BackFromTheDebt

Members
  • Content Count

    720
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by BackFromTheDebt

  1. That looks like a good plan. I would suggest something different, though. I would suggest filing a Motion To Dismiss With Prejudice, on the grounds that the SOL passed in Idaho while you were still living there. If the MTD is granted, the case is completely dead, and you don't need to go into JAMS. You would have already won. If that fails, you can go into JAMS. You probably want some violations to use to chase them away in JAMS if you go that route. One good violation would be suing you past the SOL, since you defaulted in Idaho and they sued past the SOL date. In fact, you might want to track down a good consumer lawyer to see if he thinks it wise to sue them for FDCPA violations for suing past the SOL.
  2. Yes, you are over worrying this one. This is a desperation move, a Hail Mary thrown by a backup quarterback from his own end zone. The judge ruled in your favor once on this issue. Why would the judge ignore simple contract law?
  3. Agreed. You can use the same arguments you used in your MTC, to some extent. The contract does not give them the right to pick and choose which provisions they like.
  4. I would make the JAMS agreement the MAIN focus of the objection. Perhaps a second part to the objection where you quote the 2002 contract, but perhaps not. This depends on your strategy -- do you want to force them into a time-wasting argument as to whether to use the 2002 or 2014 contract, which you will probably lose, now or later. If it were me, I would want that argument later. At some point they might try to get it thrown out of arbitration because the 2014 agreement no longer has arb. However, the court ordered it, and they did not object, so that is a moot point. If you are hoping to drive up their expenses, it might be better to have the argument over which contract to use decided by the arbitrator after a conference hearing as a separate issue.
  5. Norm has some good points. Read through the forum about Georgia cases. Norm is the go-to guy from Georgia. Also, you mentioned Synchronicity. I believe that all of their credit cards have arbitration agreements. What does that mean? Court is a very cheap way for them to collect money. Arbitration is very expensive, and costs more to collect than what they could possibly collect. Most JBDs, including Midland, have a strong aversion to arbitration. If you can file an MTC for arbitration, that will get it out of the courts and into expensive arbitration. It means they will probably walk away from the debt, rather than fight it out with you. While you are reading, also read up on arbitration and JAMS. Look up their website to see how to file. Ask questions here as they come up. The more you learn on your own, the better, but we can help. You need some good luck in your life. The great Louis Pasteur said: "Chance favors the prepared mind". Prepare you mind so you can get your good luck.
  6. There are all sorts of sample forms in the Sample Form subsection of this forum. Basically, they show you how to write a pleading. Put something like "OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S DEMAND FOR FEES" in the title. As the body, make sure you put the stuff from the JAMS letter, and move that JAMS deny the request. Look at some sample forms to see how to write it legal style.
  7. Just file an objection. It doesn't matter if there is an arbitrator or not. File an objection the way you would with a court, just use JAMS instead of the court.
  8. Well, the first lawyer was stupid to allow this to get into arbitration, but that is water under the bridge. Fact of the matter is, you are in JAMS. They agreed to get into JAMS. There are certain rules for JAMS. Read up on the JAMS rules. Very carefully. Also read up on California law. Then see where what they are doing goes against the JAMS rules, and California law. Write up an objection to their counter claim for attorneys fees and JAMS fees and the like. Thing is, in JAMS, you HAVE to object to any games they play. If they try something sleazy, you must object.
  9. There is an interesting experience I had, and I know of at least one person on that other board who had the same experience. In both of our cases, we made a settlement offer to Discover. They declined. Mine was right when I filed in JAMS but before the fees were paid. I think his were about the same time. In both of our cases, we made exactly the same settlement offer to Discover between the time they got the bill for the hearing, and when they had to pay the bill. In both of our cases, Discover accepted exactly the same settlement offer they had previously rejected. Of course, YMMV. These are just two data points. Still, since the OP can't work out an agreement with Discover, here is what I would do in that situation: 1. Offer what I can afford, but put a time limit to that offer so as not to impede the case in JAMS. Write the JAMS files in the meantime. 2. If the offer is rejected or the time expires, file in JAMS. 3. Make the same offer to Discover after filing in JAMS. 4. If they have rejected or ignored the offer twice, save up some money while the case goes through discovery, conference calls, etc. 5. When it is time for the hearing, offer Discover what you can afford to pay.
  10. @Indy17 You have a choice to make: keep this in court or take it to arbitration. I really don't know if arbitration is an option. Does Discover have a small claims exemption? If you are going the arbitration route, remember that Discover rarely walks away. I say rarely, because there are exceptions to everything. I was able to get a very satisfactory settlement in arbitration with Discover, but then I had real violations against them and there were a few issues with the records. Even so, they waited until almost the time of the hearing before agreeing to settle. The reason why some people go into arbitration against Discover is to force them to settle. @Clydesmom will be very happy to tell you that a losing case in court is also a losing case in arbitration. The thing is, you don't expect to win. You want to put pressure on them to accept a settlement offer you can live with. There are several points at which they are more lilkely to settle: 1. Between the time you initiate in JAMS and when they pay the initial fees. 2. Between the time they are billed right before the hearing, and when they pay. This is when I settled, and some others settled here as well. Note that they will be more likely to settle if they see you are not a complete idiot. 3. If you lose the hearing, you file for appeal. The third point is between the time they are billed for the initial fees for the appeal, and when they pay. 4. Between the time they are billed for the appeal hearing, and when they pay. If you go through the arbitration route, you may be able to buy some time and wear them down a bit for a better settlement. If they agree to a settlement before you file in JAMS and file an MTC, great. If you go this route, it will be time consuming. Be forewarned.
  11. I almost wish I had known about this back in the day. Instead, I had to fill out forms to the IRS that showed I was insolvent. If one is insolvent, one doesn't pay taxes in general. Exception: suppose you are $2000 under water including the debt and you get a 1099 for $3000. Now you are above water by $1000, so you have to pay taxes on that amount.
  12. Check your agreement. I think this agreement forces them to pay everything. There is a tactic I used a few times: I filed in JAMS, and then tried negotiating before paying the money. In some cases, I wound up having to pay the money to keep the case going. For one case, I negotiated a settlement before either side paid the fees. Cap 1's sleazy lawyer said Cap 1 would pay my fees if I asked. They didn't pay either my fees or theirs, and the case was dismissed w/o prejudice from the court, and they never tried to sue me again. So, in your case, I would file with JAMS but do not pay. Send a letter to the other side (the address should be in the arbitration agreement) requesting they pay your fees or advance your money to pay the fees. Then start negotiating.
  13. In 48 states, and NY is one of those 48 states, the debt persists after the SOL. Which means, they are permitted to try to collect the debt as long as they are clear they cannot sue you, or, if past the reporting date, they cannot report to the CRA. Some people feel guilty about walking away from their debts. They are hoping you will feel guilty, and pay them the money. Note that they still won't reinstate your AmEx card if you do pay them 55%. Ever. For the rest of your life. There are only two reasons to pay them anything: 1. You just feel SO guilty about walking away from a debt with the banksters you can't live with yourself, or 2. You work out an agreement that if you pay $X to AmEx they will reinstate your card. For most of us, the value of having an AmEx card isn't worth paying them off. Otherwise, round file this one.
  14. There are only two possibilities: The guy is working with the attorney in question, or He is not and is making the whole thing up. When people post on forums asking for advice, I treat them as if they are telling the truth. The small amount of damage done by occasionally falling for someone's false story is much less than the good that gets done when the story, no matter how incredible, is true. Based on that, I will only say this: Everyone agrees the attorney in question is an excellent attorney and a great guy. Good for him. Based on the assumption the OP is really working with this Jerry dude, I will only say that any advice any of us can give on this case is probably inferior to the advice Jerry can give. So anything any of us can say is probably a waste of time. Suppose the OP is NOT working with this Jerry fellow. In that case, the story is made up, and anything any of us can say is absolutely a waste of time. @Clydesmom: With all due respect, why waste your time? Either you are being counterproductive or at best beating a dead horse. Speaking of dead horses, I guess bringing up Coltfan occasionally is worthwhile, as long as it is not overdone. If one can't be a good example, at least one can be a horrible warning.
  15. I usually get Two Buck Chuck (actually $2.99 now. Inflation) at Trader Joe's. The trick is, find a more expensive wine of the same type. Then, keep the bottle around but keep refilling it with the 2-Buck Chuck. Try to get as close in taste as possible. If the 2-Buck Chuck isn't sweet, but the fancy stuff is, this won't work.
  16. AAA closing the case for non-payment is a win for you. For my cases, the one non-payment (Cap 1, back when they had arbitration) led to a dismissal without prejudice, but the dismissal was actually before the case was closed, so I kept quiet. Of course you vastly prefer dismissal with prejudice. Even if the case is dismissed without prejudice, if they sue again after arbitration has already been filed, that is a clear FDCPA violation. Not to mention a good MTD on the grounds of res judicata.
  17. Too late for that. They've already sued you in court. What you need now is a Motion To Compel Arbitration (MTC) to get it OUT of court. One way to do this is to file in JAMS before you get served, or shortly after you get served. Not a big difference. Then, when you get served, file an MTC with the court. If they had violated anything, it would be good to put in the complaint you send to JAMS. One thing you can do. You can file a complaint in JAMS, and just mention "violations of the FDCPA", or something generic as the complaint. Send a copy of the complaint to the attorney listed on the Summons. Then, before the deadline to reply, file your MTC. That won't prevent them from suing, nor will it wipe out the records of the suit, but it should get it out of court and into JAMS. My point was, if you do everything right, they lose their weapon of fear against you. When you are behaving in a rational and un-fearful manner, then you can get your best result.
  18. The other thing -- Yeah, yeah, yeah your name is on a court case. We have all been there many times. They make a good living off of FEAR. The fear the consumer has of being sued. If you just do what you need to do, and don't be afraid, you will be in great shape. Once I realized I didn't have to live my life in fear, I slept a lot better, my life got a lot better, and I was able to defend myself in all the debt cases. I never lost a credit card case.
  19. "We will not require you to" does not preclude you from arbitration. Also, notice they say they may require you to arbitrate if you claim any wrongdoing on their part. Have they done anything wrong? This may be a good situation for filing arbitration before you get served.
  20. Probably the best thing to do is not to talk to them at all.
  21. Did you record this conversation? Or at least take copious notes? At this point, the probability of this being a scam is about 100%. You have been outright lied to a number of times. I have no idea if you said something that restarted the SOL or not.
  22. @Harry Seaward -- Excellent point. In the very early days of the arbitration strategy, we didn't ever move to compel. We always moved to stay the case for arbitration. Doing both makes a lot of sense.
  23. Pretty much so. If the choice is BK and give the money to the trustee, or no BK and use the money to settle, why not settle?
  24. I am of three opinions on this. On one hand, there is a case to be made that your debts are fairly small, so why waste bankruptcy on these debts when you might need it later when you run into some really big debts, such as medical expenses? On the second hand, there is a case to be made that those debts may not be big, but they are big FOR YOU. If you don't have money saved up, then you can't really help anything. On the third hand, if you can come up with enough money to settle, then that money would disappear in BK anyway, so why not settle. On the fourth hand -- joking. People don't have four hands. It might be a really good idea to get a consultation with a competent bankruptcy attorney.
  25. Bankruptcy is interesting. For some it is a godsend, for others an albatross. There are so many variables. Can you qualify for Ch. 7? What sort of assets do you have? Are the protected assets, or unprotected assets? In my case, my salary at the time was barely enough for me to support a larger-than-average family, but probably too high for BK 7. My home was under water, I had very little in retirement funds, and just about all my assets were in things like my wife's jewelry, which we probably would've had to have sold, including her engagement ring. Also, that was a very good time to fight. Creditors didn't always have good records. The creditors and the CAs weren't very good about following state and federal laws (such as the FDCPA, etc.). They were often overwhelmed by cases. Many law firms could be scared away just with the word "arbitration". So, for me, BK was worse than fighting. And, trust me on this one, I researched BK a LOT before I decided against it. I decided to try to fight it out and BK if I failed, and I was lucky enough that with good record keeping and hundreds of hours of work or more I was able to keep the wolves at bay. I've known other people who have gone the BK route, and for them it was a lot better. They could get out from under a mountain of debt, and they didn't have to spend the time I did. When you see people talking about how this or that strategy worked so well for them, remember it worked so well for THEM. Maybe it would for you, maybe not. To a hammer everything looks like a nail. TO a BK lawyer, BK is always the best option. To someone who was able to fight off creditors in arbitration, arbitration is always the best option. For someone who was able to fight off creditors in court, fighting it out it court is always the best option. What are your options? 1. BK 2. Settlements 3. Fighting it out in court and/or arbitration. Note that these are NOT mutually exclusive. A number of people, including myself, have used fighting it out in court as a way to buy some time to negotiate a settlement. Others have done the same with arbitration. What is best for YOU? I really don't know. I would suggest talking to a BK lawyer, and also talking to the lawyers for Cap 1 about settlement. If you can come up with a settlement you can live with, fine. If not, perhaps BK is your best bet.