avenger Posted March 22, 2007 Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 I've got kinda of a stupid question but its bugging me. In court you have to establish damages to get the amount you sue for. So how are JDB able to sue for so much? If they bought an account that was charged off at say $3500 for $50 how are they able to use that $3500 as a starting point? Shouldn't the starting point be $50 since its thier damages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 22, 2007 Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 Their damages is the breach of contract that was assigned to them. The consideration between the assignor and assignee is not an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avenger Posted March 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 Their damages is the breach of contract that was assigned to them. The consideration between the assignor and assignee is not an issue.So that's true even if they bought the debt and it wasn't assigned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 22, 2007 Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 If they purchased rights to the debt, it was assigned to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avenger Posted March 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 But if its a breach of contract, then compensatory damages are going to be what they sue for. In that case, compensatory damages are for the 'benefit of the bargain' i.e. to put them back in the posistion they were prior to the breach, which would be what they paid for it; wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted March 22, 2007 Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 You owe what you owe, teh bargain being between you and your creditor. What a jdb pays is irrelevant as a substantive matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts