JLoh1970

So I wrote a letter to Experian to dispute some entries on my CR. They sent me back a letter saying they could not process my request because I did not provide sufficient identification. They go on to say that I must provide: 1.) Full Name 2.) SSN 3.) DOB 4.) Complete address for last 2 years 5.) 1 copy of a government issued ID card. (IE: Driver's License) 6.) 1 copy of utility bill/bank or insurance statement. OK, I can see 1-3 maybe 4, but 5 and 6? Just to file a dispute. Clearly they are just asking for so much BS in an attempt to get me to use the online dispute. Is this tatic legal? Anything I can do? (besides comply with all 6 of their BS ID requests) Thanks, James L

It's a front for TRAKAmerica.

They were right. Risking your health isn't worth a car. Check your sales contracted. It more then likely contains a contingency clause which allows the dealer to repossess the car if financing falls though. You have the right to your old car and any down payments back. You don't have the right to keep a free car.

It sounds to me that she DIDN'T intend to file a counter claim. She just included the words "Counter Claim" in her answer. Unless I am missing something she is saying she doesn't HAVE a counter claim at this time. Which if is the case, she doesn't need to amend anything. If she did intend to have one, then yes she should amend. Scouse, Please clarify, do you want to have a counter claim filed or was this just an error?

If it were me, I would throw the letter in the trash and ignore them till they filed a law suit. But that's just me and that's because now that I have been through the law suit defense once, I'm not as worried or nervous about having to do it again. If you go the route of defending a lawsuit, be prepared to do a lot of reading/research. This board will help a lot to answer questions. I'd read posts by trueq myself, as I found a lot of his posts very helpful.

Sounds like the court may have recorded a counter claim due the clerical error. If he filed a motion to dismiss, then that only refers to the counter claim on file at this time. If you don't really have one, thus you don't care if it's dismissed, you don’t have anything to worry about. If you file a counter claim at a later date the attorney will have to file a new motion to dismiss for that counter claim. Be careful though as they will probably try to say you are time barred in the new counter claim since you didn't file it with your answer. You'll be ok, if you can show legal cause as to why you waited.

I just had a case filed by WELTMAN, WEINBERG & REIS CO., L.P.A. against me dismissed with prejudice, in Franklin County. (Columbus, Ohio) They filed on behalf of Professional Investment & Finances, who is really TRAKAmerica, who was servicing the account for Pinnacle Collection. So yes, they are a law firm and they are able to practice law in Columbus. Are you sure they OWN the debt in question or are they representing someone? Other then filing the original complaint they didn't do much with the case. I filed an answer, discovery, affidavit, counter claim, & motion to dismiss after they didn't answer any discovery. (Yes, I took the chance and skipped over a motion to compel) At pretrial they wanted to discuss a settlement, I told them I wouldn't discuss that until they had something more then what they had submitted so far. The attorney for WWRC asked to reschedule a new pretrial so he could try to get some of my discovery requests. I agreed, however only 5 days later the judge sustained my motion to dismiss with prejudice. I agreed to dismiss a counter claim to have a TL removed from my credit report. In my case, it was clear WWRC were counting on a default and were totally unprepared for an active defense. The attorney who showed up at pretrial (while he seemed like a pretty nice guy) was clearly new and/or inexperienced or perhaps even just not a very good lawyer. The court/judge/clerks seemed quite fair and didn't seem to mind or take issue with the fact that I was Pro Se. I felt they did everything they could within reason to assist me. I also got the impression (but I could be quite wrong here, just my impression) that the judges (in FCMC) are much more concerned with their criminal case load then their civil. Thus, use that to your advantage if you end up in court.

The court will still probably want their 125 bones.

I don't know, I would think the case would have to be re-opened by the judge granting your motion to vacate before you can file all the other stuff. But I could very well be wrong, try filing all of it, if the clerk lets you, then you probably can.

Do they currently have a judgment? Has it been set aside/reversed yet? If not, I think you'll need to get that done before all the other stuff.

If they already have a case filed against you, why not answer with some good defenses, file some good discovery and counter sue? Sounds like you have a good case for SOL and some violations if you were on active duty when they sued you. If your Pro Se, it's probably best to file your suit in the form of a counter claim anyway. Once you file a bunch of stuff you will probably find them more willing to work something out. They will assume you will roll over, till you prove you won't.

They don't list a DOFD, my report says it's scheduled to be removed Oct. 2009. So I am guessing somewhere they are using Oct. 2002? However, I haven't had any credit cards or paid on any credit cards since 1999. So my guess is, it's been reaged. I requested/disputed with the info provider and asked for what they are using to report the DOFD to the CA. I also told them I disputed with the CR. I haven't received anything from them yet and doubt I will. EDIT UPDATE: So I went down to the court house at lunch to talk to the judge. The judge told me he had not dismissed yet, but the problem with my complaint was that he was a state court and I was filing under federal law. I brought some case law with me to show him state courts could rule on/award under the FDCPA. He said he would take a look at it before ruling. I also told him that while I felt my claim had merit, I would be willing to dismiss if the plaintiff would remove the TL from my CR. I told him the plaintiff's attorney said (yesterday) that "it sounded good to him, but he would have to check with his client." He said he would call the attorney and get back to me before making the ruling. It sounded like he might try to put some pressure on them to settle this by agreeing to remove the TL. Hopefully a call from the judge will get them to agree faster. I suspect if the judge does dismiss my counter claim on the grounds that he is a state court and doesn't have jurisdiction, I could appeal?

State: Ohio Summary: Old CC being reported on CR (still not sure it's even mine, but if it is, its over 12 years for last delinquency) by a company called Pinnacle Collection Services. Pinnacle hired TRAKAmerica to handle the collection. TRAKAmerica filed a law suit under the name Professional Investment & Finances. The only thing they submitted was a piece of paper titled "Charge off Statement" saying I owe. It had an account number, but not the same number Pinnacle is listing on my CR. I filed for discovery and counter claim. Thirty days later I got nothing and filed a motion to dismiss. Judge granted my motion to dismiss with prejudice, however two days later (today) he granted their motion to dismiss my counter claim. (Said he was a state judge and that the plaintiff’s argument that they were an OC was good. (Despite all the case law and my argument to the contrary which I presented in a response. I think he just wanted the case gone, but at least he dismissed their claim too.)) The problem for me now is that I have the dismissal entry against Professional Investment & Finances; however I don't have anything showing Professional Investment & Finances is talking about the same account as Pinnacle. I know its the same account, amount is the same, when I called Pinnacle they said, call TRAK and when I called TRAK they told me to call the attorney who handled the case for Professional Investments. I've disputed with CRA, they said it's been validated. I sent a letter to Pinnacle (and CRA) saying I still disputed it and requested that Pinnacle investigate and send me proof and/or what records they are using to verify the debt? Date of last delinquency, etc? My goal is to just get it deleted from my credit report. What should I do next?

Then my point has already been made. The existance of JDB promotes people to try scams like this. Not to mention all the other bogus things JDB probably do and get away with. No more JDB no more problems.

Well, we agree on that. I think even if the law had more bite they would still break it. Heck, I'd bet 9 times out of 10 times you don't even need FDCPA counter claims to beat the JDB in court on the lame cases they file. They have no evidence. YET PEOPLE STILL DON'T SHOW UP AND DEFEND letting the JDB get defaults on cases that had no business even being filed. It's always going to be a numbers game and the JDB buys have guys who are really good at crunching numbers sitting around doing stuff like this: 1.) Buy 1,000,000 in bad paper for 100,000 2.) Do all we can to collect, file lame cases seeking defaults, make threats violation FDCPA, etc. 3.) Collect on 800,000 of our bad paper. 4.) Subtract the 100,000 we paid and 200,000 for FDCPA violations paid out. 5.) 500,000 PROFIT! Yeah, that’s probably over simplified, but you get the point. Somewhere the FDCPA violations are going to be factored in and some number cruncher somewhere is going to determine it's more profitable to pay out a few FDCPA violations because they get more successful collections doing so. Profits - FDCPA payouts > Profits + following the FDCPA. Even if you increase the penalty, I still believe that not enough people are fighting their cases and/or filing for FDCPA violations for the JDB to worry about making a few pay outs. I still think the best solution is getting rid of the JDB. Yeah, the credit grantors will have to make some adjustments, but they won't go out of business and the adjustments will be a good thing. Just like the housing market thing Robert brought up. While I don't totally excuse the people who got the loans, I do put a lot of blame for the problem on the mortgage industry themselves. They made a ton of loans to people who SHOULDN'T HAVE QUILIFIED. Now they are over correcting and it's harder for people who have decent credit to get a loan, but I have no doubt it will adjust back down some. In order to stop giving loans to people they know they shouldn't an over correction should be expected to get things back to where they should be. Here is another idea and/or law that should be passed. Get rid of default judgments. I went down to my local court to watch them in action before my case. I observed one case where the defendant didn't show for trial. (After an answer was filed I assume) and they had a trail without him. (Forget the legal term) Why not do the same with default judgments. Don't just enter a default judgment blindly because the defendant didn't show up. Have the judge look at the case and make a case by case determination. Have a standard, like this is the minimum you need to win a default: A) Signed contract and/or some proof of debt like a canceled check payment from defendant. Account history C) Fact based witness Defendant doesn't show, judge looks at the evidence and makes a determination if the Plaintiff presents the minimum required evidence, if not, no default judgment, come back when you have the minimum the court requires. In my case their only exhibit was a piece of paper that could have been printed out with Microsoft excel saying I owe X amount for a credit card. (No original credit card name) Had I not shown up, they would have gotten a default with just that? THAT'S JUST WRONG! I did a search for their company name and took a look at all the cases they had filed in my local court. I check a lot of the closed ones and it was default after default. It was enough to make me what to start my own business. I'll just select names from the phone book (or better yet, I’ll choose the people who already choose not to answer a claim), make print outs saying these people owe me, and then file claims. Anyone who doesn't show, WOOOOT DEFAULT! If they show, I'll dismiss. Heck if I can think of that, you think JDB's haven’t?