• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


  • Rank

Profile Fields

  • Location
  1. The evidence JDBs have is MUCH better now than it was in the past. Don't assume anything. That is why I am suggesting arbitration. If you go against them in court, and they produce the goods, you have lost. If you go the arbitration route, you are lost if they produce the goods AND if they are willing to pay more $ to fight this case than they could collect from you. Most of the time, they don't bother to fight it out. If they are already in court, you KNOW they will fight this to the bitter end in court. See the difference? Yep thanks. I'm going to generally answer and ask for time to contact a lawyer. Then I'm going to see if I can chapter 7.
  2. I see. I still have my doubts that they will produce an actual list showing ownership of any particular account from a large debt purchase. Perhaps that's wishful thinking on my part. Regardless, there are still rules for affidavits that must be followed correctly to enter them into evidence. My contention is that they didn't provide anything in the complaint to substantiate their ownership claim. They didn't include a bill of sale or assignment just a printout of the original account actions at time of last activity (in this case an Amazon bill). That still doesn't prove they own it. But then again they might just have that we'll see.
  3. Thanks for your help. Like you said, they might have evidence and perhaps not. I'm hoping that their bill of sale lacks the attachment of list of accounts to actually prove that their purchase included the account and not just hearsay. All debt purchases have 1: A bill of sale 2: The attachment 3: List of accounts associated with said purchase. I've read that the majority of junk debt buyers don't produce the attachment and certainly not a list linking any particular account to their million X debt purchase at auction. A bill of sale is worthless on it's own and doesn't prove anything in relation to any particular debt.
  4. Please explain. Are the california rules that differn't now? the JDB doesn't need to prove they have standing or ownership of an account?
  5. Thanks a lot for posting this. I'm curious as to not bringing up any affirmative defences (Standing and lack of ownership in the original complaint) since they will see what you're asking for in discovery anyway. I think if they don't have real proof now they won't later either so why not kock this out sooner?
  6. I had the date wrong as I wrote that in the middle of the night. It's actually the 28th of March I was served in person at home. Here's the terms https://www.synchronybankterms.com/gecrbterms/pdf/AmazonCreditCard.pdf My goal is for the JDB to prove that it owns the account by providing an assinement+bill of sale and then to get them to prove that what they provide is legal. I also might use the defense that they haven't proved that it is in fact me. I intened to follow this post in part https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/ Since we share the same state. I also am unsure of the copies they provided fall under the hearsay rule since they are simply computer generated screenshots or printout showing account and name but are not offered verified.
  7. I'm being sued by CAVALRY SPV I, LLC an assignee for SYCHRONY BANK GE CAPITAL. I was served on the 28th of March. The amount owed is just under 10,000. The only document they provided in the complaint was a computer copy of the account in question at the time of default (Looks like screenshots from a website generated account itself). It's not certfied and is redacted. They are unsure as to the identy so list two names both of which are my name but one with "AKA" and my middle initial. They list amounts, dates of last payment and charge-off and alledge to be the sole owners of said debt. They claim to be the 'assignee' and sole buyer of the charged-off debt. I desire to fight this on grounds of standing. In my ANSWER I plan to use the general denial since it's not a verified complaint. I am confused concerning AFFIRMATIVE DEFENCES. Shall I list standing and lack of documents for AD or leave them wondering what I am planning? Do I lose my defense in relation to their standing if I don't use it as an AFFIRMATIVE DEFENCE? Thanks!