rikkivs

Members
  • Content Count

    1,205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

rikkivs last won the day on February 10 2010

rikkivs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

35 Excellent

1 Follower

About rikkivs

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

Profile Fields

  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. After going around in circles since Countrywide was our lender we finally got a permanent loan mod. Interest rate is the same, it's still a 30 year fixed loan but there is principal reduction and thus a decreased monthly payment by $700 including escrows. All we had to do was file BK before they responded! ha ha ha
  2. Things have changed but back in the day American Express did exactly what you suggest; they gave me and my spouse the mortgage loan based upon my credit but HIS employment history. This helped out our credit for a time and sadly we refinanced at the peak of the boom. It was a mistake because it was a sweet loan. I don't know if Amex originates mortgage loans anymore, but there may be companies out there who have similar programs. If you have a stable employment history and work in a stable sector anything is possible. Have you considered privately funded loans?
  3. After three years, we finally got a decent modification offer from BoA BUT....the trial period is three months and after that they will forgive over 100K in principle (they say). BUT...my concern is tax consequences. It is my understanding that mortgage forgiveness act only goes till the end of 2012, so if at the beginning of 2013 they forgive some principle, won't we get stuck with a tax bill? OR do the tax ramifications occur based upon the year the modification was initiated in trial? Hopefully you all can help us with this...it's been a horrible rollercoaster ride and we don't want to get screwed in the end. Thanks:) To explain the first mod pyt is due Nov 1 then Dec 1 then Jan 2013! After which time they say they'll forgive some of the principle...
  4. You have spent a lot of time helping fellow Californians here. Do you have a PayPal account so we can make donations?Your kindness is worthy of praise and compensation.
  5. You are a kind, generous and loving person for providing this exceedingly relevant information. There are documents that verify the spouses mental conditions also. Our bad though, for not getting an attorney for the trial. The good thing is that the pleadings speak for themselves. Big time. They show the issues, meet and confer letters and everything so I get this now. Thanks so much. I shall have to work on this the rest of the week now so I don't miss the deadlines for filing any of this stuff. Lastly what does JNOV mean? Thank you.
  6. I didn't know about using this as a strategy. I am not absolutely certain about the timelines though since our trial was a bench trial and was less than one day. Since we didn't ask for statement of decision at trial orally does that mean we waive the privilege of getting one? Trial occurred earlier this week.
  7. Leagleeagle my old friend. Never once have I claimed to be an expert on CA law at all. The only thing I've discussed with any hint of authority is Bill of Particulars and Motion for more definite statement from personal and other experiences. Yes it was apparent that the spouse was tongue tied and the spouse asked the judge from the beginning if I could speak because I did all the work! Of course the judge said NO because I am not an attorney, but he did say he understood that spouses work together on these things. hahhahahahahhaha My spouse had absolutely no clue and this is a problem! I will consider a motion to reconsider for certain and I have only ten days for one! So thanks for the suggestion to 1st Step. And Coltfan I figured you might like the analogy! Sometimes we have to understand the nature of our losses. I know that we lost because my spouse didn't prepare and I was too darned neurotic about everything. Lesson learned and there are no hard feelings at all! Either way it goes we'll be quite fine because we found happiness from within8-)
  8. Cannot give too much information but the trial was yesterday and we lost on a technicality. The judge assigned was new because our main judge was caught up in another trial. The judged asked the spouse if they were an attorney representing themselves based upon the pleadings. However pleadings and such do NOT make up for a lack of trial practice. 1 simple technicality can ruin your whole trial even IF you have proper documentation that you were right about a specific matter. If they get a piece of dog crap and try to enter that into evidence, if you don't object with something reasonable they will get it into the record and that piece of dog crap is evidence before the court of your debt. A stupid analogy...I know but all true. That is why it is vitally important to not only get your pleadings to be tight but to also understand a little bit about trial procedures so you won't go so far just to get slammed. If you want more details PM me. We are fine though, there are other options we can take to have the court reconsider or do a motion to set payments or something else. We will be fine. All of this taught us a valuable lesson too, if one spouse does all the legal work and the other spouse doesn't study what they are supposed to study then the couple isn't unified to the degree it ought to be and can be easily crushed. Lessons learned on a lot of levels now me and the spouse are contemplating the nature of happiness and oddly the loss at trial doesn't bother us to the extent that it might have a couple of weeks ago even. We're okay:)
  9. Leagleeagle once again you're still saying incorrect stuff trying to quote CA law to me and just repeat what I've already said. BV80's quote below goes to the heart of the matter about vagueness. It makes absolutely no sense to try to answer a complaint without a BoP or motion for more definite statement if they dont even provide an account number on their suit. This is obvious and plain sense. As to the BOP you were in error about it being a discovery device, then when called upon it the only thing you did is cite CCP 454 which we all know about already. CCP 454 is not discovery it is an amplification of the pleadings. Instead of pointing the finger at me for alleged reading comprehension issues look at yourself. You once again are in error.
  10. Yes because your friend is trying to personally serve the subpoena, I believe you are in the right time frame. Whatever the case, best wishes for the outcome of your trial!
  11. No that is why the MDS should be filed first then if time is ticking an answer can be filed which is still consistent with the initial position A motion for more definite statement includes how they arrived at the suit amount and language from the contracts that were allegedly breached etc such that the issues can be narrowed. MDS and BOPs are supposed to elucidate the pleadings. That means make the pleadings more intelligible. The issue of vagueness is contentious as I mentioned before, but at this point every single judge that I've come across always grants a BoP demand or motion to compel further BoP because although the pleading forms are standardized, they are not legally sufficient. A person can sue you and say you owe them money. But you have to understand the nature of their allegations and ask for an MDS. This is what the JUDGE told the oppositional rental attorney in our settlement conference last week. So just stick with what you know and advise others on what you understand. Don't bother me becauseI am discussing issues that you don't quite understand. BTW you were incorrect about using compound ADMIT and DENY statements with OBJECTIONS in ADMISSIONS Which is what I said above. I think your reading comprehension needs work. You argued with me, then you contradict yourself above, then front like you're right. Nope your wrong and having a negative attitude about it makes your attacks worse. Incorrect, that is why they have the motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim and demurrer devices. Just because people do pleadings like that all the time as a matter of course, does not make these pleadings legally sufficient. If your logic worked, anybody could sue anyone at any time and all they'd need to do is allege it in their complaint. That is unacceptable and most judges, when this is brought to their attention would not deem it a reasonable complaint. INCORRECT!!! A Bill of particulars and a Motion for more Definite statement serve the same purpose; to ELUCIDATE the pleadings. Although some judges treat both procedures like discovery they serve a different purpose than traditional discovery, yet compliment it. Whatever they present in the MDS or BoP is what they are LIMITED to talk about at trial. So again these processes can benefit a defendant if they are saavy. Incorrect. You don't know what you're talking about and have chosen to pick on me but you haven't been on the board as long. There are many posters who have benefitted from things I have said in particular on THESE ISSUES. So go piss up a rope and leave me the hell alone. Your arrogance is nasty.
  12. The difference in approach comes from the fact that I deal in California and speak to the unique quirkiness of our states RCP and Rules of Court. California has some devices that immediately can put plaintiff on the defensive and it turns out that many other states have similar vehicles that aren't used as often as they ought to be. The Motion for a more definite statement, or Bill of Particulars (depending upon which state you're in) serves a vital purpose because off the bat they must give you an itemization of the account from zero balance and they have to show how they arrived at whatever balance they allege you owe. In most states, if the MDS is lacking in some areas or plaintiff did not submit one, terminating sanctions can result and or exclusion of evidence, provided the Defendant is astute enough to draft these motions etc. The next reason why these MDS and BOPs are so important is that you can see the evidentiary stuff to see how tight their case is. Obviously if you did an MDS and they came back with a stack of papers that had your name and identifying information you would not win the lawsuit but you would be able to get a good settlement. In my estimation it makes sense to understand the nature of complaints against you. The other issue that was brought up a few threads ago is in affirmative defenses. I cannot stress enough their importance, provided they are relevant. In particular the account stated defenses are useful! Leagleeagle and Coltfan have a different approach to these suits. Time will tell whose methods are most effective, but in the meantime I don't want to get into pissing matches either:mrgreen:
  13. I am lucky for living in a podunk town. I called to ask about filing a trial brief and the clerk said nobody had ever asked her that! She had to ask the other clerks and the rule is that if it's a jury trial you must file one, but you are not obligated to file a trial brief for a court trial. I lucked out on that one because it seems like every time I have stuff to do I get sick and I got sick this weekend when I was supposed to be working on the brief! Thanks for all of your support everyone. I will be sure to let you know how this turns out in a few days for trial:)
  14. Yes I got sick over this weekend and am afraid I won't be able to turn one in on time. The trial is scheduled for a few days! But I guess even if I prepare something and turn it in late it may be better than not doing anything at all. Thanks very much. This has kicked my tail!
  15. Is a trial brief required by the court before trial? Can we get sanctioned for not turning one in?