Lady Bug

Members
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Lady Bug


  1. Thank you so much for the quick reply, and yes, you understood the bank situation correctly.

    There are actually 31 complaints listed on the summons. Some of the key ones include these:

    ^ pursuant to California Civil Code 1788.58(a)(3), plaintiff is the sole owner of the debt. Attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit a is a true and correct copy of the bill of sale from bank B to the plaintiff. The account was purchased by the plaintiff on September 2017. 
    {COMMENT: This agreement was between bank B (not the original lender/creditor) and Midland, and contains no information about the actual account number, my name, or anything else.}.  There is also a "portfolio level affidavit of sale by original creditor." Some guy swears that he is the president of bank B and the custodian of certain books and records. Then it says "on 9/17, bank B, sellar, sold a pool of charged-off accounts to Midland funding.... I am not aware of any errors in the accounts. Then the form is notarized. But again, nothing mentioned about Bank A (my original bank) or my name, the credit card/account number, or anything else. Then there is a certificate of conformity.}

    ^ Pursuant to California Civil Code 1788.58(a)(4), the following is an explanation of the amount that the plaintiff is seeking to recover at the time of the filing of this complaint: charge-off balance 8K. Total post charge-off interest, 0, and total post charge-off fee, 0. Footnotes: this amount may include the charge-off principal amount and pre-charge-off occurred interest as set forth in the sellar data sheet attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit a. Footnote: this amount is not reflective of the costs incurred in the filing and service of this action which are recoverable pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 1033.5.

    ^ Pursuant to CCC 1788.58(a)(6), plaintiff alleges that the name of the charge-off creditor at the time of the charge-off is bank B. Then it gives the address of the bank and an accurate account number.

    ^ Pursuant to CCC 1788.58(a)(9) plaintiff alleges that it has complied with the provisions of CCC 1788.52 and that it informed defendant of the assignment of the account attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the first written communication sent to the consumer by plaintiff. COMMENT: this initial notification had all sorts of problems with it like completely forgetting the mandatory notification.

    ^ Pursuant to CCC 1788.58(b) attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit C is a true and correct copy of a monthly statement recording a purchase transaction payment or balance transfer while the account was active as required by CCC 1788.52(b).

    ^ By this complaint, plaintiff seeks to recover 8K from defendant.

    ^ As alleged above, before filing this suit, all right, title and interest to the account were sold and assigned to plaintiff. Plaintiff owns the account and is entitled to collect on the account as if it were the original creditor {the original creditor was Bank A}. To the extent that plaintiff acts in its capacity as a successor-in-interest to the original creditor or its assigns, references herein to plaintiff may include plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest.

    ^ Before commencement of this action, plaintiff informed defendant in writing that it intended to file this action and that this action could result in a judgment against the defendant that would include court costs allowed by California Code of Civil Procedure's 1033(b)(2). Attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit E is a copy of the plaintiffs most recent attempt at resolving underlying obligation.

    Then it goes on to explain Midland's modus operandi to all defendants.

    First Cause of Action:

    ^ plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs.

    ^ Defendant opened, used, and derive benefit from the account through defendants own use of the account or by another's use at the defendant's direction. By using the account, defendant expressly agreed or implied promise to repay plaintiff.

    ^ Within the last four years defendant became indebted on the account to plaintiff in the amount of 8K on an account statement in writing by and between plaintiff and defendant in which it was agreed that defendant was indebted to plaintiff. {I never agreed to anything}

    ^ regular monthly statements were mailed to defendant listing the debts, credits, and balance due on the account, attached is exhibit D.

    ^ Defendant made last payment on account in 12/16 to Bank B.

    ^ Plaintiff has no record of defendant objecting to the monthly statements after receipt.

    ^ Plaintiff has made demand on defendant for repayment of account stated but defendant has failed to pay the balance due. Attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the first written communication requesting payment that was sent to the consumer by plaintiff.

    ^ As of the date of this complaint there is due and owing and unpaid some of 8K. The amount was arrived at by subtracting all payments and applying all credits (if any) to the charge-off balance of 8K as indicated on the charge-off statement, attached hereto as exhibit D.

    Wherefore, plaintiff prays for judgment against defendant as follows:
    #1) for unpaid balance of 8K
    #2) costs of suit
    #3) such other relief as the court may deem just and proper.

    CLOSING: so perhaps you can see why I am quite nervous over this suit. It seems like somebody put a lot of effort into it and it's not like many of the cases I've been reading on the Internet. Perhaps I'm off-base here, but it looks like I'm in for a real battle.

    The only strange thing is that I did try to contact the attorney and was not allowed to talk to him. A supervisor from the collection unit is as high up as I could go. They did offer to settle for 6000 but wouldn't go any lower. I told him see you in court.

    Again, any input or wisdom would be greatly, greatly appreciated.


  2. I just wanted you to know how relieved I was to find this form! I'm going into battle with Midland funding over 8K credit card debt and was having so much trouble figuring out how to do this myself, until I stumbled onto this form.  I can't thank you all enough for maintaining this form and for all the knowledgeable and generous people here who help thought of us who are newbies. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    I have about 10 days to file my answer and I'm going to file that PLD-050, to start things off.  My first question is this. They did attach a bill of sale to the summons, but it said that Midland purchased the debt from Bank B.  More specifically, they  explained that they purchased a "batch" of written off debt on a  specific date a few years ago. But they said nothing about my account or my name being part of that purchase.  QUESTION: is that bill of sale a valid assignment of the debt? I was thinking one of my alternative defenses would be that the plaintiff is not a valid assignee, and thus lacks standing to sue.  Does that sound like a reasonable alternative defense?

    The other interesting thing is that the original financer of this credit card was Bank A.  This is where the bulk of my charges were acquired and for whom I signed a contract with, not Bank B. Not once in any of the evidence submitted in the summons doesn't mention Bank A.  I called Bank B just to confirm and they stated that indeed my credit card was initially financed through Bank A (that's where I signed the agreement) and then after some years Bank A transferred that part of their business over to Bank B.

    QUESTION: is that going to be a problem for Midland? And should I keep that information to myself and spring it on them as we get closer to trial? I tried to ask for a copy of my original billing statement and the contract I signed, but they said I would have to request that in writing. Is that something I should try to get?

    Again, thank you all so very much for maintaining this form! I think I'm going to sleep halfway decent tonight for the first time since I've been served.

    EDIT: FYI: just in case you are wondering why I had such a large debt: I ended up having serious medical condition and had/still do have a really bad medical insurance. It's a long story, but I've always had good credit until these health problems started running up astronomical medical bills.  It's under control now, but I still have a lot of medical bills each year, just to keep an eye on the problem. Eventually I'm probably going to have to file bankruptcy, but because I own a home with a lot of equity in it, only chapter 13 is an option. Anyway, sorry for the ramble, but I didn't want the form to think I was completely irresponsible and one of those.... kind. :-)


  3. I just wanted you to know how relieved I was to find this form! I'm going into battle with Midland funding over 8K credit card debt and was having so much trouble figuring out how to do this myself, until I stumbled onto this form.  I can't thank you enough for posting  your story and even giving the steps and forms to help people like me along. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    I already have questions and I'm not sure if I should start a new form or just keep building on this one?  I'll start here and I apologize if I was supposed to start a new form.

    I have about 10 days to file my answer and I'm going to file that PLD-050, to start things off.  My first question is this. They did attach a bill of sale to the summons, but it said that Midland purchased the debt from Bank B.  They further explained that they purchased a "batch" of written off debt on a  specific date a few years ago. But they said nothing about my account or my name being specifically purchased.  QUESTION: as that bill of sale a valid assignment of the debt? I was thinking one of my alternative defenses would be that the plaintiff is not a valid assignee, and thus lacks standing to sue.  Does that sound like a reasonable alternative defense?

    The other interesting thing is that the original lender/financer of this credit card was Bank A.  This is where the bulk of my charges were accrued, not Bank B. Not once in any of the evidence submitted in the summons doesn't mention Bank A.  I called Bank B just to confirm and they stated that indeed my credit card was initially financed through Bank A (that's where I signed the agreement) and then transferred over to Bank B a few years after I had been dealing with Bank A.

    QUESTION: is that going to be a problem for Midland? And should I keep that information to myself and spring it on them as we get closer to trial? I tried to ask for a copy of my original billing statement in the contract I signed, but they said I would have to request that in writing. Is that something I should try to get?

    Again, thank you all so very much for maintaining this form! I think I'm going to sleep halfway decent tonight for the first time since I've been served.