Jump to content

The bank learned that I'm on a debt settlement program and...


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Incorrect. Testimony of personal knowledge of the document sought to be entered into evidence is prima facie showing of authenticity.

An email is no different than any other document sought to be entered into evidence - a letter, a memo, a statement, invoice, etc. There is absolutely no evidentiary threshold like the one described above that is specific to email.

Now, that's not to say there's not one or two cases wherein the opposing side was able to raise the question of authenticity to such a level as to require extreme proof, but as a rule - no. In fact, I have personally used email evidence on more than one occasion. You can read more on this subject in AmJur Evidence s.1032. To learn more about how to enter email evidence, and keep it out, you can read 41 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 1.

In the six litgations I've handled pro-se, I've shot down and been shot down regarding e-mails. It is too easy to defeat unless you can subpeona the records to show they are genuine.

"Computer records that contain text often can be divided into two categories: computer-generated records, and records that are merely computer-stored. See People v. Holowko, 486 N.E.2d 877, 878-79 (Ill. 1985). The difference hinges upon whether a person or a machine created the records' contents. Computer-stored records refer to documents that contain the writings of some person or persons and happen to be in electronic form. E-mail messages, word processing files, and Internet chat room messages provide common examples. As with any other testimony or documentary evidence containing human statements, computer-stored records must comply with the hearsay rule. If the records are admitted to prove the truth of the matter they assert, the offeror of the records must show circumstances indicating that the human statements contained in the record are reliable and trustworthy, see Advisory Committee Notes to Proposed Rule 801 (1972), and the records must be authentic." (emphasis added).

From The US Department of Justice on the subject of computer records under the Federal rules of evidence.

And by the way, testifying on your own behalf of the authenticity of a document you are admitting to evidence is not prima facie true of authenticity. Such an assertion is rediculous. That is equivalent to typing up a memo yourself and then claiming someone else sent it to you. There is no proof and it is easily defined as hearsay. You would have to get someone on the sending side to authenticate it. A person from the ISP wouldn't even do since it is easy to forge e-mail headers so even they can't authenticate the source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And by the way, testifying on your own behalf of the authenticity of a document you are admitting to evidence is not prima facie true of authenticity. Such an assertion is rediculous. That is equivalent to typing up a memo yourself and then claiming someone else sent it to you. There is no proof and it is easily defined as hearsay. You would have to get someone on the sending side to authenticate it. A person from the ISP wouldn't even do since it is easy to forge e-mail headers so even they can't authenticate the source.

Without getting into a discussion leading to nowhere, I would just suggest that you do a bit more reading on the subject before jumping to conclusions. I believe you will find that what you characterize as ridiculous is actually the baseline proof required for admissibility. The battle naturally moves on from there.

E-mail communications may be authenticated as being from the purported author based on an affidavit of the recipient; the e-mail address from which it originated; comparison of the content to other evidence; and/or statements or other communications from the purported author acknowledging the e-mail communication that is being authenticated. Fenge v. Feld, 301 F.Supp.2d 781 (N.D.Ill., 2003).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And by the way, testifying on your own behalf of the authenticity of a document you are admitting to evidence is not prima facie true of authenticity. Such an assertion is rediculous. That is equivalent to typing up a memo yourself and then claiming someone else sent it to you. There is no proof and it is easily defined as hearsay.

That means that I cannot even produce a dunning letter as evidence. After all, I could have typed it myself.

BTW- for me to say "Your honor, I got an email from Bill, and in this email, Bill told me he was going to kill me."- is not hearsay

for me to say "Your honor, I got an email from Bill, and in this email, Bill told me that Paul said he was going to kill me."- is hearsay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for me to say "Your honor, I got an email from Bill, and in this email, Bill told me he was going to kill me."- is not hearsay

for me to say "Your honor, I got an email from Bill, and in this email, Bill told me that Paul said he was going to kill me."- is hearsay

That is an excellent example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eakub... just wondering what happened at the CU this morning...

Well... its good news! But my husband is a bit angry with me at the moment! LOL!

What's going to happen:

1. My husband is going to pay my original $5000 loan off. He's going to use retirement money from his savings account that he was planning on reinvesting. :( Then the credit union will tell their attorney that they don't want to sue.

2. The credit union is allowing me to take out two new loans. One will be a signature loan with my dad as a cosigner and the other will have my husbands truck up for collateral.

3. The loans are going to be issued to me on the condition that I close the credit card accounts. The credit union will issue the checks directly to the creditors and not to me.

4. I'll have a total monthly payment that is about the same as what I was supposedly supposed to pay to the debt settlement people.

5. So now I'll get to make payments and my debt will actually be going down!!! :D

Oh... and some extra info:

My credit union took copies of my contract and e-mails with the settlement company. They are going to fax them over to their attorney to see if there is any way to get out of the contract. They'll also ask them if there is any way to get my money back that I've already given them.

They advised me to close the checking account that the company takes its automatic payment from... this way they can't get any more money.

Then they told me to call all of my creditors and tell them that full-payment was coming and to PLEASE not send my accounts to collections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now there's just one teensy little problem.

I called my Discover card. They said that they (themselves) could not accept a payment from me until I had the settlement company give them written notice that I have dropped out of the settlement program.

Apparently they were contacted and they placed my account as "pending to go to the attorney". They said that if I didn't get them the written notice, then any payment I make to them will be to their attorney and that it would show on my credit report as being paid through collections.

I'm waiting to hear back from the credit union's attorney about what I need to do.

Any ideas on how I can handle this? They said it wasn't going to remain "pending" for very long and then I wouldn't be able to get my account back to Discover if it actually goes to the attorney. :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats on the help from the CU and your family! Don't squander such good help!

I would contact a naca.net lawyer yourself and pay for a consult on the contract, they would be the more informed legal source and probably be quicker at getting back with you.

I plan of paying everything off as quickly as possible. So if I have extra money, I'm going to put it towards the new loans! My dad talked to the lady at the credit union and he said that she said she felt sorry for me and that she knew my heart was in the right place. So they are going pretty easy on me... to say the least! Hopefully I can talk my credit cards into taking some of the bad stuff off my credit report since I will be paying them in full. Then I'll have a few years of good stuff from paying on a loan after this... so my credit should be okay.

Anyway, I'll wait to see if their lawyer calls me back tomorrow. If not... I can try calling the lawyer that I found on the website you gave. The only problem is that they are SO far away... and the only one listed for Nebraska. So if I can get good local help, I'll take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now there's just one teensy little problem.

I called my Discover card. They said that they (themselves) could not accept a payment from me until I had the settlement company give them written notice that I have dropped out of the settlement program.

Apparently they were contacted and they placed my account as "pending to go to the attorney". They said that if I didn't get them the written notice, then any payment I make to them will be to their attorney and that it would show on my credit report as being paid through collections.

I'm waiting to hear back from the credit union's attorney about what I need to do.

Any ideas on how I can handle this? They said it wasn't going to remain "pending" for very long and then I wouldn't be able to get my account back to Discover if it actually goes to the attorney. :?

In my experience, Discover Card is pretty difficult to deal with. They sued me over a measly $800 balance back in 2002, and when I finally quit avoiding the default judgment this year and paid it, the total was over $2500.

And the fact that this account was pending to go to the attorney is just another sign that getting away from the debt settlement company was a good idea. Chances were "slim" that you were going to get sued, and so far two of your creditors have mentioned attorneys. I'm glad you've got family and an understanding CU to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience, Discover Card is pretty difficult to deal with. They sued me over a measly $800 balance back in 2002, and when I finally quit avoiding the default judgment this year and paid it, the total was over $2500.

And the fact that this account was pending to go to the attorney is just another sign that getting away from the debt settlement company was a good idea. Chances were "slim" that you were going to get sued, and so far two of your creditors have mentioned attorneys. I'm glad you've got family and an understanding CU to deal with.

Yep... not sure what I'm going to do about the Discover card. I want to pay THEM, not their attorney... so it shows on my credit report that the debt was not in collections. I hope someone calls me back today from my credit union's attorney. I'm sure they will know what the best way to handle this is. I haven't said anything to the settlement people yet... they have no clue. So hopefully this will get figured out before they debit my checking account on the 22nd. Hehe... they won't get any money though because the account has been closed. But I certainly don't want them thinking they can sue me now either. Oh... speaking of which, I have to cancel the direct deposit I have going into that account through my employment! LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live just over the Kansas border, I found your thread today, I'm glad things are working out for you :lol:

I too went back to college and have a degree in Computer Engineering. I went from 8 an hour working for someone else to owning my own shop...5000 sq feet. I usually charge between 35 and 50 an hour...so don't give up.

I had 3 kids, and invalid mother in law and 2 jobs in college, and I took biology and marine biology online...I was also on the deans list and honor roll each month...yes I had a full plate.

Mother in law died 3 days before I took my final final exams...But I would not miss it for the world...Keep your chin up...good things will happen if your looking for it :)++

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live just over the Kansas border, I found your thread today, I'm glad things are working out for you :lol:

I too went back to college and have a degree in Computer Engineering. I went from 8 an hour working for someone else to owning my own shop...5000 sq feet. I usually charge between 35 and 50 an hour...so don't give up.

I had 3 kids, and invalid mother in law and 2 jobs in college, and I took biology and marine biology online...I was also on the deans list and honor roll each month...yes I had a full plate.

Mother in law died 3 days before I took my final final exams...But I would not miss it for the world...Keep your chin up...good things will happen if your looking for it :)++

Wow! That's pretty cool you're so close!

My husband said it must be fate. My FASA was showing that I was eligible for the maximum Pell Grant. They did verification and somehow decided that numbers needed to be changed. :roll: Turns out my Pell Grant is only $1700 now... and I wasn't going to have enough to cover tuition (about $200 short, plus no money for books... I have other grants and scholarships so full-time tuition was completely covered). We went to the financial aid office at my college and asked them what was up. Then after much argument... the lady was like "what was your major again?" I told her biology... and then she realized I was eligible for the SMART grant. Haha! That's $4000 more for me!!! Yep... it really must be meant to be. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was eligible for alot of stuff. because I was a woman in a non traditional field...I also qualified for a few grants based on my 3.98 GPA

I love what I do and not working for someome else is scary...BTW I have had the shop open for almost 2 years, so much for most businesses failing in the first year.

I don't know what kind of work a biologist does...and I never understood why I had to take biology and Marine biology to fix computers...just a waste of grant money

But GOOD LUCK to yaxdancex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks!

A biologist can do lots of things, but I want to do conservation. Of course I can't get a real job around here... we would have to go somewhere else. But I guess if my husband ever makes it through architecture college then we'd have to go somewhere else anyway. Not a lot of demand for architects around here either (strange since UNL has an excellent architecture program... oh well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey thanks Nascar! I'll have to check that out when it comes time to buy books. Hehe... with that extra grant though, I'll have about $1200 left over after I pay for my books. Yippee! Check in the mail!!! :D But, hey, if I can make that check bigger... 8]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nascar, you need to do some reading, not I.

Try Lorraine v. Markle American Insurance Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 33020 (D. Md. 2007) which defines what is and is not admissible computer evidence under the updated rules of evidence. (have fun, it's 101 pages long)

In this case both parties produced computer documents (e-mail) to support their motions for summary judgment and both parties were denied because they could not authenticate the records. Judge Grimm gave a very long description of what determines the authenticity of a computer record based on the Federal rules of Civil Procedure (specifically Rule 56) and his analysis is the current benchmark that is used in the Federal courts.

BTW. Pro-se litigants are not officers of the court (attorneys are). As such self-endorsed affidavits are not prima facie true. They are merely rebuttable allegations.

Geez man, take a class or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Methuss, I'm sorry you are still agonized over being wrong. Your personal attacks indicate that you're out of reasonable arguments. Again, I'm sorry for that. I have to say I have better things to do than continually argue with you. We all have to admit at one time or another we are wrong. You should try it sometime.

For future reference... Rule 56 deals with summary judgment and an officer of the court is not the only party who can introduce prima facie evidence. I picked the Socialist Arab case just for you. :roll:

Black's Law Dictionary 598 (8th ed.2004) (defining prima facie evidence as “[e]vidence that will establish a fact or sustain a judgment unless contradictory evidence is produced”). Hartford Fire Ins.Co. v. The Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Slip Copy, 2007 WL 1876392 (D.D.C. 2007).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Methuss, I'm sorry you are still agonized over being wrong. Your personal attacks indicate that you're out of reasonable arguments. Again, I'm sorry for that. I have to say I have better things to do than continually argue with you. We all have to admit at one time or another we are wrong. You should try it sometime.

For future reference... Rule 56 deals with summary judgment and an officer of the court is not the only party who can introduce prima facie evidence. I picked the Socialist Arab case just for you. :roll:

Black's Law Dictionary 598 (8th ed.2004) (defining prima facie evidence as “[e]vidence that will establish a fact or sustain a judgment unless contradictory evidence is produced”). Hartford Fire Ins.Co. v. The Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Slip Copy, 2007 WL 1876392 (D.D.C. 2007).

Rule 901b determines what is admissible evidence. If the evidence is inadmissible then it can't be prima facie true. You have to get over the admissibility hurdles (all 4 of them) before you can even make a prima facie determination.

Oh and don't change what I said. I specifically said a pro-se litigant not being an officer of the court, cannot self-endorse an affidavit to authenticate evidence. An officer of the court can testify to relevant facts they have witnessed and it is considered prima facie true. People that are not officers of the court can't, they must have corroborating testimony or other admissible evidence in support.

And I do admit when I'm wrong. This time, I'm not. I doubt you read all 101 pages of Lorraine in less than 35 minutes, so I doubt you bothered to check the reference before replying. Shall I list all the published cases where ESI has been thrown out for various reasons for you?

Yes, e-mail can be admissible evidence, but as I said in the beginning, you have to authenticate it first, and most people cannot get past that hurdle as a pro-se litigant. Just a print out on your home computer and your own statement it's genuine is not going to cut it. Just ask my wife. The person who raped her is free because the e-mail and chat logs showing his guilt could not be authenticated.

Hartford doesn't define prima facie evidence. What it does do is give weight to a foreign judgment as truth: "principles of comity suggest that [a foreign] judgment should be given weight as prima facie evidence of the facts underlying it." The facts in Hartford had already been established under another case, whereas this debate is about the admissibility of untried evidence.

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.