Had Our Phone Hearing...Attorney get's 60 Day Continuance?

[Dcrawler69]

Hello. On Wed. I had my phone hearing concerning a CC debt trying to be collected upon by Dodeka. It seemed strange the Magistrate had an earlier conversation that same day with the lawyer before I was brought into the hearing. However, I had ask for total disclosure via a registered letter which the lawyer indicated he had not received and that it must have went to his Seattle address not the local one in Columbus, OH (I sent to the indicated address listed on the court document). At this point is when the Magistrate indicated he was granting a 60-day continuance. After reading allot of the posts from this forum I was under the impression the Dodeka lawyer would be obligated to supply the requested info in the first 30-day period? Not only did he receive an additional 60-days, but I must now also resend my original answer letter. Likewise, I got the impression the Magistrate was not displaying a non-biased attitude. So, what are my options at this point? I was feeling positive going into this hearing but now I feel somewhat less-so. Thank you for taking the time to read and reply to my plead.

Sincerely,

[Lecasbas]

After reading allot of the posts from this forum I was under the impression the Dodeka lawyer would be obligated to supply the requested info in the first 30-day period?

According to the FDCPA, yes. This is a point you would bring up when you are explaining your Counterclaims to the Court. Actually, the court action itself is a "collections activity" which was suspended by the FDCPA when the attorney received your request for "total disclosure". By denying receipt of this letter, the attorney can, for the moment, continue "collection activities".

If the receipt of the letter is before the court action you could argue that the attorney "willfully" disregarded the FDCPA.

The court demeanor you described is typical. Welcome to the pro-se world.

[Dcrawler69]

Thank you for your precise and frank reply. Happy Holidays.

Dc