down to the courthouse about 20 mins early, and saw that the case was still on the docket. The courtroom was pretty sparse, which I took as a goo
  6. That sounds like the kind of thing we might have fallen for if it hadn't been mentioned. Thanks!
  7. re Scenario 4: we did send out a CCP96, to which they replied with a statement of witnesses and evidence that listed three other employees of Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, my wife, and the declarant in the original CCP98 (which we received before sending out the CCP 96). The interesting part was that the address that they listed for the CCP 98 declarant in their response to our CCP 96 was different than the address that she gave in the CCP 98, which I pointed out in our trial brief and MIL. I felt that it indicated (somewhat) that they were purposely being duplicitous. Thanks a
  8. Update: we've received notice that they intend to dismiss the case! The docket hasn't been updated yet, and we intend to go down there unless it is...but they've dismissed the two prior without incident, so we're hoping they don't try to do anything silly with this one. When I just jumped into this thread to give the news and saw your avatars, I actually got a little choked up, ha ha. I'm really not the emotional type, but this has been like a lingering icicle working its way toward our hearts for six months now...and all of you gave us hope and direction when we thought there was
  9. So this is where we're at: We've submitted our objection to the Plaintiff's Testimony in Lieu of Personal Testimony at Trial. At our locale, they preferred that it be titled "Motion in Limine #1." But I did not fail by labeling it as accurately as I could. It turns out that there was very little that needed to be done between Skate97's declaration and our own. More than anything else, I've overworked it because of nerves: the local rules wanted things in a certain format, and it was different than most of the trial briefs/motions that I've emulated from these forums. It's import
  10. Update: the court docket reflect the dismissal of case "X" Quick question--in filing an objection to their CCP 98, do we have to mention everything contained therein separately or can we just object to it as a whole (given that they gave us a fake address for subpoena)?
  11. I've pointed out the discrepancies in the trial brief, but kept everything similar to the one in Skates97's. The main difference is that the counts were different in that one: ours is Account Stated and Open Book Account, that one was Account Stated and Breach of Contract. So I've had to educate myself a bit on the differences and edit accordingly. The business mentioned in Skates97's trial brief was the same, but the address was different. They must vacate a lot of units, ha ha ;). I did make it a point to bring up the third case (that they'd dismissed a few weeks ago): the address
  12. A little update, I found Skates97's thread "Sued by CACH," along with the redacted documents, and realized that almost everything that occurred in his/her case was almost exactly the same as ours--down to the subpoena served to a vacant address. Even the name of the business at said to be at the vacant address is the same (!) What was shaping-up to be a long night of writing is turning into a good night's rest
  13. This has been an immense help, I can't thank you enough for posting these
  14. Okay, will do Because all of that "evidence" is contained in their CCP 98 and response to our Demand for Production of Documents (aside from two alleged statements), and because the same person was the declarant for both of those bodies of "evidence," I was wondering if both could be thrown out based on the fact that the declarant lied about their address in the CCP 98? To me, it's not simply a matter of failing to provide an address within 150 miles of the courthouse, or even providing an address that listed "care of" such-and-such business," because that address was totally vacant--in
  15. Update: we received a notice of dismissal on Case "X," though the docket hasn't been updated yet. We intend to continue on as if it hadn't been received until we see that it has actually been dismissed. If it actually is dismissed, we'll be 2/2 this far with your help The letter is going out today. We're also sending out a letter for Case "Y," letting them know that we will be filing to suppress based upon the failed subpoena due to false address given. Here is the draft (names, dates, addresses largely redacted): https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7PF8rzk-rDFczB5WXgyZHFQRDA