ADSOFT

CCP 98 Violation Case Law

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any case law where CCP 98 was violated by the plaintiff in Collections case and ruling was for defendent.

I'm doing some research on such cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CCP 98: “Declaration In lieu Of Trial” is the typical way ALL these debt lawyers proceed to win case. But as soon as a defendant files a Notice To Appear Pursuant to CCP 1987(B), that voids the document unless the witness shows up at trial. Period.

This is how I had my case dismissed!

Anyone reading this who received a CCP 98 in lieu of testimony in CA for collections? You don't have to accept it. File a CCP 1987(B) for Notice to appear, which means whoever their witness is, that witness must show up for trial in order to have the testimony document admissible. If the witness doesn’t show (they won’t either), the lawyer asks the judge for a continuance, because they couldn’t get the witness scheduled to appear in time. Lie! You object, and Motion to Dismiss to the case against you. Otherwise Motion In Limine the entire document if they give a continuance. Then they will have to produce the witness for the next trial date. Set the date immediately. Make them work on deadline ot get a witness. The lawyers won’t be able to produce a witness 9 times out of 10--ever. When they show up again without a witness, Motion to Dismiss with prejudice so you cannot be sued again on this matter, because there is no excuse for them not being able to produce a witness. No witness? No evidence to testify to. It’s just hearsay. They have NOTHING!

I argued that these lawyers know their procedure, they do it for a living and they had 1 year to prepare for the case. They don’t deserve anymore time. But I deserve to have this matter concluded. Once I said that, my judge happily noted that their CCP 98 was defective, he told the lawyer, “I would have given you the continuance if the defendant would not have objected. You’re CCP 98 was faulty. You didn’t allow for the defendent to have a way to subpoena your witness because you did not list a valid address within 150 miles for the witness. Your law firm is not a valid address for proof of service. Therefor the defendant had to file a Notice to Appear CCP 1987(B) to try and get the witness to appear and so I am granting her the Dismissal.”

Oh, and guess what? The lawyers use the very same copy and paste declarants (witnesses) on ALL their cases. Ever heard of Ramona Aragon? She is listed from Citibank as the witness to people in CA, NY, AZ, TX, Ks etc. Google her. But the interesting things is, a witness who has personal knowledge of your case (I am speaking of California filed cases, but check your own state rules. The rule is totally similar) that witness must have an address within 150 miles of the courthouse you are being sued at. Therefore these CCP 98s are all bogus! They are completely inadmissible IF you file your Notice To Appear.

Too, and very important. You don’t have to do anything. They have to prove the case. Wait and see what evidence they are going to try and use against you. This is when they send their CCP98 In Lieu Of Testimony. Don’t correct their misprocedure. File Notice To Appear 1987(B). And either have it dismissed because of the faulty CCP 98 or failure to appear. Let their misprocedures fly under the radar so when you show up for court you have several ways you can dismiss the case in case the judge wants to be a little lenient like grant a continuance. He can’t overlook a misprodure like CCP 98 with no address of the actual witness. It will be thrown out IF YOU ASK FOR IT TO BE. This will not be offered to you. YOU MUST ASK FOR IT TO BE SO. Then the lawyers will know you know what’s up.

So you handle it by filing for the witness to show up and they can’t ignore that. It is a court order. But these debt lawyers cannot produce a copy and paste witness that is acting as nothing more that a signature bearer for Citibank. Ramona Aragon types? They have no personal knowledge of your account. She has never even looked at your case. She only signs the paper. And she doesn’t show up. At that time, as the defendant you always ask for the case to be dismissed with prejudice. You can’t be granted what you do not ask for though. So ask for case dismissed always with prejudice, but the judge will dismiss without prejudice, because it’s just bad procedure. Then the lawyers will go home and maybe they try to get you again, but maybe they don’t.

Lastly, if I had researched my court rules better, I could have had my case dismissed 2 times before the actual trial dismissal. This is how BAD these lawyers procedures are. Unfortunately, everybody gets scared and either doesn’t show up for trial or never answers a summons stating guilty.

FYI: Moore Law Group I found out is a debt collector—owned by a couple of lawyers. It isn’t even a regular firm. They actually contract/hire freelance lawyers to come to court and try to win the case. Pathetic.

You can beat them—on procedure alone.

Long Beach Courthouse civil limited 3/29/11 is the date to look up for my case. You will have to go to the courthouse to see it or you can order it online.

I won because I read these threads. I saw some lawyers do it. I figured—why can’t I? So can you!

Research what I've said here.

And lastly, the Judges would love to stop these lawyers from winning on bad procedure, but they aren’t allowed to tell you that what is going on in court is wrong. They can only give you what you ask for. Motion to dismiss. Make these lawyers work to sue you. Get them sick of you and make the judge sick of their tactics by busting them in court and they will go away.

These lawyers want easy mark people. They don’t have or waste their time re-suing those of us that know how to point our their mistakes. And it is easy. You CAN do this yourself!! I did!

And one last thing. If they know the law, why do they have such sloppy procedures that any lawyer who came to represent you would immediately have thrown out. Because they usually don’t have a real case AND they bank on you not knowing law procedures. They don’t want you to look up their quoted procedures. They win 90% of their cases by default judgments from people who were either never served, or who didn’t file an answer (very simple to do btw), or who did answer but then just ignored the rest and blew court off. If their case were so good against you? Why are they trying to settle and get you to sign away your rights to pay debt you cannot afford to pay? If you could pay, you wouldn’t have defaulted in the first place. Don’t get scared and say you’ll pay now—forget that.

Also, don’t settle—ever. You will pay $100s to $1000s of dollars in taxes to the IRS depending on you credit card debt. Even if you were sued, they can’t garnish unemployment, disability, and only one creditor at a time can garnish any wages at all. You have to think smart. Think about the worst they could do to you.

:rolleyes:

P.s. I read over 57 cases tonight from Orange county courthouse online. Every Citibank suit I read from Hunts Henrique got the defendants to cave and pay. Not one that I saw said bring your witness. How sad is that? If you are going to be sued? So be it. Because once your credit is screwed, it’s like that for 7 years anyway. You settling your debt will not change that. In fact it’s on your credit record as a judgment which is far worse than defaulting on credit cards. People don’t think about these things. Don’t just settle. Let them work to sue and believe me when I say you have a very good shot at getting your case dismissed—on procedure alone. Your credit is done for now. But a judgement won’t reverse that. So why cave? And why owe the IRS 100’s to 1000’s of dollars because you now have to claim all the money you had forgiven (got a great deal on) in your settlement as income. I settled on one case. I got a great deal. They wrote of 90% of the debt $22,000 vanished. I was thrilled!! Until I filed my taxes this year. I now owe the IRS $8,000. So, you aren’t getting a “Deal” when you settle. Ever. The debt collectors are. It’s far worse to have issues with the IRS then it is with Citibank and I just told you that there are rules for collecting monies from someone. You can’t collect from someone what they don’t have for one. And you can’t garnish wages past a small percentage. AND whoever has the first judgement against you must be paid off in full before any other judgement against you can ever be satisfied. So, it’s not that bad. And, some food for thought…You could always get sued by a family member or friend before you get sued by a creditor. That way the friend/family member would be first in line to collect from you. Except, they would never do that now would they? And their judgment would sit on the court records forever making very other judgment against you uncollectable. Oh…we must start thinking like the big corporations and power brokers of the world who get away with any and every thing. Good luck to you. Whoever you are.

I can’t answer threads etc. I am only posting because I felt it was my duty to pass along my win and let you know that you can get out of these lawsuits.

Don’t let this take over your life.

Don’t be scared. Think smart. xangelx

That is plenty of time to relax and figure out your next move. The courts are slammed all over the US. Drag it out as long as you can--from start to finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations! I am a public interest lawyer working at a non profit in Berkeley. I represent low income people for free in fighting these cases. We've been successful in most of these cases for the same reasons but what we don't have, and I hope you do (!) is something in writing from a judge explaining (a decision or order) his or her decision. Did the judge issue anything in writing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Congratulations! I am a public interest lawyer working at a non profit in Berkeley. I represent low income people for free in fighting these cases. We've been successful in most of these cases for the same reasons but what we don't have, and I hope you do (!) is something in writing from a judge explaining (a decision or order) his or her decision. Did the judge issue anything in writing?

I have something.

CCP 98 is how I won my case.

The final judgement read something along the lines of:

Violation of CCP98 section a: no other evidence produced at trial ( ... the plaintiff never showed up, lol). Judgement for the defendent.

However, I have read of cases where the plaintiff did show up and interogated the defendant on the bench.

So CCP98 violation may not be an automatic win, you still have to be able to defend yourself by denying all evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received the minute order in the mail that confirms the case is dismissed without prejudice.

Yes, they can try to sue again, but they won’t—they can't come up with a witness. And whatever evidence they submit has to be declared to be true by a witness. A copy of your signature, bill, etc. means nothing without a witness to back confirm their company’s documents are true.

So, let them send their testimony in lieu of showing up. Yet, it will not count once you file for them to appear—UNLESS they appear. They will not. 9 times out of ten.

On my case:

The judges Disposition states: Court orders case dismissed without prejudice--CCP 98 Defective.

I am surprised why people on these threads believe that anything these lawyers do is actually proper procedure and will fly in court.

Please look and listen to people who have won cases—actual dismissals. I have been researching 100's of cases from Citibank on the Orange County court website. And I found only 3 dismissals. The rest settled. Very sad. :(

Any one of these people could have done what I have done. At a minimum, that would make it so a debt collector reallly had to do their work and provide actual evidence rather than show up and have a defendent cave, because they are not a lawyer and get scared.

In my case, the evidence (as in ALL CITIBANK CASES) was a submitted declaration from a witness who in reality was worth no more than the paper she signed her name on. She only existed on a piece of paper. They could not produce her physically. So—there was/is no evidence that was admissible.

Good luck people. And... is this there more to come? Maybe...

The same firm just filed another case against me from—AMEX. I found out at the courthouse today while researching my dismissed case. Punched in my name and there it was. But, I will be ready.

The case will be a minimum of 1 year out. And this time I know the ropes and I will drag it out as long as possible. They will screw up and it'll be the same stuff they had for the previous case. A copy and paste person's name as the witness to not just mine but 500 other lawsuits acoross the US.

And guess who won’t be happy if MOORE LAW GROUP comes in with their same tactics and faulty procedure. The Judge! He actually told me I did a good job and reminded me to keep all my records and study the statue of limitations in the event they try to file again.

If that isn't way of teilling me he knows how these junk debt lawyers work? I don't know what is.

Edited by CaseDismissed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How close to the trial date did you receive CCP 98: “Declaration In lieu Of Trial” and then file your Notice To Appear Pursuant to CCP 1987(B)?

==========================================

His pleading of CCP 1987 is strictly related to the trial date and not when he receives their bogus evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Congratulations! I am a public interest lawyer working at a non profit in Berkeley. I represent low income people for free in fighting these cases. We've been successful in most of these cases for the same reasons but what we don't have, and I hope you do (!) is something in writing from a judge explaining (a decision or order) his or her decision. Did the judge issue anything in writing?

I helped one person here on this board who prevailed on this argument at trial. I believe the Judge articulated the CCP 98 issue in the decision. I will try to dig it up for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They sent it about 45 days before trial.

But the way that the bottom of their In Lieu of Trial will read is, " Pursuant to CCP 98, the affiant (Ramona Aragon) is available for process of service at Moore Law Group's office) Something to that effect. However, that is a completely defective procedure. They are to supply the Witness’s address in the document and the witness must be within 150 miles of the courthouse your case is at, so you can subpoena them to show up or serve them a notice to appear. You can't serve properly if Moore Law Group won't give you the affiant's address. So, the judge will throw it out on that alone. Anyway...you have 20 days before trial to serve the witness. Do it within a week. Give them 2 weeks to get their "witness" notice to show up. Of course, there will be no witness. When they don't show--ask for a dismissal based on a defective CCP 98 and refuse a continuance. They had plenty of time to produce their witness and prepare for their case.

Bulleted answer:

About 2 weeks before the trial. Send MLP Notice To Appear copies addressed to Ramona Aragon (or whoever your witness is) at trial. Address your mail to the witness C/O a lawyer at MLG. I sent mine to Angela Dawson. Send it certified mail.

Lastly, even if they did win, or produce a witness etc. ? It's not the end of the world to be sued. I'll explain more later about this, but I've just realized that. Some of us are getting pretty smart to how these banking systems/situations work. And there is no shame in this the massive default of debt we have encountered in this country. These junk debt collector's are scaring people with lawsuits, who then cave under the stress and lack of knowledge to the scheme that is being run. The defendent then caves and agrees to pay a settlemens he/she cannot afford. Yet the banks they are sued by? Have written off your debt, collected their losses (literally recieved a IRS tax break and a check from an insurance company for your defaullt), and then they are trying to sue again and for the full amount! Unbelievable. And we all are used to just going along with whatever these people say. Oh ..no...no, no, no. Things are changing. I believe in copying the tactics (and legally so) that the banks and their lawyers pull and doing it back to them. And I'm finding that it works--very well! 8]

Citibank (South Dakota). N.A.

Plaintiff,

vs.

(Your Name) Defendant )

)

)

) Case No.: (Your Case Number)

Notice To Citibank (South Dakota). N.A. witness Ramona Aragon, Litigation Analyst with Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. USA To Appear At Trial [Pursuant to C.C.P. Section 1987(B)]

TO PLAINTIFF CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA) N.A. AND TO ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD HEREIN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. witness, Ramona Aragon, Litigation Analyst with Citicorp Credit Services, Inc., USA, the servicing agent for Citibank (South Dakota) N.A. for delinquent credit card accounts; as per the witness’s Declaration In lieu Of Live Testimony At Trial; appear at the trial of the above-entitled matter on (Your Court Date), at (Your court time) a.m., in Department G of the above-entitled court located at (Courthouse address) (City), California, to testify as a witness in this action.

This request is made pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1987(B) which provides that the giving of this notice has the same effect as the service of a subpoena and, that, in the event of noncompliance with this notice, the parties shall have such rights, and the court may make such orders, including the imposition of sanctions, as in the case of a subpoena for attendance before the court.

Respectfully Submitted,

(Date Here)

_______________________

(Your Name)

Good Luck!!:)++

Edited by CaseDismissed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CaseDismissed .Do you have to ait until they send Declaration in lieu CCP98 to send them Notice to appear? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notice to Appear Pursuant to CCP Section 1987(B)

You may only send a notice to appear to "a person for whose immediate benefit an action or proceeding is prosecuted or defended or of anyone who is an officer, director, or managing agent of any such party." Most CCP 98 declarants won't qualify so you will have to have them served with a subpoena.

The OP received a declaration that did not have an address for service. So he or she did the only thing possible: send a notice to appear to the plaintiff's lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great posts! I have trial on 12/29 and need to file CCP-1987(B). Until these posts, I had no idea it existed!

Can someone please tell me how to file this? I can't find a form (California) and wonder if it's something I have to create myself.

Much appreciation for any assistance with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should serve a subpoena deuces tecum and ask for all sort of info about the person that has made a declaration in ccp98. usually they are not an officer or anyone of import at the company. Ask them for Photo ID, description of their job, their job title, what they do at their job, native copies of all the statements, receipts, bank notes regarding your case etc. You need the deuces tecum to do that. I can almost guarantee that person won't show up nor do they live near you, do they? They have to live within 150 miles of the court (or work). Usually they live in some other state.

Great posts! I have trial on 12/29 and need to file CCP-1987(B). Until these posts, I had no idea it existed!

Can someone please tell me how to file this? I can't find a form (California) and wonder if it's something I have to create myself.

Much appreciation for any assistance with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great posts! I have trial on 12/29 and need to file CCP-1987(B). Until these posts, I had no idea it existed!

Can someone please tell me how to file this? I can't find a form (California) and wonder if it's something I have to create myself.

Much appreciation for any assistance with this.

Read my post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a case with Citibank and sure enough Ramona Aragon showed up at the Trial and brought 1 year worth of statements. I was dead and lost the case, got a judgment of $14,000 and now Hunts is getting an Abstract to put a lean on my house :-( I am stuck now and dont know what to do anynmore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a ccp98 and subpoenaed the declarant, she left a Legal File & Service company address to serve her at within 150, since she is out of state! They accepted it for her yesterday! Then also yesterday, I get an answer to my ccp96 stating they're bringing a whole set of witnesses including "all" statements on account, which they never included in any discovery thus far BOP, supplemental answer to BOP, etc. and a "new" declaration with a "new" authorized representative to court, which they haven't provided. Seems like when they see you've trumped their first defense, they just come up with another and low and behold have come up with all the statements with debits and credits. Which prior, only submitted 6 statements from OC with only bal and 1 pymt on each statement.

Trial is in 5 days. I don't know what to do at this point!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I received a ccp98 and subpoenaed the declarant, she left a Legal File & Service company address to serve her at within 150, since she is out of state! They accepted it for her yesterday! Then also yesterday, I get an answer to my ccp96 stating they're bringing a whole set of witnesses including "all" statements on account, which they never included in any discovery thus far BOP, supplemental answer to BOP, etc. and a "new" declaration with a "new" authorized representative to court, which they haven't provided. Seems like when they see you've trumped their first defense, they just come up with another and low and behold have come up with all the statements with debits and credits. Which prior, only submitted 6 statements from OC with only bal and 1 pymt on each statement.

Trial is in 5 days. I don't know what to do at this point!

THis quote is from CCP 96:

You are requested to serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a

statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A

PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial; a

description of physical evidence you intend to offer; and a

description and copies of documentary evidence you intend to offer

or, if the documents are not available to you, a description of them.

So if they didn't attach the documents, they should not be able to use them at trial. How could they not available in response to a BOP and supplemental BOP and indeed not even available 5 days before trial but suddenly available on the day of trial? That is called sandbagging.

The statute goes on to say:

YOU WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO CALL ANY WITNESS, OR

INTRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE, NOT INCLUDED IN THE STATEMENT SERVED IN

RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW.

You might want to do a motion in limine to preclude any document not served together with the CCP 96 response or the supplemental BOP.

As far as the witness is concerned, that falls into the "nice try" category. From a previous post, I understand that they are disclosing an additional CCP 98 witness. But you subpoenad the original CCP 98 declarant and THAT person should show up at trial. They are too late to submit another CCP 98 affidavit. Under the statute, the affidavit must be served upon you 30 days before trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whew! So glad to hear from you today CALAWYER!!!

I appreciate your comment! It's starting to realize it's all a bluff. Momamia contacted me and said they (not sure what JDB) also claimed they'd bring 4 witnesses and didn't bring one. But of course be prepared to object, object, object!

THis quote is from CCP 96:

You are requested to serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a

statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A

PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial; a

description of physical evidence you intend to offer; and a

description and copies of documentary evidence you intend to offer

or, if the documents are not available to you, a description of them.

So if they didn't attach the documents, they should not be able to use them at trial. How could they not available in response to a BOP and supplemental BOP and indeed not even available 5 days before trial but suddenly available on the day of trial? That is called sandbagging.

The statute goes on to say:

YOU WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO CALL ANY WITNESS, OR

INTRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE, NOT INCLUDED IN THE STATEMENT SERVED IN

RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW.

You might want to do a motion in limine to preclude any document not served together with the CCP 96 response or the supplemental BOP.

As far as the witness is concerned, that falls into the "nice try" category. From a previous post, I understand that they are disclosing an additional CCP 98 witness. But you subpoenad the original CCP 98 declarant and THAT person should show up at trial. They are too late to submit another CCP 98 affidavit. Under the statute, the affidavit must be served upon you 30 days before trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.