Fighting Midland, need help with Interrogatory form 15.1

[colormeruby]

To whom it may concern,

For the past few weeks I have been diligently reading your forum and others, and spending much time in the law library researching how to fight Midland Funding in Georgia. I have just received the plaintiff's first request for admissions, interrogatories and documents. I have no idea about the debt, and until this next set of paperwork arrived, I didn't even know the debt was alleged credit card debt.

The help I have found here has been invaluable and now I have a question of my own. I have already answered and constructed my affirmative defenses but am now stuck on this contention interrogatory phrased,

" If you have not admitted to any one or more of the Plaintiff's request for admissions served upon you of even date here-with, with respect to each such request not fully admitted , state all the facts known to you directly or indirectly, which you contend to be a basis for denial or refusal to admit each such request."

How do I answer this? Is this a combination of my affirmative defenses as they relate to my denials and objections to admissions?

I have all my codes and stuff documented, but my main platform is that I am denying all indebtedness to Midland until they prove otherwise. I have a draft prepared, but am not happy with the response this one. Any and all help is Appreciated

~Colorme

[Massive]

To whom it may concern,

For the past few weeks I have been diligently reading your forum and others, and spending much time in the law library researching how to fight Midland Funding in Georgia. I have just received the plaintiff's first request for admissions, interrogatories and documents. I have no idea about the debt, and until this next set of paperwork arrived, I didn't even know the debt was alleged credit card debt.

The help I have found here has been invaluable and now I have a question of my own. I have already answered and constructed my affirmative defenses but am now stuck on this contention interrogatory phrased,

" If you have not admitted to any one or more of the Plaintiff's request for admissions served upon you of even date here-with, with respect to each such request not fully admitted , state all the facts known to you directly or indirectly, which you contend to be a basis for denial or refusal to admit each such request."

How do I answer this? Is this a combination of my affirmative defenses as they relate to my denials and objections to admissions?

I have all my codes and stuff documented, but my main platform is that I am denying all indebtedness to Midland until they prove otherwise. I have a draft prepared, but am not happy with the response this one. Any and all help is Appreciated

~Colorme

Well if they did not provide an authenticated assignment showing the terms of the assignment from the alleged original creditor to Midland Funding specifically citing the alleged debt I would not have sufficient knowledge so I would answer: Defendant states that after a reasonable inquiry, the information known or readily obtainable by him is insufficient to enable him to admit or deny this request. You know they file these lawsuits hoping for a default judgment so they don't put squat in the petition/complaint. They need to show proof they have standing to sue and are filing suit with evidence that they do own the account which they never do. I don't know how you answered the petition but that's how I answer requests for admissions when entities sue be it the original creditor or junk debt buyer.

[nascar]

" If you have not admitted to any one or more of the Plaintiff's request for admissions served upon you of even date here-with, with respect to each such request not fully admitted , state all the facts known to you directly or indirectly, which you contend to be a basis for denial or refusal to admit each such request."

How do I answer this?

Refer them back to the responses in your request for admission. This type interrogatory is improper and should be objected to as both vague and outside the scope of the rules of civil procedure. Here's one reason why:

Let's say the other side is limited to 25 Interrogatories and 20 Requests for Admission. You deny 18 out of the 20 Admissions and one of the 25 Interrogatories is the question referenced above ...

What the other side is doing is trying to get 17 more Interrogatories than they're entitled to by asking you (in one question) to respond to 18 other, separate issues. If they want specific details about your individual responses to the Requests for Admission, they need to ask you specific questions regarding each one.

[colormeruby]

Thanks Massive and Nascar.

@ Nascar, this is sort of what I had originally written, That they could refer back as I had detailed each admission specifically. Then I read this article

on contention interrogatories and got a little skeered that I had not answered properly (although I my gut tells me to answer like this)...

I have tried to insert a link to the article, but it doesn't work, so if you want to reference the article, put "EVERYTHING THE PLAINTIFF'S LAWYER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT CONTENTION", into google) I've been reading both sides of the argument to see how the plaintiff approaches the suit. And there are a lot of people that do fight this interrogatory with an objection so i think I will convert my answer to this one again.

I do all this, knowing full well they most likely have no evidence, but I do not want to default judgment on a technicality. I feel like maybe I should go to law school after this!

I am currently writing my requests to them for admissions, interrogatories and production of documents. Can and Should I ask the plaintiff to admit VERY SPECIFIC things like,

"you admit to signing for documents from the Defendant including Defendant's Answer's to Complaint, Affirmative defenses, and a cease and desist all telephone communications, on April xxxx" ????

"You admit to calling the defendant on April XXx and were notified verbally by the defendant of the cease and desist letter that had been signed for on April xxxx"

You admit to calling the defendant again on April XXXX and were again notified of the Cease and desist letter and the previous phone call and verbal warning" ????

Thanks for your help in advance!