Jump to content

I think.. Unifund Did a major No no

Recommended Posts

Hello all :)

First Off, I sincerely appologise if any of this has long since been addressed.

I've been sued by Unifund CCR Partners, and up until just recently, everything had looked legit and (for the most part) on the level. The complaint and summons was served by a sheriff (a pleasant one at that).

In the Complaint, Unifund Plead to the point of Me entering into a certain credit card agreement on a specific date. Everything sounded good.. I did not recall the account however and stated that in my response, and also requested verification/validation as to the specifics of it all. They refused to offer anything other than what was with the Summons and Complaint. I responded to ints/prod/and admissions, again, without full knowledge of the claim. They moved for summary judgment. I countered with with my reasons against... They were denied (Go me!) Again... I re-raised the fact nothing of any signifigance had been offered connecting me to this point, to the "imaginary account" alleged in the complaint.

So, time had passed since I had heard anything from them or the Courts. Then alas.. the 2nd motion for summary Judgment arrives.. I responded.. It again, was denied. IN the mail comes an alleged copy of the "original" account statement. *PoP* On came the lightbulb. Wow.. there it was, OC's name on it (not the name they had alleged in the summons and complaint), my old address. Digging I went, and find it I did, the true, original account statement, the one I had received years ago. On initial inspection, I said.. darn.. I guess they cooked my goose.

*kerplooey, light bulb shatters*.

But then something just did'nt seem right. I compared, with much scrutiny this time, sure enough, they altered their copy to look more, attached to the account they were claiming. Also omitted was the correct mailing address for payments, and a clause on the back which stated who actually issued the account (they decided not to include the back of the statement for whatever reason) and the format of the statement they supplied, was wrong.

Any suggestions? I personally want to move to trial, have it dismissed for unclean hands/sol (the account is over 6 years, technically, and by all interpretations, falls under a statute other than a simple civil complaint).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that the debt is beyond the sol, would be grounds to be dismissed "with" prejudice. Can you file a Motion to Dismiss and use those grounds? Be sure to include your state statute. That should bring everything to a screeching hault really fast!

BTW, are they showing the last payment to agree with what you say about the default? If not, be prepared to show your last payment and it should be a slam dunk! xdancex

Edited by Linda7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I initially obejected to the motion for summary judgment, I stated a dismissal based on SoL, In particular a commercial paper sol.

Judge entered that my dismissal was denied for I denied having the account to begin with. Judge did not address the unclean hands dismissal, which I cited relevant cases to. At that time, Unifund had not falsified any documents, other than pleading an agreement with a bank that was incorrect.

The last payment date reflects what I have in my own records, and to the best of my knowledge, is correct. However, the account was closed, one year prior to the last payment, and the last charge on the account, was a month prior to the account closing. The State SoL on civil suits is 6 years, and this, as such, is borderline to the account closing.

Plaintiff also filed affidavits, stating in general as to the accuracy and authenticity of documents/records submitted, amounts due and military service. One affidavit was from OC, the other from JDB. The affidavits did not identify me or the account number, or in particular the documents they pertained to, only that all was a true and correct representation of electronic records included on a disc purchased by Unifund. This disc, and in particular, the actual purchase of my account, is claimed to be trade secret by Unifund.

Date of last payment on their purported "account statement copy" is one day.. Date of last payment on their generic spreadsheet showing account details, is a different date.

To avoid potential wall of text, I'll post this for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first, you can deny the debt and throw in the sol and it is up to the plaintiff to prove the debt, etc. But, since you now have the papers in hand - you need to find your last payment. Then find when the suit was "filed" - not when you were served.

If you were making monthly payments, the sol started ticking with your "due date" - first missed payment. Or if the payments were sporadic - your last payment. Find out for sure the date. Then find out the date the suit was filed. If there has been 6 years, then you have your concrete proof to use your state's statute of limitation clause to have the case dismissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you do have your concrete proof, that should be enough. But, if there is any doubt to that, you'll need to attack their evidence. I'd file motions to strike the affidavits as hearesay. The plaintiff needs to bring the signers of the affidavits as witnesses that can be questioned. Of course the JDB affidavit is worthless as the signer of that was not present to witness the original contract, etc.

I'll let others chime in here too as I'm a little sidetracked with company at the moment. xdancex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trade secret claim is invalid.

The source of a debt and the amount a bad debt buyer paid for plaintiff’s debt.

213 (D.Conn. 1998);

Coppola v. Arrow Financial Services, 302CV577, 2002 WL 32173704 (D.Conn., Oct. 29, 2002) (must phrase request clearly);

Kimbro v. IC System, 301CV1676, 2002 WL 1816820 (D.Conn. July 22, 2002).

This si a cut and paste from Ed Combs PDF on the FDCPA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Court docket listing on the Vermont Courts docket lookup website the filing date was a month before the 6 year mark on the account closing. 3 days prior to a 6 year on my last use of the account. Account was closed due to the fact I had entered into a debt management program with Genesis financial management/Care One.. The account balance was generally high, OC dropped the credit limit prior to the last purchase that was made (sometime between statements, and without my knowledge).. I disputed the over limit fees and the such, to no avail. By that time, I knew I had spending problems and entered into the program with Care One. I have little to no documentation of the arrangement with Care One.Anyhow, that was that part of the story.

By date of last payment, as indicated by records, date of filing is within the 6 year SoL by one year. Hence, the reason I am pursuing the 3 year SoL for commercial paper.

Does the fact they Forged/counterfeited a document they submitted into evidence carry any weight? They put a privacy statement smack dab in the middle of the statement in an attempt to over emphasize their original plea and in support of the purported cardmember agreement.

Also, they omitted the "fine print" from the back of the statement I have, which specifically states who the issuer of the account was. That issuer IS NOT who they claim it to be. Funny thing? the statement they offered, just so happens to be the One I still have from the OC. They made one that closely resembles the original, but omitted points that I consider as important.

Thank you all for your input :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.