nobk4me

Members
  • Content Count

    1,932
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    40

Posts posted by nobk4me


  1. On 7/14/2020 at 7:57 PM, MikeS said:

    Would the stipulation that the balance shows as zero and the account closed not cover that? Trying not to be redundant but also dont want to miss something.

    My feeling is it never hurts to be thorough and cover all the bases.   I have seen some cases where a person settles with one JDB and the account is sold to another one. Which then tries to collect the balance.


  2. 22 hours ago, MikeS said:

    The Citi card does have a small claims exception that is why i was worried. 

    I wasnt sure exactly how that worked here in Ohio. In Stow Municipal Court it is called the Small Claims Division. https://stowmunicourt.com/rule-no-35-small-claims-division/

    Ohio muni courts have a small claims division, but also hear cases that are not small claims, if the amount is $15K or less.  Check out the Ohio Revised Code on small claims court. It clearly states assignees (which is what a JDB is) can't use it. I'd link but I'm not sure how with this smartphone.

    • Like 1

  3. On 7/6/2020 at 8:56 AM, Xtreme98 said:

    @fisthardcheese So you are saying to not worry about it. I'm assuming they are trying to collect anyway possible at this point (outside of court).

     

    No, you need to send the DV/dispute letter.  And find a consumer attorney to sue one or both of the CAs.  One CA suing you and another one trying to collect the same debt is a FDCPA violation.

    Edited to add: the $1000 fist refers to is statutory damages, payable to you, for FCDPA violations.  They have to pay your attorney fees too

     

    • Like 1

  4. 8 hours ago, TxCitiboy said:

    Yes, the MTC was my answer in the case. So I guess, I'll just wait for the court date, get the court order, and then re-apply to AAA. If, at that point, they want to drop the suit, is that still an option. As in, can I then dismiss the case/application entirely?

     

    thanks!

    Yes, the agreement you would reach with them is a mutual dismissal with prejudice.


  5. 7 hours ago, MikeS said:
     

    Not that I was expecting it this soon, but the last account I have out there which is a citi bank card owned by Cavalry SPV sent me a letter from a law firm that they placed the debt with.

    The letter was the standard: "This debt, owned by Cavalry.......has been placed with our office for collection........ Unless you notify this office within 30 days.......we will assume the debt is valid......"

    I'm guessing after that 30 days is up they'll be free to sue so i probably want to, based on reading other threads here, quickly file the demand for arb. The citi card contract only gives me AAA as a choice.

    Should I attempt to make any contact with the law office first or just go straight to filing arb and then go from there since I'm potentially working with limited time?

    No, you should send a DV/dispute letter within the 30 days.  Hold off on filing arb until you are sued and you file the MTC Arb and that is granted.  Just like you are doing with the other cases.

    And, maybe they won't sue. Often they don't.  I think Citi has a small claims exception in their arb clause, but since Cavalry is a JDB you don't have to worry about that.  JDBs can't use small claims court in Ohio.


  6. Just wait until the court acts.  It will eventually.  They are probably waiting for the plaintiff to respond.  If they don't, that works in your favor, as you should win the motion by default.  But don't be surprised if the court bends over backwards to accommodate them.  They might hold a motion hearing.  Don't try to push the court to do anything.  Judges don't like that.


  7. I think it's a good decision.  In my experience, courts rarely dismiss but do grant a stay.  This is in your favor.

    Now, who should initiate?  While the Rotman case says that's the plaintiff's responsibility, if you wait for them to do it, they will probably drag their feet, and the July 24 deadline passes with no initiation by either party.  Then the plaintiff can go back to court to lift the stay.  You don't want that. So to be safe you should initiate.

    Or you could file objections to the magistrate's decision, citing Rotman, seeking clarification that the plaintiff needs to initiate. But that risks giving the court second thoughts about the whole thing.  I would just initiate the arb.