Intention to introduce business records - NEED TO STOP IT

[osmonxp]

Last week I received a package containing 100s of credit card statements from previous years alone with a “Notice of plaintiff’s intention to introduce business records” is there a way to stop all those statements to be presented as evidence? From my point of view, those mean nothing I have specifically requested a copy of the contract with my signature on it but so far nothing has been produce. Any advice you can provide me with will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

[fightemdontfold]

I briefly read a few of your intital posts, this is suit that is centering around their claim that they sent you a check that they shouldn't have and that you claim you never recieved, is that correct??

Not sure how that would apply to credit card statements, did I miss something from your initial posts??

The fact that they sent you mountains of credit card statements is probably not in your favor, often JDB's (again not sure of what you are in a dispute over) have little to nothing to provide.

From what several posters on here have written, if it is a credit card, they evidently don't have to produce a signed contract. I think the creeps often can get by with a last statement as proof if they can provide that, but it must be an original, not just a photocopy.

The fact that they have produced 100's of statements, that is probably not good. Is it an original creditor suing and not the JDB.

[osmonxp]

Yes it is the OC suing and if I understand correctly you are saying that I have no choice but to allow all those statements to become part of the evidence against me?

[fightemdontfold]

No I am not saying you cannot try to dispute their validity or relevance, can't really say that without seeing them and I would not want to be the one to make the call, I will leave that to the more experianced folks on here....lol

But I can tell you through my research that beating an OC is definatly tougher than a junk debt buyer as the OC usually has the proof they need readily available to them. I think they have displayed this by sending you all the stuff they sent, but that doesn't mean your sunk necessarily.

The judge is who will decide whether it will be admitted or not, you can attempt to strike anything they bring as evidence.

[skippy1960]

First try to find Rules of Evidence for your state. Business records are only as good as the affiant that needs to testify, generally from personal knowledge of how the records were kept, handle, mailed etc.

A stack of statements are worthless to an attorney, until there is an affidavit that goes with them. Although these have a real shock value when you recieve them.

If I were you I wouldn't rush on any motions to strike until I had an affidavit that goes with these.

[osmonxp]

alone with the statements there is a piece of paper titled Busines record certification, it starts with something like:

I, name, do herby certify that: I am the custodian of records oa am otherwise qualified to administer the records for BANK NAME.

Is this the affidavit? if so, can try to strike it?

[cjb3]

seems to me that you need to attack.

first, go thru each statement paying attention to -

1- completeness....are there any months missing?

2- do they go back all the way to the very first statement?

if the yes to 1 or both, then attack as you cant verify that interest was calculated properly as statements are missing.

second, do what you can to verify that the "custodian" is actually an employee of the bank....NOT AN AGENT....i.e, an employee of a CA vs the OC.

third, supeona the "custodian" for trial.

atty's regularly use non-bank employees signing an official looking notorized document.

[BV80]

If the certification is from the OC, it will be difficult to have it stricken.

[cjb3]

I, name, do herby certify that: I am the custodian of records oa am otherwise qualified to administer the records for BANK NAME.

sounds like they are NOT a bank employee.

is it on bank letterhead?

what "qualifies" them......probably just them looking at the same statements you have or a computer screen.

sounds fishy to me.

[cjb3]

If the certification is from the OC, it will be difficult to have it stricken.

yep

the nail in the coffin is if the custodian -

1- is a bank employee, and

2- shows up to testify in person.

if either of these is NOT met, it should be possible to strike.....but no guarantees.

[osmonxp]

sounds like they are NOT a bank employee.

is it on bank letterhead?

what "qualifies" them......probably just them looking at the same statements you have or a computer screen.

sounds fishy to me.

It is not on bank letterhead, it is plain paper and the name of the custodian cannot be read.

[skippy1960]

Try this link for your civil procedures, evidence and the like-

http://michie.lexisnexis.com/maryland/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp

Rule 5-603. Oath or affirmation.

Before testifying, a witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully. The declaration shall be by oath or affirmation administered either in the form specified by Rule 1-303 or, in special circumstances, in some other form of oath or affirmation calculated to impress upon the witness the duty to tell the truth.

Rule 1-303. Form of oath.

Except as provided in Rule 16-819 (d)(3), whenever an oral oath is required by rule or law, the person making oath shall solemnly swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury that the responses given and statements made will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth. A written oath shall be in a form provided in Rule 1-304.

Rule 1-304. Form of affidavit.

The statement of the affiant may be made before an officer authorized to administer an oath or affirmation, who shall certify in writing to having administered the oath or taken the affirmation, or may be made by signing the statement in one of the following forms:

Generally. "I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury that the contents of the foregoing paper are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief."

Personal Knowledge. "I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury and upon personal knowledge that the contents of the foregoing paper are true."

As you can see the document you have needs to meet this criteria in order to authenticate the statements and make them evidence versus a stack of copies of statements.

There is more that is why you need to dig into your civil procedures.....