Anne Tyler

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Anne Tyler

  • Rank
    CIC Member

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  2. THANKS FOR SETTING ME STRAIGHT I ALWAYS knew process servers were lowlife scum sucking assholes but you just proved it.
  4. Last I heard, we were here to help one another. Based on comments from a few members who apparently challenge my credibility, in essence calling me a liar, is offensive. And I can't see how new people coming onto the site are going to feel comfortable if some of us feel free to make charges about another's honesty. I did not come here to be insulted. In my case, I came here making some serious charges about a court official and a law firm of ill repute. It would seem to me that those unfamiliar with the case, the facts, the conduct involved are out of line to call my conduct questionable. You know, sometimes (GASP) they system is not honest. Judges are people and as such are just as capable as anyone else of being dishonest. I have to question the motivation of people calling me a liar. I don't need this kind of grief. I think most people come here for help or to be helpful but apparently some are here for sport. I've been in a lot of conversation/discussion groups on the internet. I concede I was naive. I thought we were all here for a common purpose, to help each other and not to insult. I guess I was wrong.
  5. I also want to point out that some people, including myself, view process servers to be less than reputable and trustworthy. Afterall, thats why so many cases brought by Midland were thrown out recently because they found the Process Server threw them into the dumpster and had not delivered them at all. So, you are the one in charge here of heckling people. Deciding who is and who isn't an experienced pro se litigant. I did not miss anything along the way. I resent your inferring I am a liar or uninformed. Were you at court with me? If not then what you have to say means nothing. Judging from the fact that you continue to leave rude and insulting comments causes me to question your motivation. I am making heavy charges because heavy things were done. I hope and pray if I ever have to go before a jury of my peers you are not among them because you are obviously a biased busy-body who knows nothing but feels free to advertise anyway. I am an intelligent person who, though I have not been a low-life process server for 4 years, is capable of recognizing fraudulent behavior. Thankfully, I don't need your permission to send in my complaint this afternoon in which I clearly and openly and honestly claim the judge is a crook and has no business on the bench.
  6. Talking to someone who is sick not to mention nude WITHOUT disclosing who they are is a violation. The next time they come back, if ever, I'll refer them to your house. None of us, last I checked are REQUIRED to open the door to strangers, especially when we are sick and nude. I didn't invite them here, they were trespassing and they got paid for what they did. Actually, it wasn't even proper service because it is required by state law to be handed to A PERSON. Your opinion is irrelevant and from an obvious troll. The golden rule, if you have nothing nice to say mean SHUT UP basically. Oh, I'm sorry, that wasn't a nice thing for me to say was it? Well, on the otherhand YOU OPENED YOUR YAMSUCKER.
  7. I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT THIS WAS A FREE COUNTRY and this section was for comments about mortgages. OPINIONS are easy to come by. How you feel your comment added anything to the situation is beyond me. If you don't like what I wrote, you ARE NOT REQUIRED TO READ IT. Don't like it? PASS ON BY. Just because its "spam" to you doesn't mean it has no meaning to anyone else. WHO APPOINTED YOU CURATOR?
  8. precisely so. That is how these scum operate and its what they count on. That no one will show and they get default judgment. In my case with Midland Funding they sent me all sorts of discovery documents/questions. They wanted copies of all agreements with ANY CREDITOR and all charge slips with ANY CREDITOR among other things. They wanted me to testify against myself and give them the information they might have been too stupid or too lazy to get on their own. I denied every one of their questions and challenged them for lack of standing as well. Once I did that the gloves (which were never velvet) came off and they decided to fight dirty. Deny everything and let them do their own damn work. But be on your toes. Keep copies of everything even if it seems irrelevant. Get copies of orders and continuance dates, be proactive against their abusive deceptions. Don't think of this as them being almighty and you the timid serf. They are the lowlife clearly because they try to win by deception and win by overpowering, hoping you will be too intimidated to stand up for yourself. Don't let them think you are scared or weak or don't know. Go for it.
  10. Bank of America’s Review For Foreclosure Errors May Lead to Foreclosure Defense Lawyers Asking Courts to Set Aside Old Foreclosure Cases FROM: Previous Homeowners may be entitled to damages for the unlawful taking of their homes. Florida Foreclosure Defense Lawyers are investigating to determine if grounds exist to ask Courts to set aside old foreclosure cases where homeowners have lost their homes to large banks, including Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and other well known mortgage lenders. Bank of America’s review of court documents for possible errors in foreclosure cases, may lead to previous homeowners receiving compensation for the unlawful taking of their homes . Through a company spokesman, Bank of America stated it is investigating all affidavits in foreclosure cases that have not yet gone to judgment in 23 states where courts have jurisdiction over home seizures. Florida Foreclosure Defense Attorneys, Sackrin & Tolchinsky, P.A., intend to examine the circumstances surrounding the filing of affidavits in old foreclosure cases filed by Bank of America, and JP Morgan Chase and GMAC both of whom have also said, through company spokesman, that they may have improperly filed faulty documents in their current foreclosure cases. The act of filing affidavits, where the person signing the document is asserting they have personal knowledge of the information contained in the affidavit when in fact they do not, may permit the reopening of old foreclosure cases even after the property was sold at auction. Mr. Tolchinsky notes “If a fraud on the Court has been committed, then there may be grounds to have old foreclosures cases set aside and allow previous homeowners to seek compensation from the foreclosing party.” This may be true no matter how much time has elapsed since the bank took ownership of the property. Mr. Tolchinsky will be handling these cases throughout Florida without charging clients a legal fee or cost unless his clients are successful. Mr. Tolchinsky asserted “these homeowners have lost everything certainly we don’t expect them to lay out money for legal fees unless we prevail.” Mr. Tolchinsky believes that the actions by the banks may have violated numerous State and Federal laws which afford financial relief for the homeowners, including the awarding of attorney fees if they prevail. Larry Tolchinsky, Esq. Since 1994, Larry Tolchinsky, a South Florida lawyer, has represented clients in real estate matters, including foreclosure defense, deficiency judgments, real estate closings and other related issues. He is a contributor to articles on,, and other well known news publications. If you or a member of your family is facing foreclosure, has lost their home to foreclosure, or have any questions regarding a Florida foreclosure, simply call 954-458-8655 for a free and confidential consultation. The lawyers at Sackrin & Tolchinsky, P.A. serve all of Broward County and South Florida, representing clients in a variety of legal cases including foreclosure defense, personal injury, medical malpractice and probate law.
  11. How do you know you are "in discovery"? I got served with discovery documents from them a couple months ago. I was going to do my own and send to them but as it now happens case being closed with a DJ that won't be necessary. If I answer discovery documents am I in discovery. This judge never writes anything down, I keep seeing people talking about the judges entering orders for this and that and its made me realize how he just said stuff and thats the way it was.
  12. "Most people are afraid of what might happen to them in court and are unprepared to defend themselves. Debt buyers take advantage of this imbalance of power to pressure people into unaffordable settlements on debts that cannot be proven. By contrast, in the rare event that an individual has counsel, debt buyers tend to abandon cases, presumably because they know they will have difficulty producing the documentation to prove their cases at trial. -------------- So - now you know - don't be afraid to stand up to them - go have your case dismissed for lack of standing or what ever else they have not proven in the material facts. It is a formidable undertaking to go to court pro se, especially if you don't have anyone to go with you. It feels like singular/solitary you against this huge machine and this man on the bench. I've seen miscarriages of justice before in other kinds of matters, at least I thought it was a miscarriage. Divorce/Child custody is a hard battle and right now the pendulum has swung to favor women/mothers. It's one of the few ways you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Either sex, but mostly its females charging for orders of protection because of violence (which many judges and attorneys will admit its considered a tool, almost). Suddenly you are prohibited from seeing your children and you have to fight to get that right back even though you may be totally innocent of wrongdoing. Most times an order of protection is granted because for one, no judge wants to take the chance that this will be one of those cases where harm does result and then you A is going to be all over the news as having denied protection. Anyway, I was going to say that overall I have respect for the courts except for domestic matters but then I realize I've seen miscarriages of justice in other matters too so actually I don't think I do have "respect" for the court, by which I mean I no longer assume that the judge is going to be a straight up guy and that I'm not going to get trampled. I got a default judgment against me last year by the same K&F group because I was sick and I didn't know what to do and so I did nothing. They are trying to garnish but they can't find my bank account, so far they have hit up two of my previous banks where I no longer have funds. I do like the idea of them filing their garnishment orders and coming up with green eggs and ham. But I wonder how they do find your bank. No doubt if I paid a debtor who had been calling, I've had some offers to settle, but if I paid them I bet that info would go into the pipeline who my bank was. Anyway, what I was going to say is this is the first time appearing pro se in a civil/debt collection thing and while I started out very intimidated, now that I have a better idea of the ruthlessness of it, and in my case even the judge being dishonest, I would be a lot more forceful next time around. For sure from now on when a judge tells me its continued to such and so I would ask he issue an order so stating. It says in the Rules somewhere that a judge is supposed to avoid giving the appearance of favoritism or of not being impartial. That sure as heck is not the was Judge S. does it. What you say is true, the attorneys for these JDB count on people being intimidated. Which is why Judge S's SOP bugs me because she (the K&F attorney) has her seat and desk nice and tidy up front close to the judge and they exchange convo's here and there about who knows what. She looks way comfortable with him and he always looks out for her. She never has to file a motion for continuance, he just continues the case on his own. So all that adds to the intimidation for people who show up pro se. I really feel sorry for some of these people who obviously have little education and in some cases don't speak good English trying to do this. Once you see how dirty the game is. I have no doubt people are getting default judgments against themselves for debts they already paid. So from here on, its a new ballgame for me.
  13. As to the courts being clogged, indeed they are, but as you point out it is not by defendants to the JDB suits but by those filing them hoping for a default judgment when they know they have no proof. If nobody shows they get a judgment even with zero proof. I'm sure in my case that the judge and attorney considered me to be clogging up the system by actually showing up for court and having answered the complaint. It seems to me that could be cleared up if they had to show at least that they purchased the debt before filing. In my case currently, I pointed out in my answer to complaint and in my motion for summary judgment and dismissal and in my response to discovery documents that they had failed to state a claim under which relief could be granted them. I went to far as to say that they were on a fishing expedition for evidence because they themselves had no proof. The judge continued the case twice anyway and then finally a default judgment because I did not show however I did not show because I was misled by the judge as to the hearing date. I guess thats what the judge considers cleaning the slate/clearing the docket, not dismissing fruitless/abusive cases but filing default judgments to make room for the next victim.
  14. I would always send something like that with a delivery verification by the post office or whoever delivers it. I sent my answer to Kramer and Frank with a proof of delivery but they too said they had not received it. I told the judge I had a receipt from the post office and would he like to see it and he declined. Anyway, presumably after that they "found" it because I never heard anything else about it but the judge very considerately continued the case to give them a chance to look it over.