Going to court by debt collector.

[faramarz123]

Hello and thanks for reading my post.

I have been summoned to appear in court for and unpaid credit card debt. This card was opened in 2000 when I was student and had no job. My only source of income was financial aid from school. I also had a few other credit cards which they either have been paid off or I am still paying them. The credit card in question was maxed out at 5000 dollars. While in school I was using my school money to pay for the monthly payments. Up until around 2004 I stopped paying because I was coming up short on my financial aid and I could not afford to pay anymore. The account was closed in 2004. Going through several collection agencies, I was finally sued about a month ago. At around November of 2006 one collection agency offered me a settlement amount of about $3000, but I was not able to pay, but I did offer them 1/3 the balance which they did not accept. Then I got the court paper and I realized I had been sued by yet a new collection agency which I had never had any contact before. They sued me for $14000. I don’t know how the balance jumped from 5000 to 14000 within a year. I sent them a certified letter and requested VERIFICATION, also complete history of the account and how they calculated the 14000. I have not heard from them yet, but the court is scheduled for March 24th.

Thanks for reading and help. AZ

[trueq]

This will not do any good. You needed to do this BEFORE gettting sued.

DV'ing before suit makes it illegal under the FDCPA to sue you before verification/validation.

By waiting, you took away one of your defenses against the suit.

At this point, you need to answer the suit.

I'd reccomend a MTD for failure to state a claim, to start.

If you have no clue how to answer and dispute the amount in the denial, you need to hire a lawyer.

[myscoresawful]

For one thing, It will show the judge that you have tried to investigate this claim because you don't believe it to be accurate. I mean, who the crap would pay 3 times what you believe the debt to have been?

Anyway, you didn't lose any rights to validation or cease collections by not validating before being sued IF the CA NEVER contacted you before, and it seems by your post that they did not.

If in fact, this CA who now has the debt, never contacted you before, then they are violating your rights by not giving you 30 days to dispute.

By all means, show up in court and point all of this out to the judge...they will reset it, and keep reseting it until this CA proves they have their ducks in a row and that you owe what they are claiming and that they did not violate any of your rights getting to where they are at right now.

Good luck!

[LadynRed]

DV'ing before suit makes it illegal under the FDCPA to sue you before verification/validation.

No, it does not. However, if you DV'd before they sued and they had not yet validated before, then they would have to do so IN COURT.

[trueq]

Isn't suing "proceeding with further collection action" under the FDCPA?

FDCPA, under Section 809 ( prohibits further collection action without validation of the debt.

Validation after the Summons and complaint is filed should render the Summons and Complaint an illegal activity during that time frame. It should still be considered a statuatory and recoverable violation. Plaintiff cannot retroactively fix the violation. This is irregardless whether the underlying debt is valid or not.

Even if Validation occurs to the court, at some point after the Summons and complaint, it is on a much higher standard because most defendants should demand the debt to be proved up at the same time:

the plaintiff must prove:

(1) the existence of the note in question;

(2) that the party sued signed the note;

(3) that the plaintiff is the owner or holder of the note; and

(4) that a certain balance is due and owing on the note.

I could get into what is proof and acceptable documentation, etc.

Since this is the plaintiff burden to the court, one should argue that this is the validation, after the fact, burden as well.

Let me have it, if you see it differently or have a different experience.

[myscoresawful]

My understanding is that a CA can file suit, report to the CRAs and mail you the 30 day letter, all on the very first day the debt drops into their hands.

How ever, if during the initial 30 days, the consumer disputes, then the CA must stop collection activity until they verify. They wouldn't have to drop the court filing just because they didn't verify to the consumer, but once court came around and they show up, they would have to validate it to the judge. In a sense, the actual "collection activity" in filing the judgement is inactive until the court date.

The only thing I see here is that the OP did not receive any 30 day notice to exercise their right to dispute from the CA who is suing.

[faramarz123]

Well, here is the thing, I never received anything from this CA, they may have sent me something, but I did not receive it. The only time I became aware of them was when I received the summon. Now the other thing is that I had received letter from another CA during 2006 which showed I only owed $5000. And now the CA, that is suing, is demanding $14000. my question to them would be how the why the amount increased by $9000 within just one year. Are they legally required to prove to the court how and why they are demanding this money or they can just throw in any amount they want?

[myscoresawful]

Well, here is the thing, I never received anything from this CA, they may have sent me something, but I did not receive it. The only time I became aware of them was when I received the summon. Now the other thing is that I had received letter from another CA during 2006 which showed I only owed $5000. And now the CA, that is suing, is demanding $14000. my question to them would be how the why the amount increased by $9000 within just one year. Are they legally required to prove to the court how and why they are demanding this money or they can just throw in any amount they want?

Yes, they will have to show how they come up with that amount, and a lot of the times, they are allowed to tack on certain fees, etc, but I am not familiar with what and how much. That seems like an awful lot for interest, etc. I'm sure they are including attorney fees and court cost, but again, can't be *that* much.

If you never listen to anything I suggest you do, then please listen to me now....GO TO COURT! BE there!...I guarantee you they are banking on you not showing up and winning by default! BE THERE! Explain to the judge that you don't feel this amount is right and that you tried to work with them to find out more about the debt, by asking them to provide any documents with the original balance and then how they calculated all the other thousands of dollars, but that your request fell on deaf ears. (Take your green card(s) to court with you). The judge should reset it at the first hearing and give you a couple more months to wear the CA down...in the very least, they now will know that they are going to invest more money into this than they had originally expected ..

If they do provide you with proper validation before court (they don't have too, but Crap 1 did...I sent them a DV after our first court hearing!! They were so smug in thinking they were right that they sent me everything they had, and in the end was their downfall because I pointed out to them that the date on the statement of the last payment was dated 2000 and NOT 2002 as they had on court papers, etc)...

but if they do, come back and let us know what they have given you...but still....by all means...>GO TO COURT!!!!!!!

[faramarz123]

thank you all, and I am going to be there. because i just want to know how the heck they can charge anything they want.

[hiblues]

The OP is from Texas...

they cannot garnish wages in Texas... just an FYI.

[kevin3344]

Let's assume your default rate was 20%. Now, that's LOW for a credit card but bare with me. This is how the amounts can grow:

5,000 + 1,000 (20%) = 6,000

6,000 + 1,200 = 7,200

7,200 + 1,440 = 8,640

8,640 + 1,728 = 10,368

So as you can see in a very short time the amount can double, and that's not including late fees and attorneys fees. That's how you get to $14k very quickly.

Back to your original post however, regarding court. Take it from a person who has been there, you'll want to come prepared. If you're within SOL you'll more than likely lose, as the judge will simply ask "Is this your debt?". If you answer anything other than "no" you're a gonner if you don't have a defense. So what I would do is contact opposing counsel and work out a payment arrangement before you get there. In cases before me the judge said you are welcome to go out in the hallway and come up with an agreement. Most didn't and a judgment was entered. Of course you can wait until you get to court as well.

[faramarz123]

DODEKA, LLC. also there is mention of Weinstein & Riley P.S.that is their legal Counsel.

[andbowd]

wow

[debtking]

DODEKA, LLC. also there is mention of Weinstein & Riley P.S.that is their legal Counsel.

I got served saturday morning, DODEKA, LLC is listed as the plaintiff. Did a search and it seems they are a coll. agency. My original debt was to Bank of America.

I'm in Texas also and have to respond to the suit soon, can a ca file suit? I have found that they can't?

[win270]

For one thing, It will show the judge that you have tried to investigate this claim because you don't believe it to be accurate. I mean, who the crap would pay 3 times what you believe the debt to have been?

Anyway, you didn't lose any rights to validation or cease collections by not validating before being sued IF the CA NEVER contacted you before, and it seems by your post that they did not.

If in fact, this CA who now has the debt, never contacted you before, then they are violating your rights by not giving you 30 days to dispute.

By all means, show up in court and point all of this out to the judge...they will reset it, and keep reseting it until this CA proves they have their ducks in a row and that you owe what they are claiming and that they did not violate any of your rights getting to where they are at right now.

Good luck!

OP is in Texas. You can DV ANYTIME, and they are required to respond to it within 30 days. No matter how long they've been on your CRs or however many letters they've sent or not sent to you before!

[Fizzle1979]

They are bonded in TX to collect debt.

Principal Name: Dodeka LLC # 1

Address: 2001 Western Avenue Suite 430

Seattle, WA 98121

File Number: 20060237

Status: Active

Date Filed: 12/8/2006

Cancellation Date:

Phone: (206) 940-0442

Bonding Company: Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America

Bond No: 104487888

It appears they are out of WA, so Amerikaner might be able to help you.

The SOL for TX on all debts is four years from date of last payment. You would want your debts to be older than four years.

[Fizzle1979]

I was doing some research on them and found this interesting. Look at the log for 12/14/07.

http://dockets.justia.com/browse/state-texas/court-txndce/noscat-13/nos-890/

They are being sued for violations of the FCRA.

[faramarz123]

Thank you all for all the replies. I need all the help I can get. when I was student, I gave these people so much money out of financial aid, only god knows how much. these leeches do not deserve another penny from me. I will go to court. the only way they can get any money is by getting a judgment. Now my question is this. i have sent them the DV letter on 12/26/07, and let's say they recieve it by 30th. if they do not respond to me within one month, what will happen to this case, if any. thanks.

[faramarz123]

They are bonded in TX to collect debt.

Principal Name: Dodeka LLC # 1

Address: 2001 Western Avenue Suite 430

Seattle, WA 98121

File Number: 20060237

Status: Active

Date Filed: 12/8/2006

Cancellation Date:

Phone: (206) 940-0442

Bonding Company: Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America

Bond No: 104487888

It appears they are out of WA, so Amerikaner might be able to help you.

The SOL for TX on all debts is four years from date of last payment. You would want your debts to be older than four years.

what do you mean by "Bonded"?

[Fizzle1979]

what do you mean by "Bonded"?

Read the link in my signature about the Texas Finance Code.

[Amerikaner83]

It appears they are out of WA, so Amerikaner might be able to help you.

The only thing I could do would be to serve them for you

If they're currently being sued for FCRA violations, by all means, bring taht up in any correspondence you can!

[faramarz123]

OP is in Texas. You can DV ANYTIME, and they are required to respond to it within 30 days. No matter how long they've been on your CRs or however many letters they've sent or not sent to you before!

even after being sued? and if that is case, are they by law still have to reply before 30 days? and if they didn't, would that be a violation?

[faramarz123]

i sent them a DV, after 35 days, no respond. few days ago i sent them another DV. if no respond again, i will countersuit them for 1000 each time. court date is maech 24th.

[Fizzle1979]

i sent them a DV, after 35 days, no respond. few days ago i sent them another DV. if no respond again, i will countersuit them for 1000 each time. court date is maech 24th.

I'm not sure that after being filed suit against, they are required to respond to your DV.

[betam4x]

I'm not sure that after being filed suit against, they are required to respond to your DV.

The Texas finance code does not include exemptions for legal action. If the company fails to validate, they are in violation, lawsuit be damned.