who actually owns this debt?????

[can'tfindthesunshine]

I posted earlier about being served a summons for judgement on a chase card I haven't payed in over a year. same card, ( i have 3 of these nightmares I'm trying to deal with) different questions.

I was rereading old posts hoping for answers to pop out in some way. I'm trying not to get crazy over the summons at the moment, they are summoning me to the wrong county.

My 1st and only letter from the debt collector was sent in December.

It says they were notifying me that they had purchased my deliquent account from chase/mastercard and on the back of the paper they seemed pround to say they were now the owner of the account.

The balance due was $3,658.96

The next corspondence was the end of January from an attorneys office here in N.Y. They said they were representing the collector who is an assignee of chase manhatten bank.

The balance due was $3,289.14.

My DV would have reached them about the time they were filing in court. No response. Got the summons yesterday. I will do what I have to do for that.

I was hoping for a settlment of some kind at best.

The posts I've read said the debt collector can't be both the owner and assignee. Whats going on with that? and the two different amounts on the balance due?

hope someone can help me unconfuse my latest issue! thanks

[Broke Chick]

I posted earlier about being served a summons for judgement on a chase card I haven't payed in over a year. same card' date=' ( i have 3 of these nightmares I'm trying to deal with) different questions.

I was rereading old posts hoping for answers to pop out in some way. I'm trying not to get crazy over the summons at the moment, they are summoning me to the wrong county.

The suit can be dismissed on that basis (but, they'll probably refile where you are). Or, judgments have been vacated--with prejudice--when sued in a "wrong venue"--but don't count on this! Better to go for a dismissal and fight when they refile.

BTW: Asset has been known to do this little "stunt" (filing out-of-venue).

My 1st and only letter from the debt collector was sent in December.

It says they were notifying me that they had purchased my deliquent account from chase/mastercard and on the back of the paper they seemed pround to say they were now the owner of the account.

They must sue you in THEIR name, now...Chase has no part in anything to do with this account, now.

The balance due was $3,658.96

The next corspondence was the end of January from an attorneys office here in N.Y. They said they were representing the collector who is an assignee of chase manhatten bank.

This is WRONG! They are not filing as an "assignee" of Chase!! They (the CA/JDB) owns the account and should never refer to Chase at all!! Fight this!!

The balance due was $3,289.14.

My DV would have reached them about the time they were filing in court.

The DV would be useless in this case...you'll get the evidence through other means.

No response.

Typical. Tedious!

Got the summons yesterday. I will do what I have to do for that.

I was hoping for a settlment of some kind at best.

It's just as well you have to go to Court...you might have a fighting chance to get a better settlement than if it had not. (And, keep this case from going to an actual Court hearing...even lawyers don't like that!. Costs too much...and JDB's don't want to pay for it!! )

The posts I've read said the debt collector can't be both the owner and assignee. Whats going on with that? and the two different amounts on the balance due?

The debt collector, indeed, cannot be both the "assignee" and the "owner".

The wrong use of the term "assignee" is to try to fool both you and the Court...a form of fraud on the Court!...in an attempt to make it appear that the OC still has "a dog in this show".

(This "assignee" trick is quite common with JDBs--A$$et does this all the time!)

The differing amounts? Added interest and/or (probably illegal) service fees and/or lawyer's fees.

hope someone can help me unconfuse my latest issue! thanks

[Recovering Attorney]

Don't be fooled by inaccurate language in the letter. WHoever the plainitf in the summons is, that is who owns the debt.

If you got sued in a city court, you have 10 days to answer the summons, so do not delay.

You should interpose the followng defenses:

PLainitff lacks legal capacity to bring the action

The court lacks personal jurisdiction over you

The action is barred by the statute of frauds

the action is barred by the statute of frauds

The action is brought in the worng venue per 15 USC 1692i ( check the section)

[can'tfindthesunshine]

Thank you both for the information! I had a few moments of feeling like I can actually get through this, but then, knowing things and being able to state them in court to a judge is a whole other matter.

If someone gets back to this post, what is exactly implied by saying " the action is barred by the statute of frauds " ? I'd be saying they're total liars in a court of law???

[KentWA]

It means they have to cough up a written agreement.

Make sure you throw in counter claims, when it is dismissed for lack of proper venue they may just settle knowing you are going to assert these smae claims.

On the DV, check the dates carefully on when they received it and the date the case was filed. If they got your DV even a day before filing then it is a violation of the DV process of the FDCPA.

Filing in the wrong venue is a violation of the FDCPA.

I believe their representing themselves as assignee is actionable. What does the summons state as far as assignee/owner?

[tryingtodigout]

I have a similiar situation as what is being discussed here. I hope its ok to post my problem in this discussion. I received a summons from an attorney as well. I have a couple of questions:

The complaint said JDB/assignee of citibank. If I am understanding correctly what is being said here, this is wrong. Please correct me if I am wrong. I know that the JDB purchased this debt because on my CR it even states JDB/purchased from citibank under the OC area. If this is wrong, how can I fight this.

In regards to the time you have to answer the summons. The court I am being sued in is city court where I live. I went to the court personally to find out if the summons was legit and how long I had to respond. They told me 30 days three different times. I even asked about the 10 days and they still said no, 30 days. Does it make a difference that I was served by mail. But it seems to be suggested here that I should have responded in 10 days. Which one should I have followed.

I don't recall receiving any communication from the JDB on this. If so, it must have been well over a year ago. It was ignored because I had to money to pay at the time. The only other communication I got was from the lawyer earlier this year offering a lump sum settlement which I ignored. At the time, I did not know all I know now about DV etc, so I did nothing except dispute with the CRA. Then, I get sued before they even validated with the CRA. Is there any action that I can take here.

Any advice would be appreciated.

[can'tfindthesunshine]

on my summons the plaintiff claims they are the assignor for chase manhatten bank. But in a letter from December they claim to be the owners of the debt, twice in fact, like they want to make that clear. So there is absolutly no way they're claims about being the assignee can be true since they declared they bought it and own it, right????

I'm filing my answers tomorrow morning, really want to be sure.

To tryingtodigout..... hope you find your answers.

Thanks!

[Broke Chick]

on my summons the plaintiff claims they are the assignor for chase manhatten bank. But in a letter from December they claim to be the owners of the debt' date=' twice in fact, like they want to make that clear.[/quote'] Boy did YOU luck out! That letter is a gold mine--of evidence--for you! An outright admission as to their own status, in fact!!

So there is absolutly no way they're claims about being the assignee can be true since they declared they bought it and own it' date=' right????[/quote']

Right from the horse's a$$...'cuse me!...mouth! They are sure going to have a time "splainin' that one to the Judge!! ASSIGNEE, eh???

I'm filing my answers tomorrow morning' date=' really want to be sure.

To tryingtodigout..... hope you find your answers.

Thanks![/quote']

Good luck!!

[moppet2003]

I have the same thing where on a letter from the CA it says ACQUIRED at the top along with the account number and so forth, and then on the summons it says the assignment of claim to so and so for x amount with interest for xxxx account number (not complete either) and the claim was assigned for good consideration to the plaintiff. I've sent in my answer which said I lacked knowledge of the claim and my notice of appearance. I received papers from the lawyer for request for admissions and interrogatories, so I need to know what to do next. Am I able to file an ammended answer and if so, what do I put in it. There's no case file number yet so I can't send it to the court. I'm so confused and really need some guidance. Thanks for any help.

[can'tfindthesunshine]

Had to take a couple days away.....started having dreams of nasty collectors and such chasing me through the woods!!!!

So I took a trip to the county they're trying to sue me in, they stamped my papers, filed a set and I mailed a set to the ca's lawyer and got the reciept a few days later. All very uneventful.

KentWA, on the summons its says the plaintiff is the assignor of chase manhatten bank.

new development.... I was going through old files and found yet another ca for this debt claiming to be representing Merchants dated July 2004.

Anyone know if Merchants and Chase have anything to do with each other?

If not, the ca and lawyer can't even claim to have bought the debt from Chase,...?

Well, I'm no longer panicing over my 3 nightmare credit card problems, maybe a bit over discover. Mostly I'm getting angry that even though I'm trying to fix the situation, clear up the mess, there seems to nobody to deal with but crooks and liars!!!

If I didn't have this board to come to, I would probably be on my way to losing everything I have, not knowing I could have done something about it! I'm almost ready to write a new post on something I did in the beginning, because I panicked. Now, can I fix it somehow? Hope so.

[ghacorp]

Rather than debate the meaning of "assignee" and "assignor" you might want to consider diasavowing knowlege of the whole matter. Junk debt buyers are legal assignees after they purchase the debt. Even though JDB's are not holders of the debt in due course, they are legally entitled to recover the face amount. (Civil courts operate on preponderance of evidence and therefore if there is likelihood you incurred any portion of the debt, that's enough for a judge.) It's stinks, but it's legal and junk debt buying is one of the most profitable businesses for investors. Just ask David Rosenberg, the sleazeball who owns UNIFUND/Great Seneca Financial and a host of other identities. They buy your debt for two cents on the dollar then go after you for the whole amount. They know you can't pay, but they count on you owning a home they can attach or wages they can garnish after they win a judgment. So, list as many counterclaims you can think of and consider claiming ID theft. They will then have an increased burden of proof. Why not make them work for their money?