Received my request for admissions not signed by plaintiff

[whatnot]

I sent out discovery to the plaintiffs attorney since that was the only addrss I had. It's been sent back to me but everything is signed by the attorney and not the plaintiff. is that acceptable in AZ?

Also there are a couple of the admissions they objected to. Aren't they just suppose to admit or deny? Of course one of them was the acquisition price for the account being less then amount they are suing for

[ADSOFT]

I sent out discovery to the plaintiffs attorney since that was the only addrss I had. It's been sent back to me but everything is signed by the attorney and not the plaintiff. is that acceptable in AZ?

Also there are a couple of the admissions they objected to. Aren't they just suppose to admit or deny? Of course one of them was the acquisition price for the account being less then amount they are suing for

I think it acceptable to have the attorney sign.

However I don't know about the questions they didn't answer. Post the the question and answers, I'm sure other will chime in. There are motions to force them to answer or other ways to ask: Motion To Compel, Motion for more Definate Answere(I think), Bill of Particulars.

Sounds like you are on the offensive, get help from these guys they have alot of experience

[whatnot]

First I need to say that they have amended their initial disclosure statement and changed the alledged Visa to MC. They also included a contract from the OC which is signed but not dated then a few more pages that are signed and notarized along with a excel type spreadsheet with the accounts they supposedly bought. They have blanked out the purchase price and added my address phone and ss to the ledger to show my acct.

I mention this because in their admissions , pod, interrogotorries they keep referring to the 26.1

They do not have the cardholder agreement and said defendats will need to obtain for the bank

I'm not posting the entire thing just the ones I need some feedback on.

POD requests

provide dos showing date this acct first went into defaul.

See disclosure stmt

Provide notarized statment by person with origianl knowledge of alleged debt, as it was constituted and who can testify that the alleged debt was incurred legally.

No such doc is in possession at this time

Provide any and all credit repors plaintiff obtained from any credit reporting agenc concerning defendat.

Objection, irrelevant and unlikely to lend to the discovery of admissible evidence The atty pulled my credit about a month after their client bought the debt

Provide all dos showing the calculations or assessment of interest, finnace sharges, fees and charges on the alleged debt sued upon in this action, and all docs relating to the pymt history of the acct.

see disclosure . plaintiff provided all info within it's possession. If any further info exists, defendants will need to abotain directly from bank or it's own records

Provide all copies of charge slips signed by defendant with the OC

same response as above

Interrogatories

What is the name of the company Plaintiff purchased the alleged obligation and when was it purchaed. Provide a copy of the bill of sale, bulk transfer affidavit and cancelled check or other evidence of pymt

See attached purchase contract and chain of title docs (there is not cancelled check or proof of pyment)

Provide a complete accoungtin of the amount claimed due including principal, interest, collection chagres and any other compnents that contribute to the balance from date of inception through and including the response date to the first set of interrogatories.

See disclosure

[whatnot]

admit or deny that there is no written agreement between the defendant and plaintiff regarding this debt admitted

admit or dey that you are unable to provide a complete accounting for the amount you are claiming deny (but they only porvided a copy of a statement from year end for 3 years then some really unreadable screen shots. Not 'complete' accounting

Admit or deny the palinttiff and defendants exchanged consideration, monetary or otherwise creating an agreement both parties Admit as plaintiff stand in the shoes of OC

Admit or deny the defendant has been provided a signed copy of the cardholder agreement for the alleged account Objection assumes facts not in evidence as to whether a signed cardholder agreement exists (I didn't think they could object just admit or deny??

Admit or deny there is an arb cluse in the agreement and that the election of arb by either pary precludes court action Objection Compound request for admission. Assumes facts not in evidence as to whether an arb clause exists and calls for a legal conclusion as to the legal effect of any alleged arb clause

Admit or deny plaintiff does not have any account application signed by defendant admit I loved this one )

Admit or deny plaintiff does not hold any type of license form the AZDFI

objection irrelevant and unlikely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence Admit or deny the acquisiton price for this account was less thent eh amount plaintiff is suing for Objection irrelavant and unlikely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence

there are others but I don't think they are all that relavant. I'd like some of you well seasons people to let me know your take on this.

[jewel1325]

I don't understand how the attorney could have first hand knowledge of the debt to sufficiently respond to discovery. You should check into that further. Did they also list the attorneys name as the person completing the discovery? If so, you have a darn good argument as to the validity of their responses.

[FlaLawyer]

The attorney usually signs responses to RFA or RFP. Clients usually sign responses to interrogatories.

[whatnot]

I don't understand how the attorney could have first hand knowledge of the debt to sufficiently respond to discovery. You should check into that further. Did they also list the attorneys name as the person completing the discovery? If so, you have a darn good argument as to the validity of their responses.

The coversheet on admissions say plaintiff by and through it's atttorney undersigned hereby responds to defents request for admissions. Same thing for the POD. On interrogotores one of my questions was identify the person answering and it's the name of the managing member of JDB and the attorney

[whatnot]

The attorney usually signs responses to RFA or RFP. Clients usually sign responses to interrogatories.

The client didn't sign them just the attorney but they did identify jdb as one of the persons answering

[Guest usctrojanalum]

Everything they have done looks kosher so far. And yes, they are allowed to object.

Edited May 5, 2010 by usctrojanalum

[whatnot]

The client didn't sign them just the attorney but they did identify jdb as one of the persons answering

But does it need to be a signature of the JDB or just a typed name that him and the atty responded?

They also submitted a contract from OC to JDB but it looks like it was handled through a broker. They've deleted the purchase price in it. The contract is signed but not dated. Also they submitted an excell type spreadsheet with accounts that supposedly were bought and at mine there are additions (like name social etc) obviously it's been altered. Do I do a motion to strike before trial since it's now with the courts?