Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'no intent to prove debt'.
Found 1 result
Hello everyone, I am from Texas. I will ask my questions first and give you specifics further on. Is it unlawful for PRA to sue me over the same alleged debt over and over again even if they don't have all documentation and have no real intent to win? Isn't this act alone a violation of the FCDPA? Does PRA suppose to delete the tradeline of the alleged debt from all credit reporting agencies (CRA) after they loose each suite, but they don't? What is my recourse if any? Specifics.... Lawsuite #1 brought by PRA. 1. Plaintiff's (PRA) representatives, Rausch Sturm. 2. Alleged debt $3,400+ from CitiBank card. 3. Venue and service was correct. 4. My answer was sent timely and proper. 5. Sent amendments to my answer properly 6. I sent a Motion for Pretrial Conference (MFPC) and was granted. Date set for conference. 7. I show up for conference, PRA is a no show 8. Trial date set. 9. PRA sends Motion for Continuance (MFC) and is granted. 10. Trial date set again. 11. I show up for trial, PRA is a no show 12. JP is perturbed at PRA because he just received a 2nd MFC from them 2 days before trial date. 13. He denies their MFC and rules in my favor, Dismissed for Want of Prosecution. 14. I won Lawsuite #2 brought by PRA 1. PRA's representatives are Rausch Sturm 2. Alleged debt $3,400+ from CitiBank card, same debt as before. 3. Venue and service was correct 4. My answer was timely and proper 5. Trial date set. 6. PRA submits a MFC and was granted (sounds familiar) 7. Trial date reset 8. I show up for trial, a local representative that was hired that morning by PRA and she shows up, out of breath and obviously unprepared. 9. I questioned her credentials and if she was a lawful representative for the plaintiff. The JP verified her credentials. 10. She called me out of court to discuss if I wanted to admit to the debt, etc. I said no. She said she had proof of the debt in her briefcase. I told her that this "proof" was a surprise, I object to it, and it better be accompanied by proper Chain of Custody and affidavits from each record keeper involved. 11. She got up directly and walked back into court, with a scowl on her face. 12. She immediately told the JP that she had no doubt I owed the debt, but due to her client lacking proper documentation and proof that they move for a Non-Suite at this time. So by her own motion her "lack of doubts" became completely irrelevant. 13. I won again 14. When I get home, I received a copy of a 2nd MFC that evidently was filed too late by PRA. I am a practical person. If someone, especially a large law firm, were to sue someone they would be prepared and have every little bit of proof and documentation at the ready. Rausch and Sturm and PRA are unprofessional, abusive with no intention of showing proof and documentation for their suite, and just plain buffoons. I don't think their cornbread ain't done in the middle. Even though they loose cases they will still keep their tradelines on your credit reports even if a judge rules against them or they choose not to prosecute (non-suite). I am sure they will do this again. Thank you and God bless from Texas.