iabulldog

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

iabulldog last won the day on November 7 2017

iabulldog had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About iabulldog

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Iowa
  1. I don't believe Troll is a song, but I am sure you sing it well
  2. UPDATE: As of today 11/7/17 Midlund funding has agreed in mitigation to fold and wipe the debt clean. They have also agreed to show paid in full and contact the credit agencies. This was all agreed to be done with proof prior to Dec 1st, 2017 otherwise we will be going to court.
  3. Third Circuit Review: Bursting The Presumption The Third Circuit vacated summary judgment and remanded the case after concluding that the district court misapplied the presumption. The circuit noted that the presumption was not conclusive and could be rebutted. The circuit distinguished between strong and weak presumptions under the mailbox rule:
  4. Actually just recently Third Circuit considers the operation of the mailbox rule presumption under FRE 301 and the circumstances in which the presumption may be rebutted; circuit distinguishes between strong and weak presumptions; summary judgment was vacated after the circuit concluded that the district court misapplied the presumption, in Lupyan v. Corinthian Colleges Inc., _ F.3d _ (3d Cir. Aug. 5, 2014) (No. 13–1843) The mailbox rule established a general presumption that a letter properly directed and mailed is presumed to reach its destination at the regular time and be received by the person to whom it sent. However, the presumption may be rebutted. The Third Circuit recently considered the operation of the presumption under the mailbox rule and the circumstances in which the presumption could be burst or rebutte
  5. The way he said it was just producing a typed letter doesnt prove it was mailed. Most Judges he has spoken with and knows, that if one party is showing proof of shipment and deleivery confirmation on letters they expect the same from the other parties.
  6. I was told by a lawyer friend (family law) that in his experiance just produce a letter is not proof said letter was mailed. And could be argued they never sent it and burden of proof would then fall to the collector.
  7. @ Clydesmom and BV80 - You are correct and I meant to say that I requested the debt validation within my 30-day window and was very clear of the dates in the letter. Where they violated the FDCPA is that they never provided me the proof of Debt Validation, as it clearly states in section 809 paragraph b ) That the debt collector must mail a copy of the Debt Validation to the consumer (me). They did not do that, instead they sued me two months later - in clear violation of FDCPA Also - In violation of the FCBA (Fair Credit Bill Act) when a consumer disputes a debt in writing the collection agency have to report it as disputed by the consumer or some other wording - which they did not, so I disputed on the credit reporting agencies end. § 809. Validation of debts (b) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) of this section that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this subchapter may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumer’s right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor.
  8. So I got a letter June 21st from a Law firm representing Midland Funding LLC about an old Credit card debt I thought I had paid off. So I immediately fired off with a debt Validation letter that was sent delivery confirmation. I was very specific on the debt validation letter and specified that they need to respond by 30-days and also stated that there client needed to stop reporting me to the collection agency while this debt was in dispute. In September I get a certified letter telling me I am being sued, and had my first mediation date, in that mediation date I was very clear that they violated the FDCPA and was in defamation of character. We saw a judge but because the efile system was down and the lawyer for Midland had no clue about the Debt validation I new mediation time was set for this Nov 7th. In that time I have since counter sued for violation of FDCPA, Time, Stress, and Defamation of Character. So I submitted my counter suite and all the attachments and now I am just waiting... I am just nervous and not sure what to do from here as I have never sued or counter sued anyone before.