Jump to content

I may not rely on Plaintiff's proof? Are they nuts?

Recommended Posts

I recently went to my first court date against New Century Financial Services (Pressler and Pressler) where they were trying to settle the debt with me. (Debt is for HSBC Credit card in the amount of $1475). To date, I have not received any copy of the contract nor statements. All they sent with discovery was a "Bill of Sale" which was just a xeroxed piece of paper.

Anyway, this weekend, I get the following in the mail:

My office is in receipt of your certified responses to Plaintiff's Interrogatories dated blah blah blah. However, your responses to interrogatories #1 and #2 are non-responsive. Please provide a responsive answer.

Your response to interrogatory number 1 is non-responsive as it does not provide all of the information that is soughtin the question. Please state your defenses and the facts and details which support same. Please be advised that you must provide a responsive answer to Plaintiff's interrogatory. Please be advised you may not rely on Plaintiff's proof or provisions of documents to establish your defense. (Okay, here is where I almost lose it because they basically want me to prove their case for them??? I may not rely on their proof? They havent even provided me with any proof!! That is the whole reason why I continue to deny and answer them with: Defendant objects to Plaintiffs request for documents on the grounds that it is burdensome seeing it is requesting documents in regards to the contract sued upon, where no contract as of yet has been identified by the Plaintiff or their attorneys. The Defendant has nothing in his posession to provide"

How admissable is this in court? I thought the whole process demands that the Plaintiff prove their case? Shouldn't they provide me with more proof than an account#, and a xeroxed piece of paper that says "bill of sale on it"?? What am i supposed to provide in terms of my "defense" when I havent even seen what I am supposed to defend myself against??

How do I answer? I am seriously thinking of filing a motion to dismiss. Do you think the judge is going to favor them? I requested documents to be produced and none have been produced thus far. What are they trying to do? What should be my next step? Trial date is supposed to be April 5th.

Help please!

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would tell them that you have no recollection of this debt and until they provide you with proof that you owe it and proof that the amount is correct and proof that they even have a right to collect on it, that you have no knowledge of this debt. Turn it around on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would answer with an objection to the #1. I would Object saying the intter. asks for legal strategy that is not yet developed because discovery is not yet complete.

They are trying to get you to admit to the debt because you are Pro Se. They would never try that crap with an attorney.

I would also start working on my discovery package for them. Ask them most of the same questions they asked you and see how they respond. Like asking for the contract they are suing on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I have sent Affirmative defenses, my interrogatories (which they also answered vaguely and even said that they were "duely burdensome") and request for documents all when I sent in my answer. I dont know much about the law in NJ but I was wondering if I could file a motion to dismiss at this point? Or is "discovery still ongoing"?? They have also asked the court to adjourn the court date from April 5th to a later date stating: "Plaintiff is entitled to 90 days of discovery commencing with service of the defendants answer. My office was served with the answer on Jan 24,2011 and I therefore calculate the discovery end date to be April 24, 2011."

Even if they submitted this request, can I file for a motion to dismiss based on "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted? In addition, I would add: To compel the plaintiff to show standing to sue in accordance with the rules of court and rules of evidence. Defendant challenges the standing of the plaintiff to sue and demands prior to the furtherance of any litigation, plaintiff to be compelled to show a) the actual contract of assignment of the alleged debt supported by affidavit on first hand knowledge of the original creditor. B) the subject defaulted contract supported by affidavit baed on first hand knowledge of the original creditor (see Weisbound v Schultz 2 NJ.MISC.1132,1134 (Sup. Ct. 1940) and C) a copy of the original creditors last billing statement defined by 15 U.S.C 1637(B) supported by affidavit based on first hand knowledge of the original creditor.

Would the judge dismiss based on the above?

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.