Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'demerrer'.
I have recieved a summons and the complaints have been validated. I understand that I would need to send a validated answer (not a general one) in order for them not to recieve judgement by default. However, I've been reading up on Demerrer and it seems like it could be an option in this state (CA). I'd like to get someone's opinion as to whether or not I could/should go that route? The plaintiff's complaints are as follows: CAUSE 1—BREACH OF CONTRACT 1) On or about 08-13-04, CITIBANK, NA and defendant(s) entered into an agreement for the issuance of a credit card wich defendant(s) requested. A credit card now bearing account number XXXXXXXXXXXX7786 was issued to defendant(s). This credit card account granted defendant(s) credit privilages in purchasing goods and services and/or receiving cash advances. 2) Defendant(s) accepted the written card holder agreement by using the credit card. Payments for the charges incurred were to be made in accordance with monthly billing statements sent to defendant(s). 3) On or about 11-13-09, defendant(s) breached the card holder agreement by failing to make the minimum monthly payment due. 4) Plaintiff and the original creditor have performd all of their obligations to defendant(s) except those obligations plaintiff or the original creditor were prevented or excused from performing. 4) Plaintiff sufferend damages legally and proximately caused by breach of the card holder agreement by defendant(s) in that defendant(s) left due and owing the sum of $1898.33 with interest thereon. Although demand has been made, the amount prayed for is due, owing and unpaid. 5) Pursuant to agreement of statute, plaintiff seeks reasonable attorney fees according to proof. CAUSE 2—COMMON COUNTS 1) Defandant(s) and each of them became indebted to the original creditor, CITIBANK, NA within the last four years: a. on and open book account for money due and b. because an account was stated by and between the original creditor and the defendant(s) in which it was agreed that defendant(s) were indebted to the original creditor. 2) Plaintiff also alleges that each defendant(s) becase indebted to CITIBANK, NA, within the last four years: a. for money lent by the original creditor to defendant at defendant's request, and b. for money paid, laid out and expended to or for defendant at defendant's special instance and request for the defendant's use and benefit. 3) The sum of $1898.33 is due and unpaid despite plaintoff's demand, plus prejudgement interest according to proof. There were no exhibits attached. **On another note, the Plaintiff is UNIFUND CCR (represented by Kenosian and Miele) not CITIBANK. Does this change the merrit of their complaint or how I should approach my answer? If I admit to the stuff about CITIBANK how would that help UNIFUND CCR? ...Gosh, this stuff can get a bit overwhelming..