MisterLoon

Members
  • Content Count

    178
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by MisterLoon

  1. I haven't been on this site in a long time but just wandered by and found this. I haven't been in court for five or six years now and I know some stuff has changed, but I think maybe I can point you in the right direction. First, there is a site called WA law help that has all the forms, etc. and a very basic walk through of collection suits and how to answer. Now, back when I was in court, I did this: When served, I didn't put in an answer, but I did put in a Notice of Appearance. By "appearing" they couldn't do anything without notifying me first. Otherwise, without a Notice of
  2. I probably should have posted this earlier but I'd forgotten about it: Anyone dealing with Midland needs to download the consent decree they signed with the CFPB and also with some states AG's. Some people have been having success getting Midland tossed because their cases have been found in violation of the consent decree.
  3. Feel free to PM me. I'll be happy to help if I can. (Pretty much everybody on this board would say the exact same thing in my experience.)
  4. I would seriously consider arb. At the very least, you should get a copy of the agreement and post what it says so that we have some reasonable basis to consider pros and cons. This may sound like a dumb thing to say given the nature of this board, but Midland is my favorite JDB. They tend to be a tough fight, but fair and practical. I'm not familiar with the law firm they're using, but another guy on this board two or three years back took them to arb and they dropped it. Something to consider. I get seriously discouraged providing my experiences--there are things I simply can't say
  5. I suspect the OP has already answered based on the dates of the posts. We may have revived an old thread. I wasn't familiar with the Unifund v. Elyse case, but there really isn't anything new there--it's the same stuff applied to a specific situation. There are a couple of interesting things to note though. First, this wasn't a pro se effort--they had a lot of legal help, at least on appeal. Second, the appellate court neatly sidestepped any questions regarding Unifund introducing evidence. Third--and this barely scratches the surface--don't assume SOL is 6 years. In this case, if
  6. Yes, any objection based on the validity of the assignment does the trick. As I previously posted, I always just answered with (1) Plaintiff is not the real party in interest and (2) failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. (Others have done it differently but as long as the court understands you're objecting to the validity of the assignment (ie. their standing before the court.) The difference is this: With the assumption, the JDB can just say: "We bought the debt." Without the assumption, at the very least the JDB will have to get the original creditor to say: "
  7. Gather round, it's story time. Many years ago, I had the fascinating misfortune of getting to know a con man. I was working in a legit phone center, and he had just gotten out of prison and started working there, too. But, he informed me, he would only be there until the print shop finished his order so he could get some money to start another illegal phone operation. This guy was handsome, a sharp dresser, great personality--and a total psychopath. The scam was this: He had cards, receipts, etc. printed up with ABC Collections or some such. Then he would go door-to-door in poorer n
  8. There's a lot of lessons buried in this thread, but let's see if I have this figured out roughly correctly: You disputed an account on your credit report, promptly got sued by an original creditor for something that is apparently within SOL, admitted to an account with the OC in your answer and counterclaimed under a completely inapplicable Act, and now are looking for a way to "win". Did I get that about right? Let's start here: trying to do a credit report clean up with defaulted debt within the statute of limitations. Such an attempt frequently suggests to a creditor that someone's
  9. I must say I concur with Goody_Ouchless. Things have changed a lot as the mess from the financial crisis worked through the system. For example, debts were sold multiple times without supporting documentation, and certain OC's and debt buyers came up with--shall we say--creative ways to deal with those problems. And the courts were overwhelmed. Now, after the OCC stepped in, national banking associations are only allowed to sell receivables for which they have documentation, and only to buyers that agree to abide by OCC guidelines for handling purchased debt. Among those guidelin
  10. I'm not an attorney. I don't want to be an attorney. I don't do legal advice. BUT I can share my experience. I had several court cases--every one of them took 3+ years. It really isn't hard to slow things down if you're just playing for time. In my experience (WA Superior Court), the court doesn't set a timeline--it simply responds to the parties. Typically, my cases went something like this: I'd be served and put in a notice of appearance. Eventually the plaintiff would move for default judgment. I'd answer which would squash the default. They'd come back with an MSJ. I'd
  11. I'm in Washington. All my experience was in Superior court. Let's talk about the Notice of Appearance for a minute. When you "appear", no action can be taken by the court without you being notified. Once notified, you can figure out how to respond. The first time I was sued--this is seven years ago now--I just put in my Notice of Appearance. Several months later, I was notified they moved for a default judgment--that's when I finally answered, effectively killing the motion for default judgment. (They, of course, just file a motion for summary judgment--and the fight was on.) I
  12. Are you dealing with an Original Creditor or a junk debt buyer? Suttell is acting as their attorney. You need to go to washingtonlawhelp dot org and read how to answer a debt lawsuit. But, if I were you, I would not answer yet. You've got a very interesting situation, and I'll bet dollars to donuts that Suttell wasn't informed about the previous arb election. I would go to National Association of Consumer Attorneys and call or email a few of the NACA lawyers and concisely explain your situation to see if you could get representation on a contingency basis. Even if you don't have a fe
  13. For the basics on answering, go to Washington law help (dot) org and read the how to answer a debt lawsuit topic. I have been on this board for long time--much more infrequently since I went SOL and closed out my lawsuits. I know people come here for hope, or advice, or whatever, but I have to be blunt: If you don't answer, they'll get a default judgment. But if you do answer, what is your plan? Are you hoping they'll go away? They probably won't. Are you going to be able to learn enough, fast enough to be able to self-lawyer? What, if any, defenses do you have? Midland knows
  14. No, I did not make copies of anything because I chose not to pursue that route. There were a surprising number of cases given the relatively small size of the county and the impression I'd always gotten from the board that JDB's never go to arb. Admittedly, I don't remember seeing many cases involving small amounts--5k was pretty much the low end. As I recall, the court would generally just confirm the arbitration and add attorney costs while the matter of the cost of arbitration was part of the agreement, but there were cases where quite a bit of discretion was exercised and apparently bui
  15. General reply--all points granted. I don't like the arb strategy in Washington state. Unlike some states where going to arb can get you a dismissal of the court action, here the court action remains open and the court has discretion, pursuant to the arb act, to modify, assign costs, and so on. And yes, much of the time, electing arb will somehow or another make it go away--but not always. And when a case goes bad. . . Just want to make sure the OP knows that there are risks involved. Ittledo, the one thing I know nothing about is how to settle. I fought everything. But--one th
  16. Let me go into Arb in Washington a bit, and why I don't like it as a strategy although I have to admit some people that have come through this board have had success with it. The first problem I have with it is philosophical--how can I invoke an agreement I don't acknowledge having made in the first place? You can't invoke an agreement without also acknowledging you've entered into that agreement. Starting behind the eight ball. But, that aside, the entire strategy basically hinges on running costs and assuming that it won't be cost effective for the JDB or OC to pursue it. Admitt
  17. I'm tired and I'm probably too inclined to be blunt when I'm tired. You said you're in District Court, presumably Small Claims Division, yet the answer says Superior Court. The first thing you absolutely need to know is which court you're in because you need to know the court rules for the court you're in. My experience is limited to Superior Court, but the laws are the same. Court rules are different, I assume. Why is the plaintiff's lawyer not listed with your information? I'm curious: They're not trying to sue in small claims without an attorney, are they? You need to get
  18. No, but the thread Update Better Late than Never had a somewhat interesting discussion of a Motion to Retain that may be relevant. I really know nothing about it, or Texas courts, but I thought the discussion of Texas court rules, etc. may be useful to think over given the situation.
  19. Uh. . .did you happen to do a forum search of "motion to retain"? There are already at least a couple of threads dealing with this topic. It appears some collection attorneys out of Texas are using this tact. Interesting reading.
  20. How close is this to going outside the statute of limitations? Based on the limited information provided, it sounds like they're trying to stay inside the statute of limitations. While I have no direct experience with this situation, I assume that you'll have to do the legal research and write an opposition to their motion, then go through the hearing process. Don't know what the law is in Texas, but I would think you can be beat it. I found that in my state I could consult with a lawyer without actually retaining a lawyer. Off the top of my head, this is one of those situations where
  21. A good basic source of information is Washington law help--I think it's dot org, but a quick search should find it--and look for how to respond to a debt lawsuit. The Jane Doe Spouse being named in the suit is because WA is a community property state--in essence, as I understand it, they're not suing your spouse, too, they're suing for access to community assets. In the old days--and things have changed a lot over the last 8-10 years--it was common for a JDB to serve everyone on the list they bought, get the easy ones paying, and then move on the problem children. Or just throw the
  22. Usually when a sale is made from the JDB to a numbered subsidiary or trust, it's because the JDB is splitting up a portfolio purchase and selling participation in any eventual recovery to other individuals and entities.
  23. You may want to check out the Washington Supreme Court case Evans v. Yakima. There may be more. The gist is this: There can be no liability arising from an express contract unless the contract is produced and the court can determine what it says. It is not up to the court to guess at the terms and any action requiring the court to do so, fails.
  24. This line of attack by the JDB makes sense. As I understand RCW 7.04A, if the court determines there is a valid contract with an arb clause, they have to enforce the arb clause--no discretion is granted to not enforce the arbitration. I also understand that people have had problems in district court. My only experience is in Superior Court, but if this were my case and I were arguing it, I would also consider the following lines of thought: If the JDB doesn't have an express contract to enforce, they have to switch theory. First, account receivables would be subject to a six year SOL, b
  25. Okay, the only thing I'd add is that since the case was actually filed, S&H should be voluntarily dismissing the case. You should be getting an actual court form (Motion to Dismiss or something similar) as opposed to just a letter. This is a pretty important part of the process because you don't want an open case record hanging out there.