Off to Court We Go!

[dawgmom]

I'm going to court (small claims) with a friend tomorrow regarding a credit card debt. To make a long story short, the following is the MTD that we submitted a couple of months ago. It details a bit about the case. I also submitted an Order, but the judge decided to hold a trial instead of just signing the blinkin' thing and getting this over with. We have all of my friend's documentation sent to us from the CA . . . I just need to know if anyone has any suggestions or ideas about how we can get this mess over with in our favor . . . HELP? And yes, this has gone on for a year and a half!

Comes now [name of friend], Defendant, in the above-captioned case and requests that the case be dismissed with prejudice. In support of his motion, the defendant states as follows:

1) On March 28, 2008, Defendant was served with Summons to Appear in Warren Small Claims Court on April 29, 2008, regarding above-captioned case.

2) On March 28, 2008, Defendant sent certified letter to Plaintiff, requesting validation of alleged debt, per Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.

3) On April 29, 2008, Defendant appeared before Judge Ricardo Rivera in Warren Small Claims Court after finding that Borns and Steele had not provided any documentation regarding the debt in question; Judge Rivera then ordered Borns and Steele to produce discovery on or before May 30, 2008.

4) On June 26, 2009 (well over a year from the initial court date), Borns and Steele sent documentation to defendant that still does not validate this debt. Reasons being as follows:

a) Borns and Steele provided copy of “Bill of Sale” dated November 29, 2005 with no letterhead, no account numbers, and no information linking this document to defendant (Exhibit A);

Borns and Steele provided copy of December 2005 credit card statement showing that the defendant was still paying the original creditor at that point in time, negating the above-mentioned bill of sale (Exhibit ;

c) Borns and Steele provided copy of credit card application that does not show defendant’s signature or date of application/contract (Exhibit C);

d) Borns and Steele has offered no reasonable explanation of how this debt was calculated, i.e., rate of interest, amount of original debt, breakdown of any associated fees (Exhibit D);

e) Borns and Steele failed to comply with Judge Rivera’s request to have valid debt verification to the plaintiff on or before May 30, 2008 (Exhibit E).

It is the opinion of the defendant that if Borns and Steele had the proper documentation, they would have provided such before now and would have complied with the judge’s request for this information by the May 30, 2008 deadline. It is also the opinion of the defendant that pursuit of this case will do no more than tie up the court’s time and resources.

WHEREFORE, [name of friend], Defendant, asks this Court that the case be dismissed with prejudice, and for all other proper relief.