Jump to content

secretagent007

Members
  • Posts

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Fields

  • Location
    NJ

secretagent007's Achievements

CIC Member

CIC Member (4/6)

10

Reputation

  1. If "4321" is the original account number, then why was a balance transferred from an unknown "5678"? I agree..especially if these are the original bank statements from the OC. It looks very weird. Not to mention the statement for 4321 has an airline header on it....
  2. The account number they stated in their complaint and all other correspondence is 4321. This is the number to focus on. 1234 is listed at the top and bottom of the first two statements (this number has never been brought up. Don't know why it's there). And the "transferred account 5678 is mixed up in the first two statements 1234. This is why it's confusing.
  3. Yes, that is the exact MSJ word for word. Regarding account number "5678" ( "transfer from account number 5678.")...is that the number that was in the JDB's Complaint? No. The original account number for the alleged account they are seeking relief for is "4321". On "4321's" OC bank statement, it mentions account number "5678" under "purchases and adjustments." It reads: + TRANS FROM XXXXXXXXXXXX5678 $XXXX (the balance they're seeking as a whole number, minus the change). And that statement has everything zeroed out except for the amount they're seeking. "the present balance owed to plaintiff is as shown below" The only evidence to support this claim are alleged credit card statements that contain inconsistencies. One of those cc statements shows an address at which you've never lived, and you can prove it. The only "account statement" that has a definite incorrect address is the Plaintiff's "internal account statement - which according to the authoried representative of the affidavit - displays the account information that was provided to Plaintiff at the time of purchase and assignment and accurately reflects the status of the account as of the date of the affidavit." The OC bank statements (if they aren't generated by the JDB), have my correct address, but the account numbers are inconsistent/no terms and conditions/no signed agreement by me/list of transactions and/or receipts of purchases made to calculate their total balance due. I think I am going to request oral arguement. I don't see how it can hurt. I certainly could explain the discrepancies in person better, than I can in writing (especially with all the written formalities that I'm just learning). I can't even express how thankful I am for your help! You are like a breath of fresh air! My head has been spinning all day trying to figure out how to put this all together in writing. Should I include case law? I can't seem to find anything relevant to my case in NJ. What I've found is unpublished.
  4. They also attached a copy of the Bill of Sale and Assignment of Loans in Exhibit C. Someone please help.
  5. This Certification of Proof was also included: I, Joe Shmoe, of full age, certifies and says: 1. I am the Attorney Relationship Manager of XXX plaintiff in the above-entitled matter and am familiar with all of all the matters and facts set forth herein. 2. Defendant entered into an agreement under the terms of which it was provided, inter alia, that certain credit would be extended to defendant who would repay the debt on a regular monthly basis for the credit used, plus a finance charge on the outstanding balance. Plaintiff is the present owner of said credit account. The account number for said agreement is (has full number here). 3. Defendant made use of said credit, and the present balance owed to plaintiff is as shown below, but defendant failed to repay the same as agreed, despite demand having been made. 4. The aforesaid agreemet further provided for a reasonable attorney fee if the account was referred to an attorney. 5. This claim is not based upon a writ of attachment, replevin or repossession of a chattel. 6. As a consequence of the foregoing, there is now due and payable by defendant the following sums, for which demand has been made but ignored: $XXX, plus reasonable attorney fees calculated in accordance with N.J.S.A. 17:16C-42, in the amount of $ -0-, (they whited that out and wrote 0 in pen), less payments of $0.00 made since suit was started, making a total due and owing of $XXX. There are no additional credits, deductions or setoffs due to the defendant from the plaintiff; Upon my belief and knowledge, no defendant name herein is an infant or mentally incapacitated; Upon my belief and knowledge, no defendant named herein is in the military service of the United States. 7. True and correct copies of documentation supporting this claim are attached hereto and incorporated herein. (Certification here) (Plaintiff name here) Signed Joe Shmoe Attorney Relationship Manager And the attached exhibits are the 3 OC bank statements (first page only) with discrepancies in the account numbers. The first bank statement is the only one with specifics of the APR and past due amount, etc..but again, the account number doesn't match the one they're claiming. The other two have zeros in every area except the total balance due which is the amount they're seeking. There are no transaction histories, receipts, etc. to lead to the calculation of the balance due and no agreement between the plaintiff and I. The only other thing they attached aong with the first page of each statement, is a generic sheet that comes with every statement that explains what grace period means, payments, etc. but not signed by me either. The Affidavit of Debt and Verified Bill of particulars says: The udersigned being first duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that they are familiar with the policies and practices, as well as the books and records of the Plaintiff with respect to the matters stated herein, and based on information and beliefs states as follows: 1. Plaintiff's principal business consists of purchasing charged off receivables. 2. The Defendant(s) defaulted on OC Account No. XXXXXXXXXXX. Said Account was charged off on 6/30/2008 and subsequently sold to XXX with a balance of $XXX. 3. Plaintiff purchased or was otherwise assigned this charged off account along with other debts. As a result of the foregoing sale and assignment, the Plaintiff succeeded to all right, title and interest in the charged off account and it now owns the account. 4. Plaintiff conducted a due diligence investigation to determine, among other things, the accuracy of the account information provided to ascertain whether the statue of limitations was a bar to demand or institution of suit. Further, Plaintiff and its predecessor entered into a contract where the predecessor made representations and warranties that 1) it had clear right, title and interest in the account; 2) the account was free and clear of all liens and encumbrances; and 3) it had the power, authority, and full right to sell and convey its interest in the account. 5. According to Plaintiff's records, the last payment to the Original Creditor to this charged off account was on XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of $XX and after application of all payments, credits, adjustments, and lawful offsets, if any, there is still a balance due and owing on this indebtedness of $XXXX. 6. The internal Account Statement of Plaintiff is attached hereto as Exhibit A. (That is the statement that has my wrong address - I have NEVER lived there, nor do I think it exists). Such account Statement displays the account information that was provided to Plaintiff at the time of purchase and assignment and accurately reflects the status of the account as of the date of this affidavit. The foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. By: (Different first name, but same last name as Joe Shmoe from the Certification of Proof) "Authorized Representative" Subscribed and sworn before me on, October XX, 2011 (before I was even served the summons). (Notarized by some lady with a rubber stamp. THIS COMMUNICATION IS FROM A DEBT COLLECTOR
  6. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT This is a motion by Plaintiff XXX, for entry of Summary Judgment in its favor pursuant to the provisions of R.4:46 on the basis that there is no genuine issue of material fact in this case; XXX is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. Defendant XXX, is indebted to Plaintiff, XXX, on a book account arising from credit card purchases and/or cash advances. 2. Defendant is indebted to Plaintiff in the amount of $XXX as more specifically calculated in the attached certification. ARGUEMENT It is well established in New Jersey that a Motion for Summary Judgment "should be granted forthwith if there is no dispute as to material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Tyson vs. Groze, 172 N.J. Super, 314;319 (App. Div. 1980); Judson vs. Peoples Bank & Trust f Westfield, 17, N.J. 67 (1954); R.4:46-2. The Motion for Summary Judgment serves the twin goals of speeding up litigation by eliminating matters in which there is not genuine issue of material fact -- and equally important -- it affords protection "against groundless claims and frivolous defenses, not only to save the antagonist the expense for protracted litigation, but also reserve judicial manpower and facilities to cases which meritoriously command attention." Robbins vs. Jersey City, 23 N.J. 229;241 (1957); United Rental Equipment Company vs. Aetna Life and Casualty Insurance Company, 74 N.J. 92;992 (1977). Indeed, Summary Judgment procedure was initiated in regard to creditor claimants suing to recover upon liquidated debts and demands such as the instant one. Judson vs Peoples Bank & Trust of Westfield, supra. Summary Judgment is particularly appropriate where, as here, the answer filed by the Defendants consists essentially of nothing more than a bare denial of XXX allegations. The mere filing of such an answer is wholly insufficient to warrant a trial of this action. A. Kaplan & Son, LTD vs. Housing Authority of Passaic, 42, N.J. Super 230 (App. Div. 1956). Robbins vs Jersey City, supra, at 241, and Rule 4:46-5(a) compel Defendant to counter XXX prima facie showing of entitlement to Summary Judgmet by presenting specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Rule 4:46-5(a) mandates that a Defendant cannot rely upon "mere allegations or denials of his/her pleading," but must furnish affidavits "setting forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Additionally, the Supreme Court of New Jersey, in an apparent attempt to decrease the dockets before our trial judges, has recently liberalized the standards so as to permit Summary Judgment in a larger number of cases. In Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995) the Supreme Court held that a Summary Judgment Motion should not be denied just because a Defendant alleged that there is any disputed issue of fact, but instead, a determination whether there exists a genuine issue of material fact that precludes Summary Judgment requires the Motion Judge to consider whether the competent evidential materials presented when viewed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party are sufficient to permit a rational fact finder to resolve the alleged disputed issue in favor of the non-moving party. Thus, a judge must determine whether there is a genuine issue for trial. Id. at p. 540. If there exists a single, unavoidable resolution of the alleged disputed issue of fact, that issue should be considered insufficient to constitute a genuine issue of material fact for purposes of Rule 4:46-2. Id. at p. 540. The import of the holding is that when the evidence is so one sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law, the trial court should not hesitate to grant Summary Judgment. Id. at p. 540. Thus, in the present case the Defendant has not presented competent evidential materials to permit a rational fact finder to resolve this matter in favor of the Defendant and thus, a genuine issue of material fact does not exist and Summary Judgment should be entered against the Defendant and in favor of the Plaintiff. CONCLUSION Application of the foregoing principles to this case requires entry of Summary Judgment in favor of Plaintiff, XXX, and against Defendant), XXX because there is no genuine issue of material fact. Signed Attorney for Plaintiff Dated: April 27, 2012
  7. I included my Request for Admissions and Notice to Produce to them, along with my response to their ROGS, RFAs and NTP. It was sent guaranteed overnight, tracking number provided and signature required. It was sent April 19, but I haven't received anything back yet..although they do still have time. No, they did not include a return date on the MSJ. I haven't decided on oral arguement yet. Is it more intimidating to request it? Not sure how that works. I will most definitely include an affidavit regarding the wrong address on the plaintiff's account statement. However, the OC bank statements have my correct present address (although the statement account numbers are inconsistant). But I wasn't living at this address at the time those statements were mailed to this address. Should I try to provide proof that I received mail (paystubs or whatever) to the address I moved to at that time? I'm going to type up the MSJ Brief under this...
  8. To try and better explain the discrepancies in the bank statements, I'll use different numbers to represent the accounts. Statement 1 uses last four digits 1234 as the account number (on top left corner and in amout due box on bottom right of remittance portion). Statement 2 also uses last four digits 1234 as the account number (on top left corner and in amount due box on bottom right of remittance). Both Statements 1 & 2 also have an electronic number representing the routing and account number abover the remittance portion - but this number reads "5678" as the last four digits. Statement 3 uses the original claim account number 4321 (as specified in all plaintiff's correspondence). And the same four digits are shown in the top left, bottom right AND electronic routing number/acct number abover the remittance portion. However, it shows "transfer from account number 5678." So where does account number "1234" come from? And why is 5678 thrown in the middle of the same statement with that random number?
  9. I finally received the MSJ in the mail today, (it was dated April 27, 2012 but according to the stamp on the regular mail copy, it was actually mailed May 3rd (Thursday) and I missed the certified mail copy today (the mailman left the little "we missed you" card in my mailbox with todays date 5/5). Anyone know if I still have to file my objection by Monday (according to the 10 day rule)? I believe the court clerk was basing the 10 days on the 27th (what they dated the MSJ). Just wondering if I actually have more time than I'm being led to believe. Aside from that, I really REALLY need help with this because there seems to be all sorts of wrong in this MSJ. First thing I noticed in their exhibits of the bank statements, is that 2 out of the 3 OC bank statements have different account numbers on it. In fact, the 3rd statement that has the matching account number for what they're claiming, says something about transfer from account ending with XXXX (which is different from the account number they've been claiming). So when I checked back on those 2 statements with different numbers (both have the same different account # from the 3rd one) - I see above the remittance area the last 4 digits of that "transfered account" but in the upper left corner and in the balance due area on the same statement, it has a different account number (4 digits). I hope you can understand what I'm explaining. It seems very confusing, but even the 3rd statement with the account number they're claiming seems sketchy. It says the name of an airline at the top left corner - which leads me to believe that these might be computer generated by the JDB's office. Next thing, the affidavit that is (rubber stamp) notarized, and signed by an "authorized representative" is under oath and certified as stating true facts of this alleged account belonging to me and that the plaintiff received my information from the OC (as shown in the exhibit - on plaintiff's account statement). The thing is, my street address is wrong on the plaintiff's account statement. It's totally off, that I don't think that address even exists in my town. So how can this account belong to me? Would these be good arguements? Also, the Certification of Proof from some other Joe Shmoe stating that he is the "Attorney Relationship Manager" of the plaintiff is also saying everything is true and that I owe this debt. But how, if the bank statements all have errors? (I also found a link to a case with the same plaintiff using this guy for an affidavit. The MSJ they went for was denied because they failed to state a claim. I believe that case was unpublished though or in CT not NJ). Lastly, I noticed on the original summons that they stated the "Demand" for a different amount, plus attorney fees and mileage, with a different Total than what they're claiming IN the actual complaint/MSJ/evidence. There's just so much I'm finding wrong with this but I don't even know where to begin piecing it together in my objection. Someone please help! Thanks!
  10. Well, two out of three have a different account number. There is one with the account number they've been mentioning. Do you think that will make the judge overlook the two wrong ones? And what about the wrong address on the plaintiff's "account statements"? And also the fact that I never received a copy of the MSJ. I would never have known if I didn't call the court to inquire about an error with the status.
  11. Another thing.... I noticed that on the OC's statements (they attached 3 top pages with no list of transactions), that two of the account numbers are different than the account they are trying to collect on (the last four numbers anyway). Could I use that as an arguement as well? I could really use some help putting this objection together. Found case law in NJ with a similar situation that pointed out the different account numbers proving they aren't the owners of the debt. Thanks! This is the case law I found: COURT FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A v. PRINCE F. KESSIE :: April, 2011 :: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division - Unpublished Opinions Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: US Case Law :: US Law :: Justia This other article was interesting too: Ballard Spahr | Trouble Continues for Credit Card Collection Actions
  12. Anyone know if there's anything I can do as far as them not serving me the MSJ properly? i checked, and double and triple checked to see if I got anything and still nothing.
  13. Not only that...they mailed (cc'ed me) a letter to the court clerk asking for an adjournment of the trial date because we were "well within the 90 day discovery period." We already had a trial date set. The next day, they mail me another letter pushing for answers to their ROGS, RFAs and NTP. I eventually sent that back to them (last minute, but I overnighted it and have proof and a tracking number) along with my own RFAs and NTP (which I haven't received an answer for). I didn't even know it was possible for them to request a trial adjournment because of discovery and then file a MSJ...let alone, the fact that I never received it. I checked with everyone in my household and no one signed for anything or saw anything from them. And the wrong street address on the plaintiff's "account statement" is sketchy as well.
  14. Thanks for your attention to my case, although you're not familiar with NJ. I just received a copy from the court of the MSJ. It shows that they cc'ed me via regular and certified mail, but I haven't received anything. Also, it says I have 10 days here as well. They stated a bunch of case law, and used the provisions of R:4:46 on the basis that there is no genuine issue of material fact in this case, and that they are entitled to judgement as a matter of law. They also included a certification of address source for service of process. (Which is crazy because I never got ANYTHING from them)! A certification of non-military service, Order for Summary Judgement, Proof of Service, A Certification of Proof from the "Attorney Relationship Manager of (the plaintiff)" which included an account number and "total due", copies of the FIRST PAGE of 2 bank statements (with no transactions) and the terms (which isn't signed by me), A Bill of Sale Assignment of Loans (not singling out anything to do with me), an Affidavit of Debt and Verified Bill of Particulars (Notarized), a copy of the plaintiff's statement of the alleged account that has pretty much the same info as the statements they attached before...but this one has my name, last four social #'s, and the address is wrong. The street address is wrong (I don't even think that street address exists in my town)..and lastly, a copy of a military status check from the Dept of Defense. According to the court clerk, I have until Monday to object. Where do I begin???
  15. Ok, I guess I'm left wondering what to do now since I never got a copy of their Motion in the mail. I've never had contact with them, and I don't want to alert them on their "mistake" if they screwed up....or even if it was intentional. I have nothing to see what I'm objecting to! Can I request a copy (fax) from the courts clerk? I'm so pissed! I can't believe I have to worry about this now, with only a few days to object. I find it amazing that the only correspondence I received from them were two seperate letters (sent regular mail), dated April 9th and April 10th. The first was a letter copied to me that was sent to the court clerk, asking for an adjournment of the trial date (because we were "well within the 90 day discovery period" as they stated). The second one was basically pushing for me to answer their discovery or they "will be forced to file a motion to protect their client (which they were "reluctant to do"). Mind you, I overnighted (with proof) my response to their discovery as well as my own for them to answer. I still haven't heard anything from them. Supposedly, they filed the Motion for Summary Judgement like a day after their second letter. If I never would've checked the case status online and noticed the error on the courts behalf, I never would've called and never would've known about their MSJ! Any insight , or anyone who can point me in the right direction as to how I should handle this, would be very much appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...