Judge Roy Bean

Members
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Judge Roy Bean last won the day on December 18 2009

Judge Roy Bean had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Judge Roy Bean

  • Rank
    CIC Member
  1. The important thing to take from the story is the fact that in the guise of homeland security, your personal financial information is being monitored, collected and reported without your knowledge. And, none of it has anything to do with credit reporting so there are no laws under which you can seek relief when you are the victim of a privacy breach.
  2. I think you'll find currently assessed "taxes" are not debt, but past-due amounts are for the purposes of the new regulation allowing 3rd party collection. The theory that is most disturbing is that the businesses involved can't use any information they obtain to assist in the collection of other debts. Unless they have someone sitting at the desk of every collector, there is no way to police that, and the info they receive will be a gold mine they simply won't be able to resist using (or selling to an affiliate).
  3. It's not just credit cards at issue in the Cardegna case. In this interpretation, any illegal (not just invalid or partially flawed) contract can be forced into arbitration instead of having to face a legal judgment. The real danger I see under the ruling, is if a contract in one state is illegal by statute, the company can apply an arbitration clause that will keep it out of that state's jurisdiction and force it to a more friendly arbitration venue.
  4. If it's that old, they are actually powerless to collect and are just counting on you to fold up and pay.
  5. Judge Roy Bean

    NCO

    Glorified legal lingo for they bought the debt. Keep in mind, if it's beyond the statute of limitations, they can't actually sue and get a judgment to collect, but they can try and cajole, wheedle and intimidate you into acting against your own best interests. NCO is among the worst of the offenders when it comes to using underhanded tactics. Whatever you do, don't get into a phone exchange with them.
  6. Ugh. Citi is among the worst of the serial consumer abusers. For companies like them, paying millions in fines and settlements is simply a part of the cost of doing business. I would suggest you drop over to www.naca.net and, although it may seem useless, file a formal complaint with the FTC on their web site. You should also familiarize yourself with the information HUD puts out regarding the responsibilities mortgage servicers have. And in general, don't try doing this kind of thing over the phone. They are trained to avoid responsibility and will never admit they've made a mistake. In fact, they'll flat out lie to you if they need to. It's much more difficult for them to do that in writing. Better find yourself a local attorney who understands mortgage servicing, escrow, etc. In many cases, a lawsuit is the only thing Citi will respond to, and you'll recover your legal expenses when they finally have someone look at it and settle with you prior to trial.
  7. It really depends on the lender AND if they are servicing the loan or have sold off the servicing rights. Some of them are simply marginal in their performance, others are downright predatory. Some are under investigation, others have class-action lawsuits going on. ALL of them have at least a handful of civil suits in play at any given time. If you tell us who you're up against, the "angle of attack" will be easier to choose.
  8. The fun never ends with good ol' HSBC/H&R. Stay away from them.
  9. Obviously, this isn't legal advice. IMHO they have decided they may not be able to produce the required evidence and are looking for the next best way out. Wait for them to do as the court ordered. When the don't, file your motion to dismiss. And, yes, you should ask for it to be dismissed with prejudice. You may not get it, but you should ask for it anyway - you don't want to let them have multiple bites at the apple. Don't be surprised if they try to dismiss before you do. If there's any skulldugery going on they don't want the court to become aware of in discovery or trial (as in, knowingly filing the case without legitimate claims), they may bail out and come back at you later when they mysteriously "find" the "missing" documentation.
  10. Yes - but you want them to provide you with a hand-signed letter to that effect upon receipt and clearance. They will file a motion with the court (and you'll be served with it) to dismiss the case and the "with Prejudice" prevents you or them from bringing any further legal action in the matter. Congratulations!
  11. As always, this is not legal advice, but when dealing with judges who just don't get it (or don't want to), a motion on your part to have the court take judicial notice of the strict statutory nature of the act (i.e., that your alleged status as a debtor isn't relative to their violation of the act) will at least help keep things on track and if they fail to grant the motion, it's a cause for an appeal.
  12. Good trial lawyers are rarely available via their office phone. If you know them to be competent consumer attack-dogs, you might offer to pay for a consult/case review with one of their associates or paralegals when you leave information about your case. At least part of the problem you're dealing with is even if the case is "chock full" of violations, the reward will probably be smaller than you're calculating - 99.5% of civil cases settle out of court. Have you visited http://www.naca.net?
  13. Some of the CA's will at least try to have cases removed to federal court on diversity grounds (multiple state entities, i.e., them being in one, you being in another, the firm they represent in yet another). If it's to their advantage, they'll try it.
  14. I see you're already down the river and over the falls . The attorney for AAC wants $421 a month - doesn't mean the judge will automatically agree with them and not take your issues into consideration. Consider that the worst case scenario is what is known as wage garnishment. Bascially, in most states, a judgment can be rendered so that up to 25% of your post-tax paycheck can be garnished. Some states limit that with other circumstances, i.e., child care costs, hardship situations, etc. So if the $421 is more than 25% of your post-tax income, they're asking for more than the law would allow them to take under garnishment. If it's less than 25% (I'm guessing it is) the judge may see it as reasonable. Be prepared to present evidence of your typical monthly budget to the judge if you want to challenge the $421. (Don't just up and offer it, wait until someone asks for proof of what you claim is your maximum amount). In order to form the judgment, the judge will probably ask you about any assets you own, i.e., boats, other vehicles, savings accounts, (they can't come after IRA or 401K assets), stocks, etc. Don't get into a long-winded description of your financial situation in answering, just keep it to simple numbers. IMHO, it is better to start by making an offer of a little less than what you can live with in your budget, but don't expect them to go for a lot less than they could get through garnishment. That's the worst-case scenario unless the judge really gets off the reservation and let's them take property from you, which is pretty rare unless the debtor has a ton of stuff.
  15. IMHO, you should call your insurance company and speak with the adjuster who handled the claim. The term "bodily injury" and the fact that it took a couple of years to settle indicates this was something that cropped up after the accident and my guess is somebody's neck started hurting. Even 5mph impacts create significant acceleration forces. I was once "tapped" in a parking lot and felt fine until I woke up the next morning with a headache like I'd never experienced before and I couldn't turn my head. I wore one of those stupid collars for almost a week. I didn't realize the forces involved until I opened the ashtray in the truck to get some change and discovered it had opened partially and all the coins were down under the seats.