Sign in to follow this  
c m chase

*edit*

Recommended Posts

Their response changes nothing...You requested validation...they failed to provide you with a full accounting of the alleged debt...that affidavit is amusing but really worthless without the full accounting of the account. If they had the proper validation documentation they would have sent it to you.

Wait out the SOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:!: TheCapn speaks from another board!! :D

Thanks for the advice. I don't have long to wait for SOL, so that shouldn't be too hard. I just wanted to make sure this didn't mean something that I wasn't seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You know.. they can also be held for sending you something that looks like a legal document without it being a REAL legal document.

Might rack up more violations on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol Funny...someone JUST said that too, on the other thread. Here's what I said....please tell me what you think about it.

Well, that was my thinking too, but someone on CB told me that it's the actual affidavit they'll use when they file, so I didn't think too much more about it.

I figured it was kinda like me filling out small claims paperwork and sending it with an ITS letter without filing. :?: I dunno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I haven't looked at the affidavit, I really can't say for sure, but I think it is probably a very poor substitute for validation: "We don't have any documentary proof, but trust me Chase owes us money".

Whether this could stand up in court would depend on what documents or evidence the plaintiff DOES have to submit to the court. Many states have something called the "best evidence rule" which is way too complicated to discuss generally on this board (it has so many exceptions that some commentators describe the rule as "dead"). But, in a case where NO records exist, and the plaintiff is left with nothing more than testimony about what records USED to say, the rule might have some application. Here is a link to a DOJ article descibing some of the issues it faces with the best evidence rule in cybercrime cases:

http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/search_docs/sect8.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just my opinion and I am not an expert but;

This sounds like a bullying or bluffing tatic with an underlying threat to take you to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "affadavit" ploy is now part and parcel of the standard court CA tactics. See my post in "Is There a Lawyer In the House" for links to cases filed by CAs within the last 30 days for examples of how the "Affadavit" is used.

If you are actually sued and you have FDCPA violations, you MUST move the case to federal court, or you're guaranteed to lose. Failure to do so will result in being forced into binding arbitration where you will be before an Arbitrator who was neither a judge nor a lawyer, and who won't know or understand anything about the FDCPA and won't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

They have NOT validated the debt. You have no proof whatsoever that it is even YOUR account ((even if it is)). What have they shown you? What proof do they have?

An affadavit is nothing more than a paper saying you swear something is true.

CA"s lie all the time.. like lying on this would be a big shock?!

I think this is continuing collection activity and also I think they are trying to scare you by making you think this is a legal document.

I would go after them in May when the SOL runs up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's something else: Check your state laws. I just found out that in Ohio only a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) is "competent" to testify about such matters. I'll bet this "relationship/analyst" (probably a fancy name for a meaningless position) has zero training or education in accounting or finance. If you challenge their "competency" by requiring proof of education/training, you can have the "Affadavit" and testimony stricken.

In this neck of the woods, MCMs attorneys have only been challenged 3 times in 120+ lawsuits The handful who did show up got forced into binding arbitration and lost. The arbitration hearings aren't available on-line, but one poor slob paid MCM 29.5% interest on his debt during the period between the date the account was charged off and 28 months later when MCM purchased the account, plus the 8 months time between the account purchase and the court filing. Obviously the arbitrator it was OK for MCM to charge interest even when they didn't own the account and weren't collecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Egads. Thanks for the info.

Looks like I'm going to have to keep a pretty close eye on these guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this