debtzapper

Members
  • Content Count

    3,432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    85

debtzapper last won the day on June 11

debtzapper had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,273 Excellent

About debtzapper

  • Rank
    CIC Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    al

Recent Profile Visitors

2,851 profile views
  1. 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?

  2. Being sued by PRA in Tarrant County Texas.  Pre-Trial Mediation.  PLEASE HELP

    Here's the situation:

    I was served and after doing some research, I filed an answer letter.  I received a letter in the mail about a pre-trial mediation.  I attended but was unprepared because I didn't know what I was in for.  I requested a continence and the judge granted it.  I go to court on the 5th, which is in 6 days.  I've done a LOT of research, but I just would like some advice on my current plan.  I don't want to agree to any kind of mediation for fear that it will inadvertently admit that the debt is mine, and my main defense is the burden of proof that they will have to provide.  To my understanding, to prove that the debt is not only mine, but is the correct amount, they will need all the paperwork of every payment in the chain of documents.  

    My plan thus far is to make a motion of discovery.  See what ammo they have against me.  My questions: 

    1)Is that an admittance that can be used against me if we go to trial?

    2)I have some old documents regarding this CC debt, but obviously if I'm fighting it on the basis of them having to prove it, what do you think the pro's con's of revealing that.(I know that question might seem stupid, but I'm trying to get an idea of all aspects and scenarios)

    3)Should I just flat out refuse arbitration and go to trial?  When I was served, they provided no copies of any kind of CC agreement or any kind of supporting documentation

    4)I've been reading something about arbitration through "JAMS".  Would that be a good route?

     

    Thank you so much for any help you can provide.  

  3. Congratulations and thanks to all on the board who helped you.
  4. You win! Great job with the arbitration strategy. Even some consumer lawyers now are representing their debtor clients by arbitrating their case.
  5. You did a great job, rob. And thanks to all those on this board who helped you. Superb advice from some very bright, very experienced "litigators."
  6. Great work! And thank you for wanting to join the military and serve your country. I wish you well.
  7. Forget about contesting their business records. Idaho rules are irrelevant. Your opposition to their MSJ must be based solely on your right to compel them to stay their case and enter into arbitration. If the court grants your motion, it is likely they will drop their case because of the expense of arbitration.
  8. Still, the CFPB is not the vigilant, pro-consumer agency it once was. It is hated by the financial industry, and it has willing allies in Congress who want to weaken it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/how-trump-appointees-curbed-a-consumer-protection-agency-loathed-by-the-gop/2018/12/04/3cb6cd56-de20-11e8-aa33-53bad9a881e8_story.html?utm_term=.822eadbc292e https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/03/13/consumer-protection-actions-cfpb-ftc-and-cpsc-decline-under-trump/3142905002/ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/magazine/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-trump.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/30/democrats-aim-to-roll-back-anti-consumer-measures-at-nations-watchdog-agency.html
  9. Debt collectors could soon get an all-clear to text, email and private-message consumers who have fallen behind in debt repayments -- on an unlimited basis. Consumer groups decried the proposed rule, saying it will enable harassment of consumers through electronic communications as well as phone calls. While the proposed law would limit debt collectors to seven calls per week per debt, one consumer advocacy group said debtors could still feel ambushed, especially when combined with texting and emailing. "We are horrified that the CFPB's proposed rule will actually authorize harassment of consumers through phone calls, emails and texts," said Margot Saunders, an attorney at the National Consumer Law Center, in an emailed statement. Even limiting debt collectors to seven calls per week could prove to be overwhelming for some consumers, the National Consumer Law Center said. For instance, a student with eight loans could receive 56 calls each week, the group noted.
  10. https://www.nclc.org/media-center/consumer-watchdogs-proposed-debt-collection-rule-bites-consumers-authorizes-harassment-by-debt-collectors.html
  11. Congrats to the OP for his persistence and hard work and to the MEMBERS who continue to give generously of their time and expertise to this board.