BV80

Moderators
  • Content Count

    19,424
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    240

BV80 last won the day on November 17

BV80 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,683 Excellent

About BV80

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

Profile Fields

  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

6,650 profile views
  1. To be honest, that wouldn’t make a difference. One reason is because it’s not the proper way to elect arbitration.
  2. Probably not, because it would not be considered a violation of the FDCPA.
  3. cjtx2

    I welcome all feedback and responses to my questions even if it is not what I expected or I disagree with them. Not sure if you have noticed, but I never disparage anyone with a different point of view or opinion and I discuss only the subject matter and never make it personal or resort to personal attacks. 

    About your conclusion that I know the answers in advance / I made up my mind... you give me too much credit. I genuinely do not know the right answer, although sometimes I have some idea about possibilities. Responses help me consider issues I had not even thought of and give me ideas to do my own research. I thought posting my conclusions could help others, but it is giving the wrong impression.

    I was not aware that I was being so annoying. It was not my intention to come off as a know it all.

    I do appreciate the reminder about my unsupported opinions. It must be frustrating having to repeat it and me failing to implement it. I do understand it, I am just not bright enough to put it into practice.

    Bad habits die hard, but I will try my best to limit myself to asking questions and refrain from justifying my points of view.

    1. BV80

      BV80

       I apologize for sounding a bit short with you in your thread, but it’s a bit frustrating when suggestions are met with nothing but what a poster thinks should take place.  It’s fine to justify your points of you as long as you realize that in court you would be required to prove them.

      I wonder if you realize that your argument may be with the original creditor, not the debt collection agency.    Have you contacted the original creditor?

      I will re-open the thread and we can discuss it more there.

    2. cjtx2

      cjtx2

      Thank you and I am sorry I gave the wrong impression of being a know it all.

      I agree with you that the problem is with the OC, who is the one who actually reported me deceased. I have not contacted them yet. I want to have documentation first, in case I have to sue, so I ordered credit reports from all bureaus since I only had one of them.

      My question is whether the CA has any liability.  The OC gave them my file, but the OC may argue, as part of their reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy, that they expected the CA to verify that I was indeed dead. So they can blame each other and avoid responsibility for reporting false, unverifiable information. 

      Is discovery the only way to find out for sure who is actually responsible? or is it the OC because whatever it did, it was the one who actually made the false report? Can they hide behind a bona fide error if they hired the CA to make sure I was dead?

  4. I would agree to that settlement. Once it’s paid, it’s over and done with, and you can concentrate on other issues. Good luck!
  5. Then why did you ask us? You have a habit of starting topics, asking questions, and then arguing with responses. That is because you have already made up your mind before you ever ask questions. Since you really don’t want responses other than those that agree with your preformed opinion, and you seem to know it all, go ahead and sue. I’m sure the judge will accept any of your unsupported opinions as law.
  6. The court doesn’t care about what you believe. It cares about what you can prove.
  7. Lying requires knowledge. They have been told by the creditor that you are deceased. It is for you you to prove that the law requires such procedures absent word from you that there has been an error. The FDCPA allows consumers to dispute and debt collectors to respond for a reason.
  8. No, plenty of debt collectors call before sending dunning letters. It is not at all uncommon. Depending on the information provided by the creditor, the FDCPA allows for bona fide error. You assume they are required to validate whether or not a person is deceased, so find the statute or court ruling that supports your claim. However, I have a feeling you’ve already made up your mind, so you should contact an attorney.
  9. The creditor contacted the collection agency, not the other way around. What you think they should do and what the law requires them to do might be 2 different things. Why?
  10. BV

    Well, it's been a while since I've even checked the board. I know you were once a member of Debtorboards, and I was wondering if you think any of their members are now posting here, now that they have shut down?

  11. I’m so sorry to read about your father. My thoughts and prayers are with him, you, and your family.
  12. Agreed. I just don’t know for a fact that all courts have made that decision. Hopefully, the OP has precedent that would help him.
  13. To be specific, the MTC should be heard first in order to determine if the court has jurisdiction to determine the merits of the case. If it is decided that a valid agreement to arbitrate exists, then the court cannot render a decision on the merits of the case.
  14. What does the cardmember agreement say about an appeal of the arbitrator’s ruling?
  15. Okay. Based upon what I understand, the alleged FDCPA violation would be against the law firm representing the JDB. There is always the possibility that the JDB will voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit. However, if that doesn’t happen, you need to consider and prepare for the possibility of the following. The law firm is not a party to the lawsuit filed against you. There are usually rules for filing counterclaims against non-parties. What are your court rules for counterclaims against nonparties to a lawsuit? Did you read and follow those rules? Since the plaintiff is a debt buyer, it could possibly be held vicariously liable for the actions of its agent, but you need to find out what your courts have ruled on that issue. Assuming it can be vicariously liable, you would have to make the proper allegations.