Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by newryman

  1. They are not accessing the credit reports, they are furnishing information for the CRA to process. The FCRA is quiet clear on who does what and under what circumstances. They are not breaching the court order.
  2. It is well settled as a matter of law that reporting to a CRA is collection activity. Hence I started another thread inviting everyone to fax them an immediate ITS in the absence of a check for $1,000 and permanent removal from "my" CR. it is one of those once in a lifetime chances. Consumers should take it. What can possibly be more unconscionable than acting in direct defiance of a court order not to undertake collection activity? Removing the information is in compliance with the court order as they are ceasing collection activity. There is no case law that supports the absurd idea that NOT reporting is collection activity. A straight forward breach of FDCPA which is an act of strict liability.
  3. If you can't afford to meet the payments then you are bankrupt. You need to decide to either declare it or to fight it. Making unsupportable payments is not going to help you one way or the other
  4. Now there is the difference between us. You are willing to settle with the 2nd where as I want to go all the way to the first Find grounds no matter how spurious and there normally are some from an appellate court to appeal it to the next level and file pro se. See just how much more cash they want to burn taking this further and try to force them to a negotiated settlement. Just a thought. If they want to fight it, drop the BK bomb in the middle of it all. Given the amount involved what have you got to lose?
  5. He will ask Frankie Falzone to collect it. Oh wait a minute
  6. Who the heck cares really? Calling a floor manager who is a convicted felon to the stand for cross examination about why he instructed another convicted felon who he served time with to serve process is hardly going to harm you when you are saying the service was defective in the first place. Binghamton and Buffalo are fine cities indeed.
  7. If you want it gone from CR sit back wait to be sued. Defend and win the suit, throw in a counter claim so they cant dismiss when you fight it. With a peice of paper signed from the judge saying you do not legally owe the debt tell the CRA's to get it the heck of your report or you will sue them.
  8. There is a much shorter argument - it is called show me permissible purpose for a hard pull or send me a check and remove it.
  9. A win is a win is a win of course it good. I do not mean to imply otherwise, if I did please accept my apologies. I was merely curious because of our previous intereaction in the forums. And once again Congrats ITS = I intend to Sue. Having got MCM once trust me they take you very seriously when you tell them you are going to sue the next time. I am currently trying to find people in MD to fax ITS letters and issue in the absence of $1,000 check and removal of all entries on their CR
  10. There is a theory that I have seen expounded elsewhere that a VOD demand on one is binding on subsequent collectors. There is no case law that I am aware of that supports or denies this theory. However, I am aware of case law that the obiter makes comment and says although it is not the instant matter if there is an ambiguity it is for congress to address and correct not the courts. That is obiter that should be borne in mind for other untested areas of FDCPA. When dealing with unifraud my view is people should simply FOAD them and deal with a summons if and when it arrives. They are not exactly the sharpest tools in the box and can be disposed off with relative ease. I simply do not see the point of arguing with village idiots. As always others may have a different viewpoint.
  11. The full amount? If so well done sir. And welcome to special handling. Collecting is so much easier from here on in, a simple ITS works every time :lol:
  12. What type of debt is it exactly that you owe a Phd? The word Doctor may imply to some readers that this is in respect of a medical debt which clearly it is not from the information you have given us so far.
  13. I understand your side DH but with respect if it really held water then the truth is this. The FDCPA is decades old and in all that time my point of view has NEVER been challenged by the dark side. IF they or their counsel ( and lets face it they pay a lot of cash to lawyers for opinions) thought for one minute they could make this go away it would have been litigated all the way. Their silence on the matter speaks volumes. Psst I love this debate thank you for a well reasoned argument from the other side
  14. Ohhhhhhh I am so conflicted here. Yes what has been said above is correct. however, a skilled advocate will use case law that is against him to establish why it is wrong and should be overturned. In short case law is good for the uninitiated when it backs their point of view but in reality is probably best avoided. The Judge will know from the points made what the law is, there is no need to try and educate him. The opposing counsel is likely to tie you up in explaining why it backs your point of view. A dangerous position to place yourself in pro per. Case law for me in the hands of a pro per is a dangerous thing. It is useful to know to keep you on track but can backfire real quick. Sorry to go a little bit off topic guys but I just wanted to point out what is obvious to the posters in this thread but may not be to people who are not familiar with running a case at trial. Please carry on with normal service whislt I now retreat
  15. I think you are all to hard on the guy. At least give him credit for the laughter he brings into our lives. What is wrong with you people? Rightly or wrongly he holds a particular view of the world and is entitled to express it no matter how misguided it may be I think most members of this forum are well able to evaluate the worth of that opinion without bashing on him.
  16. Send them a VOD and burn up their collection income in dealing with that. Watch how quick it gets returned to Verizon. Without validating they can not carry on collection activity which includes reporting to a CRA. Go read up on accounts under $100 and what it does to your credit report. Even in Verizon report it, you ain't gonna be penalised. If they provide VOD (which I seriously doubt) write back 2 weeks later saying you haven't had an answer. Make them spend 240 to collect 24 if you want to be hard headed with them. Or just pay it. Your choice Is it really worth getting that wound up about that you spend time in a forum seeking advice over $24??? Lets cast common sense to one side and assumethat somehow (ignore reality) that it showed up and caused a problem with a mortage. How hard would it be to take care of it? My SIL is not going to get involved even if I asked her, she is senior management, I mention it in passing because I am privy to their reporting procedure at VZ and what you tell us seems to be at odds with that. Mistakes happen Pay it to VZ or ignore it and move on or make them validate. Those are your choices.
  17. Generally speaking, for credit card debt they need to sue you where you live - period. Make sure you do not inadvertently place yourself within the courts jurisdiction.
  18. The good news is you are being sued by someone who is using one of the worst attorney firms in the USA. I have a pet rabbit who could cut and paste better than their so called paralegals do and pass it of as a lawyers work. Not that what they do is a bad thing, it allows many legitimate debts to go uncollected because of their disingenuous work methods. The better news is every time you answer them they will pass it up the chain until it lands on the desk of a real attorney. When it gets there they will make a commercial decision based on if they are going to make money or not. If the debt is owned by someone else they will back off. If it is owned by them go nail them. The bad news is you used a debt negotiator. The good news is you can go sue that debt negotiator for negligence. The sooner people do this the sooner we will be rid of the proxy collector leeches. You have not said what sort of debt this is. It would help if you told us and who the OC is and who claims to own the debt now. If you really want "the right advice" go see a NACA attorney. In the meantime you are likely to get good general educational pointers in this forum, but legal advice it is not. Do not use Internet form letters. (1) They are recognized and laughed at as such (2) Unless you know what sits behind them you tie yourself up in knots which is not good. A Judge may just ask you eaxactly what you meant. You caught a break avoiding a default. Do not rely on that break continuing.
  19. The answer being $24 is not going to show on their credit reports right?
  20. Frankly your post does not make sense. Verizon do not pass accounts over to a CA that quickly. My sister in law works for them in their credit dept and it takes at least 6 months, they also have a minimum amount that is needed before they pass it on. $24 is nowhere close. As for your credit report there is a $100 rule that you may want to explore. $24 is not really worth arguing over is it?
  21. In fairness whilst he may or may not be a troll he has never claimed to be an attorney. He has claimed to be a law student. having said that any one who studies a case in the local newspaper about a guy who was arrested for DUI can legitimately claim to be studying law. He does claim to be a collector but given the amount of time he spends here recently he cant be collecting a whole lot. So keep asking him questions guys, the longer he is on here the less time he has to harass "debtors" The correct answer has been given above. Do not rely on what one individual on the Internet tells you. If several people are telling you the same thing there is a better than evens chance that you are getting good advice. At the end of the day however it is up to the individual to carry out their own due diligence before acting. There are a number of attorneys who very kindly give their time and guide people on here, but even they are likely to tell you that whilst they may be an attorney they are not YOUR attorney and they are not giving legal advice but rather general educational information. Of course why anyone would ever want to listen to a collector is beyond me
  • 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.