Jump to content

Flyingifr

Members
  • Posts

    1,643
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Flyingifr last won the day on March 16 2012

Flyingifr had the most liked content!

core_pfieldgroups_99

  • Occupation
    Teacher

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Back in the USA - Arizona

Recent Profile Visitors

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

Flyingifr's Achievements

500 posts and hasn't been banned yet....

500 posts and hasn't been banned yet.... (6/6)

149

Reputation

  1. Let me get this straight - the Plaintiff submitted a blank form contract without the alleged debtor's name, address, or other identifying information and without the debtor's signature indicating an agreement took place and a legal obligation to repay was agreed to? It sounds to me that the plaintiff doesn't HAVE the signed original of the debtor's contract and is trying to pass off on the Court some other document that may or may not be what the alleged debtor agreed to, if the alleged debtor agreed to anything at all. Not having this piece of evidence can be argued as insufficient evidence of a major element of the Plaintiff's Burden of Proof.
  2. Wow, they just elevated debt from a Civil matter to a Criminal matter. Why don't these jerks ever contact me? I would have a ball driving them crazy with counter-arguments and citations of law.
  3. An instant TD is a credit decline that you get within seconds of sending the app in. In most cases it is issued by the company simply checking their own files for any bad debts and there was no credit pull at any CRA - the app simply didn't get that far. Amex is famous for this. My father stole my identity had a charge off with Amex when I was in High School and it took me 30 YEARS to convince Amex that I was not him and get them to issue me a card.
  4. Discover - I got an instant TD over a 10 year old charge off. Meanwhile my FICO scores are all in the 800's now.
  5. "You're coming here? Great, I'll put on the coffee, you bring the donuts." When they make silly threats like that, you should really challenge them on it.
  6. They answer the phone as "Litigation Office" meaning it is either a CA or a JDB. Obviously they are trying to scare her. Obviously they did. She needs to do a LOT of reading in the Flyingifr Method. On the Other Board she will find these: Understanding the Collection Agency Chani of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel Flyingifr on Venue Making Yourself Judgment Proof Frustrating the Skip Tracer
  7. I doubt the police will get involved in a civil action, and I doubt any Judge will uphold a claim of fraud when you paid the bill for a year before you lost your income. Fraud requires an intent to decioeve, and paying the bill for so long defeats that allegation.
  8. It's a really simple concept - Statute of Repose extinguishes the debt so that it no longer exists except in some bill collector's imagination. Statute of Lmitations is a defense against a debt that does exist but is not enforceable. So.... if I call you and start dunning you for payment of a debt that does not exist except in my imagination, the simple act of asking for money is a FDCPA violation. It makes no difference whether it is for a real but reposed debt or some Payday Loan that originated in some scamster's computer in Mumbai. Neither of them exists in law. The Wisconsin Statute cited above says it - The right (meaning the right to recieve payment) and the remedy (the ability to use the Courts to enforce that right) are both GONE. If the right to recieve payment is gone then there is no debt. Calling me on the telephone and saying there is a debt is a Misrepresentation and will get a debt collector sued for a FDCPA violation faster than the speed of light, if I lived in Wisconsin or Mississippi. SOR doesn't bar them from filing suit, it removes any right to do so. They can file suit, and I can immediately countersue under FDCPA. They can ask for payment and I can immediately sue under FDCPA. SOR is a debtor's most powerful weapon if used, and used quickly and decisively. Once a debt is gone under SOR, even asking for payment, much less trying to enforce payment, is no different than sticking a gun in your face and demanding money. In that example the debt collector has no more right to your money than the thief on the street. BTW, you don't need Case Law when the Statute itself is this clear. In fact, when the Statute is this clear there may very well be no case law because no one litigated under it.
  9. I don't care whether a debt collector knows the finer parts of repose or not. If they don't understand my explanation maybe a Judge can explain it better when they get sued for a FDCPA violation. After all, ANY attempt to collect a debt that has been reposed is a violation of the Misrepresentation prohibition.
  10. There probably are but unless they are based on California's Rosenthal Act or the Texas Debt Collection Act they will probably be based on the above section of FDCPA. No need to cite a Court case when you can cite the l;aw itself.
  11. Let's make Gunny's post describing the difference between SOL and Repose a bit easier to understand: SOL: "Mr Collector, You say I owe you money. You can sue me but since SOL has expired I have a legal excuse not to pay you. You snooze, you lose" Repose: "Mr Collector, debt? What debt? Even if there was one the Statute of Repose says it no longer exists. Since it no longer exists you can't sue me for it."
  12. How about the text of FDCPA itself? FDCPA Section 803(6) (15 USC 1692a):
  13. If an OC pretends to be a CA then the OC becomes subject to FDCPA.
  14. Right - I took the subway so I came across the river "feet dry"
  15. No mixup, I lived in Queens at the time. They had me dead to rights - I slipped across the East River one day into Manhattan. Does that qualify me as a "wetback"?
×
×
  • Create New...