Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cracrap

  1. " Again, if OP has filed a 7, and there is equity over the homestead OP needs to be prepared to lose the property in exchange for that $100,000.00. " It is not that cut and dried. There are other factors that play into the equation. The bottom line is that the trustee must be able to obtain a net balance or else he cannot seize and sell the property. Based upon the above scenario, he will not obtain a net balance therefore, in all likelihood, the property would not be sold. Regarding exemptions, all property belongs to the estate which the trustee controls. The debtor then removes property from the estate back to themselves through the exemption schemes which of course, a trustee or any individual with standing, may challenge.
  2. i don't believe that contributory or comparative negligence would apply as those are defenses that are used in tort law not contract law in the examples you give. only unjust enrichment would fit, however, when a jdb is involved,they do not have to actually own the account, as long as they have been "assigned" the right to collect on it, then they have a legal right to collect on it. They purchased the "right"( a chose in action) to collect, they did not necessarily purchase the account. Big difference.
  3. 1. Your Credit Card Agreement is an unlawful contract as it is ONLY signed by you- constituting a Unilateral agreement. Contract Law i stopped reading here, one signature does not make it a unilateral contract a unilateral contract is when a promise is given in exchange for performance that is not what a c.c. is they are promising to loan you money and you promise to pay them back
  4. typically in the past, a pro-tem was an unpaid volunteer attorney and the commissioner was a paid attorney ...and the judge is a judge i'd never allow a pro-tem to hear a case of mine again, a commissioner, maybe..
  5. normally you can only sue in small claims court against residents of the state in which you reside
  6. hey retmar:)++ regardless of how a credit card issuer wants to label a card, it is the transaction that creates the debt that determines whether it is regulated by the fdcpa..if it was used for personal use then it would be regulated by the fdcpa as noted above there is existing caselaw for this perk v wooden to start with..
  7. not entirely true, there are exceptions in the ca penal code we had a long discussion on this a couple of years ago try and find the thread ..there is a difference in intrastate calls and interstate calls, federal law is one party
  8. lhr is a jdb if u have the original cardmember agreeent you'll most likely see that it is to be governed by the laws of delaware or virginia, which is a 3yr sol. plead sol also, are they claiming interest to be charged at around 30% ? plead usury, they are not a national bank and should not be exempted from your states usury laws
  9. u also have a wildcard exemption of another 5000.00 which u can apply on top of ur 3500.00 my defense attorney wanted me to do the same thing..file bk it seems like they all want u to do that regardless of the merits of the case against u..
  10. u need to elect arbitration pursuant to the cardmember agreement and get it out of the podunk county court
  11. this was news to me till i experienced it at my sj hearing.. hearsay is not excluded at an sj hearing.. typically it will come in the form of oral argument so as not to tip the other parties hand..
  12. your first coa is breach of contract, the second is an account stated....
  13. cmsi collects on behalf of chase..speaking from personal experience.. they have also been sued a bunch for fdcpa and tcpa violations.. and have lost... also settled with ag of ny for debt collection violations this year...
  14. it seems like some of the first admizz's are asking for legal conclusions
  15. most of these questions would be objected to because they are not relevant to the claim against you and neither would the information provide you with any legally recognized defenses to their claim against you.. only the questions as it pertains to your account info would really be relevant ..also i wouldnt begin any of the interoggs with "what was", i would use "identify" and in your list of definitions, define what "identify" means..
  16. u mostly have it except that the commision did exempt debt collection calls placed to residential landlines under the ebr exemption...at least thats how courts have interpreted it... the question then becomes , can u terminate an ebr for debt collection calls ? that has yet to be adjudicated...though its clear that u can terminate an ebr for telemarketing calls and junk faxes....
  17. i believe i commented only on your class action certification. im not familiar with your other motions and i still havent seen any classes certified on phone calls only faxes..but if you can accomplish that ,it would be great for the rest of us...
  18. i didnt say it was my baby, i think someone else said that.. in regards to landlines, that would be a tougher hurdle to leap.. i havent seen any cases that have been adjudicated prior to settling on the issue of debt collection calls placed to landlines where they were calling the correct person.., but it is important to note that when someone is called with the recorded message player to a landline (autodialers to landlines arent prohibited) , if they are not the correct debtor, then its not a debt collection call..its an invasion of privacy claim...
  19. in regards to hicks ,unless im mistaken , your link is the order denying class cert for the tcpa claim, this is not the order granting her summary judgment on her tcpa claims while denying summary judgment on her class fdcpa claim...
  20. my court requires the actual green card,,,it would be a good idea to keep those
  21. hicks settled already... for 48 violative phone calls...the attorneys were going after almost a million bucks in attorney fees under the fdcpa.. rivas was waiting on a trial date last i checked ..
  22. hicks was denied class action for the tcpa claims but hicks was granted summary judgment on her own tcpa claims because the debt collector could not prove she provided her express consent prior to placing the calls to her cellphone... and by the way, though florida didnt allow the class action to continue for the tcpa claim, north carolina does...so that issue varies from state to state
  23. nco is only one case...it involved mistaken debt collection calls to a residential landline read the others as they apply to debt collection calls placed to cellphones... especially hicks as the plaintiff was granted summary judgment.... the restrictions are on the equipment used, it doesnt matter who uses the equipment-ebr does not apply to autodialed calls...the touchstone is express consent...
  24. 100 interoggs? doesnt that exceed the limits? federal is 25, state might be more but dang thats alot..surely youll be seeing alot of objections...
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.