• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by nobk4me

  1. And the best Plan B is arbitration, when it's available.
  2. Have you ever sent a DV letter, disputing the debt? That's what I would do.
  3. As I understand it, the OP doesn't owe approx. $1000, he is past due by that amount and the total outstanding balance is $6400. Is bankruptcy an option?
  4. I would consider it a win, and accept the dismissal without prejudice. It is very unlikely they would sue you again. If they do, then it's a matter of "rinse and repeat." You just file the MTC Arb again. Same thing if they sell the debt to another JDB. Rinse and repeat. And the SOL clock is ticking, and eventually the SOL will run out. I suspect other people here might urge you to push harder, and go for the with prejudice, off the credit reports, etc. But I take a more conservative approach. This is a WIN. You went from experiencing a hostile, pro-creditor court determined to slap you with a judgment to a dismissal. I wouldn't get greedy here.
  5. I would file a Motion to Compel Arbitration, ASAP.
  6. The blanks are from an earlier time before the cases were officially reported. You can google the case names and get the official citations. And you won't need the citations to slip op. then, either. That is also a reference to an opinion before it is officially published.
  7. As for recording, I think California is a two-party state. Both parties have to know it's being recorded.
  8. Sometimes they don't respond to the motion. Is the plaintiff a JDB? Their attorneys usually aren't legal scholars. They are used to easy prey, the default judgments, and responding to a MTC Arb is above their pay grade and skill level. If they don't respond to your motion, then your motion should be granted by default. Be sure to stress this in court. The court wouldn't give you a break if you failed to respond to a motion filed by the plaintiff, right? So they shouldn't get a break either.
  9. Another thought: I don't know how small claims in WI works; maybe @BackFromTheDebt can help here? But, now that you have had the first hearing, could you just go to the court clerk and file the MTC Arb now, instead of waiting for the next hearing? Maybe, in the future, in arguing the MTC, focus on the arb clause in the cardmember agreement, and that you elect arbitration, and all the case law (including the Supreme Court) that favors arb. Maybe challenging the court's jurisdiction (although a proper argument) is what ticked the magistrate off? Maybe made it seem too personal?
  10. Yes, it sounds like a pro-creditor court. One thing I thought might be going on in my case, where the magistrate was a POS jerk, was that they had some kind of deal going with the collection attorneys. The magistrate, who is not subject to the FDCPA, plays the bad guy, being rude and abusive, instead of the attorney, who is subject to the FDCPA. The magistrate does his dirty work for him. In fact, when I was called into the back room for the pre-trial, the attorney was already there, perhaps meeting with the magistrate beforehand, probably complaining that my discovery was killing their profits. (Which was the purpose.) Despite the magistrate's tirade, I filed some more discovery. Nothing wrong with that; when the creditor chose to use the courts, the rules apply to both parties. The plaintiff eventually dropped the case. So be aware of the bias, but don't let it get to you. I don't know Wisconsin law, but it sounds like, if you lose here, you can appeal and essentially get a do-over, with a real judge. And be aware that, if the magistrate is doing something unethical or illegal, there has to be some fear of exposure on their part. Sunshine is always the best moral disinfectant. I would push for recording or transcribing the next hearing.
  11. It's possible she wasn't really pissed at you, but was putting on an act, a bullying act, in the hope of scaring you into settling or taking a judgment. I have seen this behavior. Or maybe she was pissed because you didn't act like a scared sheep like the rest of the defendants. Maybe she sees this as a challenge to her authority. I'm not sure what motivates this behavior, maybe contempt for "deadbeats", or for pro se's, or, as mentioned, a challenge to her authority. Or, I suspect there may even be corruption involved. Maybe these biased magistrates and judges are getting kickbacks from creditors. Shouldn't happen, but corruption sometimes does. Whatever the motive, IMO. this unprofessional, biased behavior is UNETHICAL. It violates the codes of professional and judicial conduct. All parties appearing before the court are to be treated with respect. Courts are supposed to be neutral and should not show bias for or against any party. If it happens again, I would object to this behavior. I know that's tough, as you are in a stressful situation where it seems like they have power and you don't. But I think it's important to get your objection on the record. Speaking of the record, was this hearing transcribed or recorded? If not, it's just your word vs. theirs that it even happened. For future hearings, could you ask that it be recorded or transcribed? Maybe record it yourself, if they let you? I find people behave better when their behavior is documented. Are you able to ask this person to recuse herself from your case, due to demonstrated bias and hostility? Check your state's rules of civil procedures and local rules of court. And, assuming she's an attorney, you could file a bar complaint against her. Just some ideas here. You are not as powerless as you may feel you are. I doubt very much that you would face sanctions for advocating for your rights, as long as you actions are civil, polite, and professional. She won't go that far because it would expose HER behavior.
  12. Sorry to hear you got a bad magistrate. Sounds like one of those who thinks it's his/her job to advocate for the creditor plaintiff. Yes, I have encountered that type too. Follow the advice from BackFromTheDebt. Eventually you will get to a real judge who understands the law and will grant the MTC.
  13. Yes, it's a win. I doubt very much if they will sue you again, but if they do, it's "rinse and repeat." File the MTC Arb again.
  14. Could you provide more information? Please answer the questions in this thread:
  15. If the case was dismissed, why does the OP have to do anything? I am assuming it was dismissed without prejudice? I doubt very much if PRA will initiate an arbitration. The only thing they would or could do is sue the OP again. So you file the MTC arb again, and maybe initiate arb then if they claim you are not serious. They have claims against you, so I would say it's their responsibility to initiate. Now, if the court case had been stayed, not dismissed, I would say the OP should initiate arb.
  16. Does Discover still have arbitration in its agreement? That is another option. I know, people will claim Discover is extremely aggressive and will follow you into arb. But, they are not aggressive in all cases. I can attest to this from personal experience. Discover did not sue me and did not use any collection agencies, that I know of. For a debt over $6K.
  17. If the plaintiff has sent you discovery, you need to answer them, but in a special way so as not to waive your arb rights. This is especially important for requests for admissions; if they are not denied they are deemed automatically admitted, meaning you will be admitting you owe them money. This is how to answer for each of the discovery requests: OBJECTION. The defendant has elected private contractual arbitration. The scope of discovery is to be determined by the arbitration forum.
  18. Discover uses Delaware law, where the SOL is 3 years. But the CO borrowing statute cited by Goody is strange, not sure how to interpret that one.
  19. Actually, a stay is under the jurisdiction of any court, as I read the statute. It's just that a motion to compel arb, or dealing with the award after the arb has been completed, that is under the jurisdiction of a common pleas court. ORC 2711.02 B. If any action is brought upon any issue referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for arbitration, the court in which the action is pending, upon being satisfied that the issue involved in the action is referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for arbitration, shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial of the action until the arbitration of the issue has been had in accordance with the agreement, provided the applicant for the stay is not in default in proceeding with arbitration. Here the statute does not refer to a court of common pleas. But, as shown by MikeB35's victory here, in practical terms, it doesn't seem to make a difference.
  20. Is there an online court docket you can search to find out exactly what has happened, what the ruling was? And you might want to wait a little before filing in JAMS, to see if you receive a written ruling from the court with any instructions to the parties. You just had the hearing today, so it may take a few days for the court to make an official ruling and send it out.
  21. Maybe @BackFromTheDebt can help here? I don't see how you can answer without being served, but I don't know how WI works.
  22. SCAM!!! A debt 16 years old is beyond the statute of limitations. Not paying a debt isn't theft, you won't face criminal charges, and you won't be arrested.
  23. I thought you had a thread with a Midland case here, too. That could be disposed of with a BK. As for credit repair, I would be very skeptical that this is going to work. I assume you are paying money to some company which is claiming to settle the debts for you? Why bother, when BK can wipe out the debts.