• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


WhoCares1000 last won the day on November 28

WhoCares1000 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

640 Excellent

About WhoCares1000

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

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. "Right to Cure" might be a state thing but not a federal thing. I do know that technically a creditor can sue you the day after you default. Most don't because it would most likely raise the ire of the judiciary and possibly the legislature. That said, most JDBs probably send dunning letters mainly as a CYA method. If no response after 30 days, they can sue. If there is a response, they can get their evidence together, send their counter-response, and then sue. There is really no gain or loss by sending out the dunning letter. Most of my point is still valid though that actions to thwart JDBs that are suing you that worked 10 years ago might not work today (or might only work in certain locations today). The legal system is very fluid and will change as needs and wants from it change.
  2. You would have to ask Freddie Mac to define that but I would bet that would be something like you losing a current home to a natural disaster such as the Camp Fire. I would doubt most people would full under extenuating circumstances. If their website says 4 years, then that is how long you will have to wait to get a conventional mortgage. In the meantime, the only thing open to you is the subprime market where they will nail you to the wall with interest rates. Best to wait the next 2.5 years and bank up as much money as you can for the down payment.
  3. The FDCPA was passed in 1977 so people knew about collection agencies long before the financial crisis of 2008. As for JDBs, they have been know since the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s/early 1990s because they were the ones to purchase all the bad loans from the government to try to collect. This suggests that the whole debt buying/collection industry has been around a lot longer than since 2008. Also, 10 years ago, my JDBs and debt collection companies had scummy practices, including the big guys. The CFPB has reigned in the practices of the big guys so the only real scummy JDBs/collectors that are left are the scammers and small time companies. For the most part, the debt buying industry has cleaned up its act. In fact, some of the large debt buyers are not reporting to credit agencies anymore and might not even call or send a letter before suing to avoid giving the defendant any claims in court. That is perfectly legal. For debt buying itself, it is perfectly legal and a method for banks to offload collections of bad accounts so that they can concentrate on their primary business. It is similar to a school district offloading transportation to a company like First Student. There is nothing illegal about it. It is in your contract (even if you don't read or think about it). The original creditor can ruin your credit and sue you just as easily as the debt buyer so nothing changed there. As for the tax write-off, the original creditor must claim any income they receive from the sale of the debt and if the debt buyer does collect, they must report and pay taxes on any income (minus legal business expenses) so taxes are paid on the debt at collection. The concept of allowable records in court has also changed from the days that Jake Halpern (sp?) wrote Bad Paper. Statements and other documents are now kept in electronic form (possibly in the cloud now) which the creditor or they assignee can get at any time. The courts now allow those records as a part of keeping up with technology (just as many county recorders now keep the deed records electronically). This means that the methods of fighting a case and winning 10 years ago do not work anymore. As for lawyers, some of them do train their paralegals in collection pressure tactics but there are ways around that and regardless, you have to communicate with the attorney. If you paid an attorney to deal with the matter, they would contact the opposing attorney and discuss any issues at hand. The same is expected of pro se defendants. That is why I told the OP to contact the opposing attorney and discuss the issues. If the paralegal will not let you speak to the attorney, you politely stop the call and then send a letter to the opposing attorney CMRRR stating your position and how to contact you directly. The idea is that when you get in front of the judge, you want to be able to prove that you tried to solve the issue without the judge's intervention. Judges do not like it when they have to get involved in something that could have been dealt with through a 15 minute phone call between parties. That is why the courts require you to meet with the opposing attorney prior to meeting with the judge. Things have changed in the 10 years since the financial crisis. Laws have changed,. The industry players have changed their practices. The government has changed how they do oversight. The courts have changed the rules of evidence. Something that could have been done 10 years ago might not be valid today.
  4. I think the Freddie Mac guidelines are for a BK to be 2 - 3 years out before you apply for a mortgage which is why you are being quoted such a high rate. This means you will need to wait another 6 - 18 months before you can get a decent mortgage rate. As for wiping a BK off of your credit report, it will never happen. A BK is a public record from a courthouse and even if you get it wiped, it will make it back relatively quickly as the reporting agencies download data from the BK courts all of the time. Not only that but if you lie on your mortgage application, the loan can be accelerated, you an be foreclosed upon, and you might be criminally charged with fraud for not reporting the bankruptcy. You are also required at closing as part of the loan documents to sign and notarize a document that says you have not declared BK in the past 7 years. You best bet is to wait just a little more time and let your credit heal some more.
  5. Because sooner or later, you will either be in the court house for a pre-trial hearing where you will be expected to discuss your case with the opposing attorney OR you will be expected to do a meet and confer before filing a motion on the court to compel something. Even if you had an attorney, the attorneys talk to each other all of the time before hearings and trials. The courts expect it because that is how most issues get resolved.
  6. Also, quite a few state laws follow what is called the Universal Commercial Code for financial contracts which is similar from state to state. The state procedures may be different but the rules and laws are similar.
  7. OK, let's stop with the arguments and assist the OP. Granted not everyone is from Texas, there are things that are universal enough that they apply in every state. One of those is that is someone was served for a case that has been filed in court, the clerks are required to accept an answer to that case, even if the answer is that you are not the correct person. They are also required to accept motions to the court. Not doing so can get them in trouble with their supervisor and could cause court issues with the case. As for discovery, you first make those requests on the plaintiff anyways and then only motion the court if you think the plaintiff is withholding vital information. You do not need to deal with the clerk unless you file said motion. I would contact the Attorney for PRA at this point because I will have to talk to the attorney anyways so sooner might be better than later. That will help you get the ball rolling on this.
  8. WhoCares1000

    Do I still have time set up payment before I'm sued?

    As a Genealogist, I can tell you that this happened quite a bit in the past. Especially regarding married couples where one abandoned and ran away from the other or business partners where one partner had absconded. I probably stuck because the person publishing the article could state that the community was well informed of the actions. Again. before radio, TV, and the internet, Newspaper was the only way to know what was going on locally in the community as well as in the country and world.
  9. WhoCares1000

    Do I still have time set up payment before I'm sued?

    I see it quite a bit in the legal notices of the local newspapers here. Yes. it is costly but if you are dealing with someone who tries to evade service and keeps moving, it might be the only method of service. It is probably used less today than in the past because in the past, most people regardless of economic class, read the newspaper. Therefore service by newspaper was a good way to inform someone that they were being sued, either by them reading the paper or one of their friends. Harry is correct that more likely, if they really want to serve you, they will use the US Mail to send the summons and complaint to your last known address.
  10. WhoCares1000

    Do I still have time set up payment before I'm sued?

    Alternative Service means using the newspaper to serve you because they do not know where you live but assume you still reside in the jurisdiction of the court (in other words, they think you are evading service).
  11. WhoCares1000

    Huge medical debt question (1st time poster)

    Actually Federal law requires a hospital to provide emergency care regardless of ability to pay. Once the patient is stabilized, they can at that point require that the patient get care at another facility through another provider. In fact, I recently heard a story here of someone found passed out in their car near an ER facility here and the hospital tried to revive them but failed. It was later found out that the deceased was a Walmart worker without any assets. When asked why the hospital spent all the resources and effort at the revival attempt, the hospital personnel said that doing so was better than the liability, both legal and financial, after the fact.
  12. WhoCares1000

    Huge medical debt question (1st time poster)

    I think the OPs policy had a high out of pocket because the 2nd provider was not an in-network provider for their insurance. However, As you said, the insurance company paid their portion, the OP send the insurance payments to provider A but not to provider B. The OP did claim to have used some of the funds to cover expenses but when questioned, they claimed to have all of the insurance funds now so again, I am not sure what to believe. The OP last claimed to be talking to a lawyer which IMHO is the best they the OP can do right now. Maybe an attorney can straighten things out for them. If the OP does not send the fund, the best thing that can happen is that they somehow get an agreement with the collection agency and can keep the funds. The worst is that the provider and insurance company gather the evidence and charge the OP with felony theft by conversion (which would require that the provider can give the DA evidence that the OP knew the funds were to be sent to the insurance company but instead the OP kept the funds). The 2 middle things would be that the provider sues the OP for the amount of the debt , either without or with the charge of civil theft by conversion (which all the provider has to do is prove the OP kept the funds). The big thing though is if the OP ever needs surgery again, they burned their bridge with the better of the 2 providers in their area. I doubt the 2nd provider will do anything more medically with the OP than what is required under law. In other words, this may come back to bit the OP in the gluteus maximus.
  13. WhoCares1000

    Need Some Help

    No, the are based on SD because they can export the maximum interest rate from the state they are based on and SD has no usury rate.
  14. WhoCares1000

    Huge medical debt question (1st time poster)

    I have to agree. The OP came here with an agenda and once we started to ask questions and poke holes in that agenda, the OP was very elusive with their answers.
  15. WhoCares1000

    Huge medical debt question (1st time poster)

    And no, I don't dispute that medical debt cannot be sold and then possibly reduced. I just dispute that it depends on the state, medical provider, and whether insurance was involved or not.