Jump to content

Help Help Being Sued by Sherman Need help with Answer


Recommended Posts

First off, I want to thank everyone who has helped me here with your informative posts. I have had some success thanks 10000% to the help I have gotten here.

Now, for my issue, I need to give everyone a little background which I think might be helpful. After signing up here, I pulled my credit reports. I found out I had a default judgement against me on my CRs. With help from various people here, I put together a motion to set aside the judgement along with my answers. If you read my previous posts, I had all kinds of troubles with the Plaintiff (a jdb) and the judge. She repeatedly kept postponing ruling on my motion telling me to settle and off the record asking the Plaintiff to get any kind of evidence "so I don't get away with it". The alleged debt was a few thousand dollars. Well, my motion to set aside was begrudgingly granted. I asked for discovery requesting all documents, etc. The Plaintiff contacted me saying they were going to dismiss the case initially without prejudice. I demanded if it was not dismissed with prejudice, I wanted to go to court. They begrudgingly agreed.

Now, for my current problem. I found out someone tried to serve me via certified mail 2 weeks ago. The person where I live would not sign for it. I got a letter regular mail from the court as a summons about being sued requesting my answer. It is the same lawyers who had sued me before. When I went to court against them, they requested my current address since I had been claiming improper service as my motion. The judge insisted I provide that for them. Almost immediately, I was sent a letter about a different account. I need help to answer the complaint. I have also included all the correspondence letters pertaining to this account down below. Thanks everyone.

Here is what is listed in the complaint.

It is a general civil case.

Complaint:

1. Plaintiff allowed the Defendant to charge goods and/or services (the underlined is what they typed in) on an open account or pursuant to contract, and upon defendants promise to pay for same.

2. Plaintiff has completed performance and rendered and account stated, copy attached. (none was attached).

3. There is presently due and owing, over and above all legal counterclaims, the sum of $ 1,557.19

4. Plaintiff requests judgment for $ 1,557,19 plus costs, interests and attorney fees as allowed by law.

I declare that the complaint information above and attached is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief September 2005.

(*Potential issues I see from their complaint- they are claiming it was an open account which if they are a JDB is a lie. Also, they did not attach any contract or documents as they claim).

I want to answer their complaint as well as counter-sue them (at least as leverage). Please critique my ANSWER and any help is appreciated. I have bad anxiety about all of this and could really use help. Thanks to everyone.

My potential ANSWER – please comments are greatly needed. I cut and pasted ones I found on the boards here and amended them to fit my case. I do need the Michigan statutes if anyone can help me so I can file my answer. Txs.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

FOR THE COUNTY OF xxxxx

Sherman Acquisition Limited

Plaintiff Case No._____________________

Vs.

Iwant2

Defendant, appearing pro se, for its reply to the Complaint of Sherman Acquisition Limited states as follows: All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Complaint. All allegations of the Complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein.

ANSWERS

1. In response to paragraph #1, the Defendant disputes the alleged debt, defendant denies allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

2. In response to paragraph #2, the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is necessary. However, to the extent that the Court may deem a response to be necessary, defendant denies the allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

3. In response to paragraph #3, the Defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

4. In response to paragraph #4, to the extent a response is required, defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

DEFENSES

5. As and for a First Defense

Plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the Defendant for which relief can be granted.

6. As and for a Second Defense

Defendant alleges that this action is time-barred under § O.S. 12-95-2 of the laws of Rhode Island.

7. As and for a Third Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint violates the statute of Frauds as the purported contract or agreement falls within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing. The purported contract or agreement alleged in the Complaint is not in writing and signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

8. As and for a Fourth Defense

Defendant claims Lack of Privity as Defendant has never entered into any contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff.

9. As and for a Fifth Defense

Defendant alleges that the Complaint includes references to alleged agreements made outside of the alleged written contract, violating the Parol Evidence Rule.

10. As and for a Sixth Defense

Defendant invokes the Doctrine of Unclean Hands as the Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff or the person or entity that assigned the alleged claim to Plaintiff acted in a dishonest or fraudulent manner with respect to the dispute at issue in this case.

11. As and for a Seventh Defense

Defendant reserves the right to amend and/or add additional Answers, Defenses and/or Counterclaims at a later date.

COUNTERCLAIMS

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

12. March 23, 2005, Defendant sent Lawyer xxx, PC (collection attorney for Sherman Acquisition Limited), by first class mail request for validation of alleged debt, including a request for documentation.

13. Similar letters and request for validation were sent to Sherman Acquisition Limited by way of regular mail on March 23, 2005.

14. Up until the date of this filing, no attempt at validation was received from Lawyerxx or Sherman Acquisition Limited, yet Lawyerxx, PC continued to collect on alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

15. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (hereafter “FDCPA”) in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified Plaintiff in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

16. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

17. Defendant received notice from lawyerxx, PC dated February 24, 2005, which stated “ 25% Off Your Outstanding Sherman Acquisition Limited. Contact this office today to take advantage of this offer. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER PLEASE CONTACT THIS OFFICE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MATTER DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL. Said notice contained the statement: “ This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Plaintiff lawyerxx did not identify themselves as a debt collector.

Statement of Claim

18. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by making an offer to settle by a certain date, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers instilled a false sense of urgency of settlement payment. Since payment date was within the 30 day period, Plaintiff overshadowed Defendant’s right to request validation within 30 days, violating 15 USC 1692g(a)

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

19. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 and 16-18 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

20. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated February 24, 2005, did not specify an alleged balance.

21. Defendant received subsequent notice from lawyerxx, PC dated March 25, 2005 noting a Balance of $1,557.19.

22. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated April 18, 2005, noted a Balance of $1,719.81.

Statement of Claim

23. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) By falsely representing the amount of the alleged debt and therefore violating 15 USC 1692e(2)(A)

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

24. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15, 16-18 and 19-23 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

25. Defendant had asked for documents concerning alleged debt as validation.

26. On December 6, 2005, Defendant was served with Summons via first class mail concerning alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

27. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified xxx in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

.

NOW THEREFORE, DEFENDANT PRAYS FOR THE FOLLOWING RELIEF:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF:

41. A. For Defendant’s First Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury ;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

B. For Defendant’s Second Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

C. For Defendant’s Third Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

E. For Defendant’s Fourth Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

F. Actual damages in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

G. Exemplary relief in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

H. Injunctive relief;

I. Declaratory relief;

J. Any attorney fees if applicable;

K. costs;

L. That any and all contracts having balances owed to the Plaintiff by the Defendant be declared null and void.

FURTHER, sayeth naught.

Dated: December 12, 2005

by

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

Correspondence letters:

I Sue You Lawyer

Offer to Settle:

Creditor: Sherman Acquision Limited

original Vendor: Directmerchant

Acct: XXXX

Our File: XXXX

Make Checks Payable and Mail to :

I SUe you Lawyer

25% Off Your Outstanding Balance

Sherman Acquisiton Limited Balance:

CONTACT THIS OFFICE TODAY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS OFFER

To Accept this offer please contact this office within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions concerning this matter do not hesitate to call.

Then it lists how it benefits me.

If at any time this office receives funds held under the state income tax credit/refund for the current year, that will also be considered as payment in addition to the settlement payment. Please contact this office without delay if you have any questions concerning this offer. If we do not receive your settlement amount by the acceptance date, this offer is revoked.

Disclaimer: This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

Here was my response: (the standard one listed. mind you I did not initially dispute the debt as mine since I had not read that in the forums until after):

To Whom It May Concern:

This letter is being sent to you in reference to the aforementioned account #XXXXXX. Be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 (B) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.

This is NOT a request for “verification” or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you.

Please provide me with the following:

What the money you say I owe is for;

Explain and show me how you calculated what you say I owe;

Provide me with copies of any and all papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe;

Provide a verification or copy of any judgment if applicable;

Identify the original creditor;

Prove the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account

Show me that you are licensed to collect in my state

Provide me with your license numbers and Registered Agent

At this time I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureau’s (Equifax, Experian or TransUnion) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent I will not hesitate in bringing legal action against you for the following:

Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

Defamation of Character

If your offices are able to provide the proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist.

Also during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes any listing any information to a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying an account as accurate when in fact there is no provided proof that it is.

If your offices fail to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit file and a copy of such deletion request shall be sent to me immediately.

I also request, in writing, that no telephone contact whatsoever be made by your offices, agents or assignees. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS.

It would be advisable that you assure that your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose.

Best Regards,

Iwant2

Here was their response to my DV request:

Dear Iwant2:

I am in receipt of your correspondence dated March 2005 wherein you requested validation of the above referenced debt. Please be advised that Sherman Acquisition is the holder of the debt owed to Direct Merchants purchases made on an Direct Merchants/Metris credit account.

I am attaching to this correspondence a Debt Validation Form for your review. I am hopeful that this information will refresh your memory as to the debt. If you would like to enter into a repayment plan, please contact our office at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

Iamacrook lawyer

Here was the attachment- a printout not on any letterhead or anything:

Debt validation Form

Account: XXXX

Identity of Original Creditor: Direct Merchants

Name of Debtor: Iwant2

Address of Debtor: XXXX, MI

Balance of Account: $1,557.19

Debt was : Original Creditor__ Assigned__ Purchased __X

I responded with the following letter: (Again I didn’t properly dispute the debt as mine).

To Whom It May Concern:

This is my second request for validation sent to you in reference to the aforementioned account #XXXX1. On March 23, 2005 I sent you a letter explaining that I do not believe I owe what you say I owe, and in accordance with The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Section 809, I respectfully requested that you provide me, in writing, with the following information:

• What the debt you say I owe is for;

• Explain how you calculated what you say I owe;

• Provide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe including any of those that bear my signature;

• Provide me with a complete accounting history of the account;

• Show me that you are licensed in my state, and provide me with your license number

As of the date of this letter, you have failed to comply with my requests as it is your duty to do so according to Section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

I have reason to believe the debt is not a valid debt. You are requested to show proof of your claim. To be clear, this is NOT a request for “verification” or proof of my mailing address or some cursory basic information that could be printed by anyone on a computer and in no way provides validation, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you.

Since you have failed to adequately validate this debt by providing the information I requested, consider this letter my official notification that I do not intend to correspond with you on this matter again until you comply with my requests.

Furthermore, I am also reiterating, in writing, that no telephone contact whatsoever be made by your offices, agents or assignees. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS.

It would be advisable that you assure that your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose.

Best regards:

Iwant2

They responded with he following:

Dear Iwant2

Enclosed please find copies of the January and February 2003 billing statements for the above referenced account. Please contact this office to discuss either lump sum payment of this account or to establish a monthly repayment plan.

Your attention and cooperation in this matter are greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Crook lawyer

They then enclosed copies of 2 statements for Direct Merchants Bank listed at an address I did not live for January 2003 and Feb 2003.

June 15, 2005

Crooklawyer

Dear Sir/Madame:

I have not heard back from you in over 45 days regarding my notice of dispute dated May 27, 2005. You have also not supplied the demanded proof of the alleged debt. Your continued silence is unacceptable.

For the record, I state again that as I have no account with you, nor am I your customer, nor have I entered into a contract with you.

You have fifteen (15) days from receipt of this notice to respond. Your failure to respond in a timely manner, will work as a waiver to any and all of your claims in this matter, and will entitle me to presume that your attempted collections from me on this alleged debt are in error. Unless I receive information from you disputing your error within the aforementioned time, I will assume this matter will be permanently closed.

Sincerely,

Iwant2

May 27, 2005

CrookLawyer

I am writing in response to your letter dated April 18, 2005.

On May 10, 2005, I sent you a letter explaining that I do not believe I owe what you say I owe and do not believe the debt to be mine, and in accordance with The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Section 809, I respectfully requested that you provide me, in writing, with the following information:

• What the debt you say I owe is for;

• Explain how you calculated the alleged debt you say I owe;

• Provide a verification or copy of any judgment if applicable;

• Provide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe including any of those that bear my signature;

• Provide me with a complete accounting history of the account;

• Show me that you are licensed in my state, and provide me with your license number

.

I do not believe I owe this creditor anything and cannot determine if I do or not without more information. If the amount you are claiming contains costs, fees and interest, you must provide a detailed breakdown of them for me. To be clear, I am requesting an entire itemization of the account, including all payments made, all charges, and all fees.

I also request that your office provide me a detailed accounting of the purchase of this alleged debt, how amount sought was calculated, and documents conferring authority on defendant to collect debt. I am specifically requesting the amount, in U.S. dollars and cents, that was paid to Direct Merchants/Metris by Sherman Acquisition.

As of the date of this letter you have failed to comply with my requests, as it is your duty to do so according to Section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The information you sent was cursory at best and is in no way validation of a debt. The information supplied was nothing more than basic information that could be printed by anyone on a computer and in no way provides validation

Your demand for payment after failing to validate the debt is a violation of the FDCPA.

Since you have failed to adequately validate this debt by providing the information I requested, consider this letter my official notification that I do not intend to correspond with you on this matter again until you comply with my requests.

I would like to remind your office that I have requested contact be made only in writing.

Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated.

Sincerely,

Iwant2

I also just noticed their thrid letter was dated April 18, 2005 but postmarked 5/23/05 well past the thrity days they gave me. In my opinion that would seem they had no intent of "settling" or anything but maybe wanted to sue me because I beat them in court once. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply. That was a different case I had with the same lawyers doing the collections. They other case was on behalf of a supposed other OC who sold it to New centruty then got a default and then sold it to some other JDB. I fought that case and was successful for lack of any documents whatsoever. They didnt even have any letters they supposedly sent to me. I got the original judgement set aside and then dismissed so whoever bought it (who has been calling me still to collect) is out of luck.

This is a different case but the same lawyers but different JDB. Thanks again for the help. I really need anyone's help. Txs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what is listed in the complaint.

It is a general civil case.

Complaint:

1. Plaintiff allowed the Defendant to charge goods and/or services (the underlined is what they typed in) on an open account or pursuant to contract, and upon defendants promise to pay for same.

2. Plaintiff has completed performance and rendered and account stated, copy attached. (none was attached).

3. There is presently due and owing, over and above all legal counterclaims, the sum of $ 1,557.19

4. Plaintiff requests judgment for $ 1,557,19 plus costs, interests and attorney fees as allowed by law.

I declare that the complaint information above and attached is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief September 2005.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

FOR THE COUNTY OF xxxxx

Sherman Acquisition Limited

Plaintiff Case No._____________________

Vs.

Iwant2

Defendant, appearing pro se, for its reply to the Complaint of Sherman Acquisition Limited states as follows: All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Complaint. All allegations of the Complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein.

ANSWERS

1. In response to paragraph #1, the Defendant disputes the alleged debt, defendant denies allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

2. In response to paragraph #2, the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is necessary. However, to the extent that the Court may deem a response to be necessary, defendant denies the allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

This should probably just be a denial like the others. I see you took my answer/counterclaim and amended it to fit yours....the reason I answered that way to #2 is because they stated they were a business licensed to work in oklahoma. Change this to a denial.

3. In response to paragraph #3, the Defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

4. In response to paragraph #4, to the extent a response is required, defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

DEFENSES

5. As and for a First Defense

Plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the Defendant for which relief can be granted.

6. As and for a Second Defense

Defendant alleges that this action is time-barred under § O.S. 12-95-2 of the laws of Rhode Island.

O.S. 12-95-2 is an Oklahoma state law. Find the corresponding RI law.

7. As and for a Third Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint violates the statute of Frauds as the purported contract or agreement falls within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing. The purported contract or agreement alleged in the Complaint is not in writing and signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

8. As and for a Fourth Defense

Defendant claims Lack of Privity as Defendant has never entered into any contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff.

9. As and for a Fifth Defense

Defendant alleges that the Complaint includes references to alleged agreements made outside of the alleged written contract, violating the Parol Evidence Rule.

10. As and for a Sixth Defense

Defendant invokes the Doctrine of Unclean Hands as the Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff or the person or entity that assigned the alleged claim to Plaintiff acted in a dishonest or fraudulent manner with respect to the dispute at issue in this case.

11. As and for a Seventh Defense

Defendant reserves the right to amend and/or add additional Answers, Defenses and/or Counterclaims at a later date.

COUNTERCLAIMS

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

12. March 23, 2005, Defendant sent Lawyer xxx, PC (collection attorney for Sherman Acquisition Limited), by first class mail request for validation of alleged debt, including a request for documentation.

13. Similar letters and request for validation were sent to Sherman Acquisition Limited by way of regular mail on March 23, 2005.

14. Up until the date of this filing, no attempt at validation was received from Lawyerxx or Sherman Acquisition Limited, yet Lawyerxx, PC continued to collect on alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

15. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (hereafter “FDCPA”) in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified Plaintiff in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

You need to be sure what you're doing here - I'm not familiar with your case, so I can't help ya. In my case (and why it's worded like this), not only did the JDB refuse to validate, so did the law firm itself (they were collecting...not just suing). Before you file this, make sure it makes sense with your case.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

16. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

17. Defendant received notice from lawyerxx, PC dated February 24, 2005, which stated “ 25% Off Your Outstanding Sherman Acquisition Limited. Contact this office today to take advantage of this offer. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER PLEASE CONTACT THIS OFFICE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MATTER DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL. Said notice contained the statement: “ This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Plaintiff lawyerxx did not identify themselves as a debt collector.

Statement of Claim

18. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by making an offer to settle by a certain date, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers instilled a false sense of urgency of settlement payment. Since payment date was within the 30 day period, Plaintiff overshadowed Defendant’s right to request validation within 30 days, violating 15 USC 1692g(a)

You really need to read this closer. Was there really overshadowing? In my case, they sent an original letter with the 30-day notice and then 10 days later, sent another that said it was due in 25 days...or something. I don't see overshadowing in yours, unless I'm missing something.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

19. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 and 16-18 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

20. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated February 24, 2005, did not specify an alleged balance.

21. Defendant received subsequent notice from lawyerxx, PC dated March 25, 2005 noting a Balance of $1,557.19.

22. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated April 18, 2005, noted a Balance of $1,719.81.

Statement of Claim

23. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) By falsely representing the amount of the alleged debt and therefore violating 15 USC 1692e(2)(A)

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

24. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15, 16-18 and 19-23 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

25. Defendant had asked for documents concerning alleged debt as validation.

26. On December 6, 2005, Defendant was served with Summons via first class mail concerning alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

27. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified xxx in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

.

NOW THEREFORE, DEFENDANT PRAYS FOR THE FOLLOWING RELIEF:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF:

41. A. For Defendant’s First Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury ;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

Again...Oklahoma statutes are listed. Anything that says O.S. is a state stat.

B. For Defendant’s Second Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

C. For Defendant’s Third Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

E. For Defendant’s Fourth Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

F. Actual damages in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

G. Exemplary relief in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

H. Injunctive relief;

I. Declaratory relief;

Read your state statutes and make sure your state and specific court even allows for those...not all of them do.

J. Any attorney fees if applicable;

K. costs;

L. That any and all contracts having balances owed to the Plaintiff by the Defendant be declared null and void.

FURTHER, sayeth naught.

Dated: December 12, 2005

by

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is what is listed in the complaint.

It is a general civil case.

Complaint:

1. Plaintiff allowed the Defendant to charge goods and/or services (the underlined is what they typed in) on an open account or pursuant to contract, and upon defendants promise to pay for same.

2. Plaintiff has completed performance and rendered and account stated, copy attached. (none was attached).

3. There is presently due and owing, over and above all legal counterclaims, the sum of $ 1,557.19

4. Plaintiff requests judgment for $ 1,557,19 plus costs, interests and attorney fees as allowed by law.

I declare that the complaint information above and attached is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief September 2005.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

FOR THE COUNTY OF xxxxx

Sherman Acquisition Limited

Plaintiff Case No._____________________

Vs.

Iwant2

Defendant, appearing pro se, for its reply to the Complaint of Sherman Acquisition Limited states as follows: All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Complaint. All allegations of the Complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein.

ANSWERS

1. In response to paragraph #1, the Defendant disputes the alleged debt, defendant denies allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

2. In response to paragraph #2, the Complaint states legal conclusions to which no response is necessary. However, to the extent that the Court may deem a response to be necessary, defendant denies the allegation and demands strict proof thereof.

CHANGED TO:

2. DENIES having knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the matter alleged at paragraph 2 and specifically DENIES any account being stated

This should probably just be a denial like the others. I see you took my answer/counterclaim and amended it to fit yours....the reason I answered that way to #2 is because they stated they were a business licensed to work in oklahoma. Change this to a denial.

I WILL CHANGE THIS TO A DENIAL.

3. In response to paragraph #3, the Defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

CHANGE TO?

3. DENIES the allegations of paragraph 3

4. In response to paragraph #4, to the extent a response is required, defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

CHANGE TO?

4. DENIES the allegations of paragraph 4.

DEFENSES

5. As and for a First Defense

Plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the Defendant for which relief can be granted.

6. As and for a Second Defense

Defendant alleges that this action is time-barred by applicable statute of limitations.

O.S. 12-95-2 is an Oklahoma state law. Find the corresponding RI law.

I AM IN MICHIGAN SO I NEED TO FIND THE CORRECT LAW? or ok to state as I did?

7. As and for a Third Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint violates the statute of Frauds as the purported contract or agreement falls within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing. The purported contract or agreement alleged in the Complaint is not in writing and signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

CHANGE TO?

This action is barred by the applicable staute of frauds

8. As and for a Fourth Defense

Defendant claims Lack of Privity as Defendant has never entered into any contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff.

9. As and for a Fifth Defense

Defendant alleges that the Complaint includes references to alleged agreements made outside of the alleged written contract, violating the Parol Evidence Rule.

10. As and for a Sixth Defense

Defendant invokes the Doctrine of Unclean Hands as the Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff or the person or entity that assigned the alleged claim to Plaintiff acted in a dishonest or fraudulent manner with respect to the dispute at issue in this case.

11. As and for a Seventh Defense

Defendant reserves the right to amend and/or add additional Answers, Defenses and/or Counterclaims at a later date.

12. As and for a Eighth Defense

Plaintiff lacks the legal capacity to bring and maintain this action

COUNTERCLAIMS

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

12. March 23, 2005, Defendant sent Lawyer xxx, PC (collection attorney for Sherman Acquisition Limited), by first class mail request for validation of alleged debt, including a request for documentation.

13. Similar letters and request for validation were sent to Sherman Acquisition Limited by way of regular mail on March 23, 2005.

14. Up until the date of this filing, no attempt at validation was received from Lawyerxx or Sherman Acquisition Limited, yet Lawyerxx, PC continued to collect on alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

15. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (hereafter “FDCPA”) in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified Plaintiff in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

You need to be sure what you're doing here - I'm not familiar with your case, so I can't help ya. In my case (and why it's worded like this), not only did the JDB refuse to validate, so did the law firm itself (they were collecting...not just suing). Before you file this, make sure it makes sense with your case.

I GOT A LETTER FORM THE CA ON BEHALF OF SHERMAN TELLING ME THEIR WAS A DEBT AND THEY WERE OFFERING A DISOUCNT. THE STANDARD LETTER THEY OFFER. I SENT LETTERS TO BOTH SHERMAN AND THE LAWFIRM WHO WAS ACTING AS A COLLECTION AGENCY. I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE CA/LAWFIRM WITH AN ATTACHMENT OF 4 LINES THAT SAID IDENTITY OF OC, NAME OF DEBTOR, ADDRESS OF DEBTOR, BALANCE OF ACCOUNT. THEY DID NOT SPECIFY THE 30 DAYS TO PAY OR THEIR OFFER WOULD EXPIRE AND THEY WOULD CONTINUE LEGAL ACTION BUT IT COULD BE IMPLIED. ALSO, THEIR LETTER WAS POSTMARKED 34 DAYS AFTER IT WAS DATED SO THEIR 30 DAY GRACE PERIOD WAS ALREADY EXPIRED. I SENT SHERMAN AND THEM ANOTHER DV LETTER REFUTED WHAT THEY HAD SENT. THEY SENT ME 2 STATEMENTS FROM THE OC THAT WERE FOR AN ADDRESS NOT MINE AND DIFFERENT THAN THEY CLIAMED WAS MY ADDRESS ON THEIR OWN FORM. I SENT THEM 2 FOLLOW UP LETTERS THAT I LISTED HERE SAYING I DISPUTE THEIR VALIDATION AND LISTING WHAT I AM REQUESTING. THEY IGNORED BOTH OF THEM UNTIL I GOT A LETTER OF SERVICE IN THE MAIL.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

16. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

17. Defendant received notice from lawyerxx, PC dated February 24, 2005, which stated “ 25% Off Your Outstanding Sherman Acquisition Limited. Contact this office today to take advantage of this offer. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER PLEASE CONTACT THIS OFFICE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MATTER DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL. Said notice contained the statement: “ This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Plaintiff lawyerxx did not identify themselves as a debt collector.

Statement of Claim

18. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by making an offer to settle by a certain date, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers instilled a false sense of urgency of settlement payment. Since payment date was within the 30 day period, Plaintiff overshadowed Defendant’s right to request validation within 30 days, violating 15 USC 1692g(a)

You really need to read this closer. Was there really overshadowing? In my case, they sent an original letter with the 30-day notice and then 10 days later, sent another that said it was due in 25 days...or something. I don't see overshadowing in yours, unless I'm missing something.

THE FIRST LETTER I RECIEVED FROM THEM WAS DATED FEBRUARY 24 WITH THEIR SECOND ONE AS A RESPONSE TO MY DV DATED MARCH 25. I AM NOT SURE IF IT OVERSHADOWING OR NOT THAT IS WHY I ASKED FOR YOUR EXPERT HELP:) IF NOT I WILL REMOVE IT.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

19. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15 and 16-18 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

20. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated February 24, 2005, did not specify an alleged balance.

21. Defendant received subsequent notice from lawyerxx, PC dated March 25, 2005 noting a Balance of $1,557.19.

22. Defendant’s previously stated notice from lawyer xxx, dated April 18, 2005, noted a Balance of $1,719.81.

Statement of Claim

23. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) By falsely representing the amount of the alleged debt and therefore violating 15 USC 1692e(2)(A)

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

24. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 12-15, 16-18 and 19-23 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

25. Defendant had asked for documents concerning alleged debt as validation.

26. On December 6, 2005, Defendant was served with Summons via first class mail concerning alleged debt.

Statement of Claim

27. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified xxx in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

.

NOW THEREFORE, DEFENDANT PRAYS FOR THE FOLLOWING RELIEF:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF:

41. A. For Defendant’s First Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury ;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

Again...Oklahoma statutes are listed. Anything that says O.S. is a state stat.

HOW DO I FIND THE ONES FOR MICHIGAN?

B. For Defendant’s Second Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute) in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

C. For Defendant’s Third Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $1,000;

E. For Defendant’s Fourth Cause of Action

1) Punitive damages as specified in 23 O.S. Supp. 1995 §9.1 (I am in Michigan so I need the MI statute)in the amount of $5,000 or as so deemed by judge or jury;

2) Statutory damages as specified in 15 USC 1692k in the amount of $2,000;

F. Actual damages in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

G. Exemplary relief in an amount to be determined by judge or jury;

H. Injunctive relief;

I. Declaratory relief;

Read your state statutes and make sure your state and specific court even allows for those...not all of them do.

J. Any attorney fees if applicable;

K. costs;

L. That any and all contracts having balances owed to the Plaintiff by the Defendant be declared null and void.

FURTHER, sayeth naught.

THANKS CM. WILL YOU PLEASE REVIEW WHAT I LISTED AND ADD YOUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? TXS AGAIN.

Dated: December 12, 2005

by

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. In response to paragraph #3, the Defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and on that basis generally and specifically denies the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

CHANGE TO?

3. DENIES the allegations of paragraph 3

You can leave those as they are. It pretty much wraps everything up nicely....denies it UNLESS they can prove it...and then asks for that proof. You don't have to just deny. They're fine, IMO. ;)

6. As and for a Second Defense

Defendant alleges that this action is time-barred by applicable statute of limitations.

O.S. 12-95-2 is an Oklahoma state law. Find the corresponding RI law.

I AM IN MICHIGAN SO I NEED TO FIND THE CORRECT LAW? or ok to state as I did?

I imagine it would be ok your way...though it'd look better if you could list the actual statute. I don't think it will be a big deal if you don't though.

7. As and for a Third Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint violates the statute of Frauds as the purported contract or agreement falls within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing. The purported contract or agreement alleged in the Complaint is not in writing and signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

CHANGE TO?

This action is barred by the applicable staute of frauds

That would work. I don't remember this being my exact defense...but it's possible. It's certainly wordy enough to be me. :lol:

12. As and for a Eighth Defense

Plaintiff lacks the legal capacity to bring and maintain this action

Works for me. Make sure to go back when you're done and re-check your line numbering.

15. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (hereafter “FDCPA”) in the following respects:

(a) by failing to cease collection of an alleged debt after the Defendant notified Plaintiff in writing that the alleged debt was disputed, therefore violating 15 USC 1692g(B).

You need to be sure what you're doing here - I'm not familiar with your case, so I can't help ya. In my case (and why it's worded like this), not only did the JDB refuse to validate, so did the law firm itself (they were collecting...not just suing). Before you file this, make sure it makes sense with your case.

I GOT A LETTER FORM THE CA ON BEHALF OF SHERMAN TELLING ME THEIR WAS A DEBT AND THEY WERE OFFERING A DISOUCNT. THE STANDARD LETTER THEY OFFER. I SENT LETTERS TO BOTH SHERMAN AND THE LAWFIRM WHO WAS ACTING AS A COLLECTION AGENCY. I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE CA/LAWFIRM WITH AN ATTACHMENT OF 4 LINES THAT SAID IDENTITY OF OC, NAME OF DEBTOR, ADDRESS OF DEBTOR, BALANCE OF ACCOUNT. THEY DID NOT SPECIFY THE 30 DAYS TO PAY OR THEIR OFFER WOULD EXPIRE AND THEY WOULD CONTINUE LEGAL ACTION BUT IT COULD BE IMPLIED. ALSO, THEIR LETTER WAS POSTMARKED 34 DAYS AFTER IT WAS DATED SO THEIR 30 DAY GRACE PERIOD WAS ALREADY EXPIRED. I SENT SHERMAN AND THEM ANOTHER DV LETTER REFUTED WHAT THEY HAD SENT. THEY SENT ME 2 STATEMENTS FROM THE OC THAT WERE FOR AN ADDRESS NOT MINE AND DIFFERENT THAN THEY CLIAMED WAS MY ADDRESS ON THEIR OWN FORM. I SENT THEM 2 FOLLOW UP LETTERS THAT I LISTED HERE SAYING I DISPUTE THEIR VALIDATION AND LISTING WHAT I AM REQUESTING. THEY IGNORED BOTH OF THEM UNTIL I GOT A LETTER OF SERVICE IN THE MAIL.

A CA doesn't have a 30-day deadline to do anything. Their 34 day mark doesn't matter - unless you live in Texas, I believe.

The 30 days is what they have to tell you in their FIRST letter to you....at no other time do they have to give you that. According to your complaint, their first letter did give you the mini miranda. If they sent 'you have 30 days to pay' and that date landed after your initial 30 days, that's ok too.

Overshadowing is when they give you the 30 days to dispute and then tell you (or imply) that you don't have the full 30 days. If your dispute time is made to be confusing...that's overshadowing.

Now, if they didn't validate and you disputed within 30 days...then that's a violation. Just make sure to have the right FDCPA statute on there.

17. Defendant received notice from lawyerxx, PC dated February 24, 2005, which stated “ 25% Off Your Outstanding Sherman Acquisition Limited. Contact this office today to take advantage of this offer. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER PLEASE CONTACT THIS OFFICE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MATTER DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL. Said notice contained the statement: “ This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Plaintiff lawyerxx did not identify themselves as a debt collector.

Ooh, I see where you're coming from.

I don't think that could be considered overshadowing. There are quite a few decisions saying that "contact us now" or "please call immeiately" aren't overshadowing. If it would have said "Payment Due : March 1" and then "you have 30 days to dispute", then it would be overshadowed.

Did that make a lick of sense? :lol:

Again...Oklahoma statutes are listed. Anything that says O.S. is a state stat.

HOW DO I FIND THE ONES FOR MICHIGAN?

Do a Google search for your state's statutes or your court website. There's usually a legal research option. Or do a specific search like "Michigan state statutes punitive injuntive relief" or whatever you're looking for.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Txs CM for your help. I just want to make sure I get may answers in. I know it is "iffy" to countersue but my rationale is if I have listed 4 different counts, if I were to prove & be successful on all of them, they would owe me at least $4000. Their entire alleged cliam is for $1,500. Maybe it might give me leverage. I would rather this just be gone. They have enough people who dont fight back maybe they will just agree to stop. Plus, in my final letter to them that I posted here, I specified lack of providing requested info means they are waivinig their rights- like my own "account stated" as they tried to do to me. They did not even bother to even attach an affidavit or any supporting documents so if they can sue me with no grounds or proof, then why can't I? At least they have to fight me at more expense to them right? I am also willing to request a jury trial at my expense and have them tell a jury how much they paid and have the jury rule on the amount they owe and bring up all their other lawsuits against them. At my last trial against this CA/lawfirm that I won, they told the judge on 4 occasions they had the documents when in fact they had none. That is why they fought me so hard not to set aside their default. They even told the judge on the record they had never pulled my CR showing their plaintiff's claimed OC was not on my record. Then I also called and the person who signed their original affidavit, no one who that person was so not an employee as they claimed. It was blatantly false. In MI though most of the judges don't care and use the old "is it yours, have you ever heard of them? then pay it" motto irregardless of the law. A CA/lawyer just got arrested and admitted he falsified amounts, service, affidavits and collected millions from people. His penalty, 100,000 penalty and one year suspension of their law license. That's it. What a joke. The head manager for Assett is even suing them for re-aging and falsifying amounts, and fraud and no one cares. That is why people here like you are the only help for others like me. Thanks again.(sorry about rambling)

Do you think I am way off in my thinking pattern? Your comments are alwys greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the overshadowing, I say it falls into a "gray" area. But, if you want to be sure whether it is or isn't, look at the date of each letter, then, hopefully, you kept the envelopes, note the date of cancellation or the meter date on the envelopes.

You need to understand that an "acceptable" time frame for delivery is 5 days. Therefore, if their letter is dated the 10th, and you receive it on the 15th, then, for a second letter to be overshadowing, would have to be dated before the 15th of the following month to qualify, and before the 10th to be absolute. AND, most important, it must include a demand for payment or a threat. By doing so, they are denying you your right to dispute the debt, as described in the initial communication. You must understand that if the second letter is only a "reminder", so to speak, then it is not overshadowing. An example is their second letter says " we recently sent you a letter and have not heard from you. You still have time to . . . ." This is acceptable and legit. In short, as long as it is not threatening you in any way or demanding of you in any way, it is not overshadowing.

Overshadowing is when they demand payment or threaten you before you have had the opportunity to respond to their initial communication. If you receive 2 letters within a short period and it is past the initial communication period, 30 days, etc., there is no overshadowing, as due to your not responding they have assumed the debt is valid and are now exercising their rights to continue activity.

I am not denying you your right to claim this, I just want you to fully understand so that, if necessary, you can stand before the court and prove your claim beyond any doubt.

To add, one may think that two conflicting letters within a specific period constitutes overshadowing. An example would be an offer for 50%, then the second says 70%. But, to qualify as overshadowing, one would have to prove they did not receive sufficient time to respond to the first. Mind you, the 30 day period only applies to the initial communication, not all times. So, to prove this, one would have to show the date of origin and receipt of same, and the dates on the second were within 10 days, as this would show the court you had insufficient time to properly respond, thus causing conflict and confusion. I'm sure you get the drift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Statement of Facts

22. Defendant repeats and re-alleges each allegation in paragraphs 17-21 with like effect as if fully repeated herein.

23. Defendant received notice from Crooklawyer, PC dated February 24, 2005, which stated “25% Off Your Outstanding Sherman Acquisition Limited Balance. Contact this office today to take advantage of this offer. TO ACCEPT THIS OFFER PLEASE CONTACT THIS OFFICE WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MATTER DO NOT HESITATE TO CALL.” Said notice contained the statement: “This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Plaintiff’s attorney, Crooklawyer,, PC did not identify themselves as a debt collector.

Statement of Claim

24. In the entire course of its action, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers willfully and/or negligently violated provisions of the FDCPA in the following respects:

(a) by making an offer to settle by a certain date, Plaintiff, by itself and its agents including lawyers instilled a false sense of urgency of settlement payment. Since payment date was within the 30 day period, Plaintiff overshadowed Defendant’s right to request validation within 30 days, violating 15 USC 1692g(a)

ok..Even though their response letter was dated within 30 days of the intial letter I received, it probably is not overshadowing. However, since they did not say they were a debt collector and instead identified themselves as Crooklawyer, isnt their some violatuion I read but can't find about that? Txs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually....I just got my NCLC report today and this is in there:

Gervais v. Riddle & Assoc. PC, 363 F. Supp. 2d 345 (D. Conn.. 2005) Where the debt collector's letter presented the consumer with the opportunity to satisfy the outstanding balance at a 50 percent discount of over $4000 if paid within 30 days from receipt of the collection letter, it violated 15 USC §1692g because the consumer was entitled to the full 30 days from receipt of the collection letter to request debt validation and the shorter period for the discount overshadowed and contradicted the validation notice.

There ya go. Use it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok..I filed my answer today. The clerk told me they didnt even have record of me being served. I told her that is what this law firm did last time then got a default judgement. Anyways, I also filed my countercliams. the clerk asked me if I wanted a jury trial. I said no but am not so sure I shouldn't have. What do you guys think? SHould I ask for a jury and tell them how things work with a JDB? It would cost me $50 to do.

2nd-Sherman filed an affidavit as support for their case. here is what it says:

"I hereby certify that I am an Attorney in Fact of Sherman Acquisiton Limited PArtnership, a paartnership organized and existing under the State of Delaware and doing business at 15 S Main St. Greenville, SC 29601. I further state that the claim and cause of action of the aforesaid company against "IWANT2GET", SS# XXX-XX-XX. Account # XXXXX, is in the sum of $1,557.19. Assignee of : Metris- Metris/Direct Merchants Bank, original creditor.I further certify that I am duly qualified, competent to testify tot eh matters stated herein, and authorized to make this affidavit. I further state that I have access to the records of this account, and that the amount of the claim is just and true to the best of my personal knowledge, and that all just and lawful offsets, payments and credits have been allowed."

How do I attack this? I know I need to make a motion to dismiss as hearsay. I need help. Txs everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.