• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BV80 last won the day on December 8

BV80 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,550 Excellent

About BV80

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

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,601 profile views
  1. Oh, I didn’t mean you had to look at the articles. I was addressing your question about the attorney. The articles are just extra information about the FDCPA and information about how to determine if an account has been sold to a debt buyer.
  2. Since you’re representing yourself, you’re acting as your own attorney. Attorneys contact each other. Do you have his email address? Perhaps you could send him an email and tell him that you prefer to communicate via email.
  3. @texasrocker Here’s the thread. The debate starts near the bottom of the page.
  4. I once had a debate with Anon Amos about that issue. That would have around 2012 or so. At that time, I had forgotten about the amendment to the FDCPA. I’ll find the thread.
  5. Could you be thinking of a Right to Cure?
  6. The FDCPA does not require a dunning letter before filing suit. In 2006, Congress amended the FDCPA to include 1692g(d). It states that a summons and complaint are not an initial communication for the purpose of 1692g(a) (the right to request validation). (d) Legal pleadings A communication in the form of a formal pleading in a civil action shall not be treated as an initial communication for purposes of subsection (a). This shows that debt collectors were filing lawsuits without first communicating with consumers. At the time Congress amended the Act to include 1692g(d), it also had the opportunity to require a communication prior to filing suit but chose not to do so.
  7. Sending it when? Before reporting to a CRA? Or do you mean debt collectors are always required to send a dunning letter before suing?
  8. I agree. The article shows how much misinformation is available and how valuable information is not provided probably due to the fact that it’s unknown.
  9. Check out the author’s advice regarding a validation request after being sued. OOPS! Wrong information.
  10. @janebetts In 2012 and 2013, did your son have a checking or savings account out of which he could have made payments? I’m not suggesting that he made payments. What I mean is if he did not have a checking or savings account, how could he have made payments? If he did have an account, you could get copies of records to show that no payments were made to that credit card bank.
  11. I’m sure @texasrockerwill be along and can offer an opinion on that person’s actions. The clerk of court and those who work in the clerk’s office are not supposed to provide legal advice. It seems to me that she crossed the line. I don’t see how she could try to prevent you from filing an answer.
  12. @matahari You do not pay the JDB filing fees. Just go to the arbitration websites and read the consumer rules. It’s the business that pays the costs. Your cost is limited to a filing fee of somewhere around $250.00.
  13. Calling @sadinca @RyanEX
  14. In moving for summary judgment, the "moving party bears the initial responsibility of informing the trial court of the basis for the motion, and identifying those portions of the record which demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of fact or material element of the nonmoving party's claim." Dresher v. Burt (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 280. A motion for summary judgment forces the plaintiff to produce probative evidence on all essential elements of his case for which he has the burden of production at trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett (1987), 477 U.S. 317, 330. [T]he failure to prove itself as the real party in interest creates a genuine issue of material fact that precludes summary judgment. First Union Natl. Bank v. Hufford, 146 Ohio App.3d 673, 679-680, 767 N.E.2d 1206 (3d Dist.2001). "Lack of standing is certainly a fundamental flaw that would require a court to dismiss the action, and any judgment on the merits would be subject to reversal on appeal." Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta, 141 Ohio St.3d 75, 2014-Ohio-4275, 21 N.E.3d 1040, ¶ 23, citing Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13, 2012-Ohio-5017, 979 N.E.2d 1214, ¶ 40. Portfolio asserts that it has proven the standing requirement of its action through the attachment to the complaint that references the sale of assets from the original creditor, U.S. Bank, to Portfolio. However, Portfolio fails to acknowledge that the documents it attached to the complaint do not establish that VanLeeuwen's account was part of an asset sale from U.S. Bank to Portfolio. The document attached to Portfolio's complaint only refers to "assets identified in the Asset Schedule," with no further documentation to show what specific assets are included in the schedule. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC v. VanLeeuwen, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 26692, 2016-Ohio-2962, 2016 WL 2840930, ¶ 17.