amomaine

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About amomaine

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Maine
  1. Exactly. I would have never brought up the potential moral issues (however you see them) in the hearing -- it's a waste of time and not relevant, especially in this small claims case. It would have been embarrassing (who cares that I was once a poor college student? I felt bored even bringing it up in the previous post). The judge sure couldn't have cared less about the "morality" of whether or not the debt was mine, I could tell by the obvious kick he got out of my paperwork and asking for dismissal with prejudice. Obviously the JDB lawyer didn't care enough to even show up!
  2. BoA and debt buyers are not comparable to friends or small loans between friends/family. BoA and other CC companies do not "force" anyone to enter into a contract, but they all do perpetuate practices (why wouldn't they? it benefits them financially) that entrap consumers in cycles of debt, high interest, and predatory lending; and they most definitely target young students and low income people in these practices. It makes money for them, even if a percentage of individuals default. This is why I don't feel sorry for them if they don't get a percentage of that percentage recouped. They cre
  3. Are you kidding me? You're making a morality case? I originally got into debt as an 18 year old college student living on my own in a large city, without parental backing, and quickly fell into the trap DESIGNED by credit card companies to play people in that position. I made payments for years, stopped spending on credit, and my balances continued to rise. That's what they want to happen. Then, THEY sold it for cheap, and debt collectors just want to keep the change (and although I work full time in a nonprofit, my financial situation barely skims middle income). Don't talk to me about
  4. Hello! A BIG thanks for all the help I have gotten from scouring these forums, and to those who responded to my questions. Couldn't have done it without you! I won against Midland today (BoA was the OC, law office of Howard Schiff represented), and the case was dismissed WITH prejudice. I lucked out because the lawyer from Schiff was a no-show (so she missed out on my case and atleast a couple of others). The background is -- I was summonsed on an old BoA CC, which had gone through the wringer several times before ending up with Midland and was still within SOL. Immediately, I started re
  5. Hey! I got these things time/date stamped, and the lawyers representing Midland never responded to my discovery request. I was basically told since then, by someone with knowledge, that in small claims here they don't have to respond to a discovery request. I am surprised at that. I also filed a motion to strike their affidavit as hearsay, but did not realize at the time that I may have needed to set a hearing for that motion (which may explain why I haven't heard anything in regards to that motion since I filed it.... I was assuming that it would just come up at the court date but now I see
  6. I haven't heard anything. The clerk seemed sort of confused as to why I was filing these documents as a pro se in a small claims case (maybe that doesn't happen much?).
  7. Hello! I am going to small claims court on Thursday. The summons is from a local Howard Schiff lawyer representing Midland (BoA is the OC). After I received the summons in April, I filed an answer with affirmative defense. I sent a discovery request and a motion to strike affidavit. All of this I filed at the court/had stamped and sent to the Schiff office with confirmation receipt. I received the confirmation that the Schiff office received these docs in early May. Schiff lawyer has not responded to the discovery request. In the time since i filed it, I have come to learn that since it is
  8. In the affidavit from JDB employee submitted with my summons, it states: That in the ordinary course of business, JDB LLC purchases revolving credit accounts (.......) JDB is the current owner of, and/or successor to, the obligation sued upon. JDB LLC* predecessor in interest sold and assigned all right, title, and interest in the defendants OC account number # to JDB LLC*. I took out the standard wording to leave what I am question: *refers to the fact that "JDB LLC predecessor" is the same JDB LLC who they sold all rights/title/interest to. Can I use the affirmative defense "Plaintiff fa
  9. I am attempting to draft a Motion to Strike Affidavit (from a JDB employee regarding an OC account they are assigned/own) on the basis of hearsay; however, I am concerned that I may get tripped up by the wording of the Business Records Exemption rule in Maine Rules of Evidence: (6) Records of regularly conducted business. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business, and if it
  10. I am trying to file a Motion to Strike JDB's affidavit attached to the statement of claim I received, based on the affidavit being hearsay. Maine law requires that I file a memorandum with the motion -- while I found a helpful memorandum to motion to strike on this forum, it cited FL case law and I figure that wouldn't help me here in Maine. I have no idea how to search case law. I've spent the past hour+ trying to find out how to even perform the search, what keywords to even use and where to even look, to no avail. Help? thanks.
  11. Hello! I was summonsed last week by a JDB, assignee of Big National Bank (credit card), represented by Big Jerks in Maine (aka). The summons was delivered by the sheriff to my home, but there is no Docket/Case number written on the complaint. Attached was an affidavit (in support of judgment) from Minnesota and a basic sheet stating amount sought and open/charge off dates. It is within statute of limitations by 1 year. JDB is claiming to be both the assignee (on the claims form) and the purchaser/owner (in the attached affidavit). Though this is going to small claims, I plan to fight it.