Jump to content

Need help with midland


TXguy7
 Share

Recommended Posts

1. Who is suing you? Midland assignee of BoA

2. For how much? 5000

3. Who is the original creditor? BoA

4. How do you know you are being sued? found a packet duct taped to my door

5. How were you served? Were you served? see above

6. What was your correspondence with the people suing you before you think you were being sued? sent a notice of new ownerhsip and prelegal review

7. Where do you live? tx

8. When is the last time you paid on this account? 05/2008

9. What is the status of your case ? coudn't find this info online

10. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?) No

11. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? If not, don't bother doing this now. No

12. Does your summons require a response in writing? Did you receive an interrogatory (questionnaire) regarding the lawsuit? It requests for admissions

13. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affadavit? A statement from the OC? Anything else they attached as exhibits? the above mentioned notice of new ownership and a single statement from them

14. What is the SOL on the debt? To find out: I believe its 4 yrs in TX

-------------------------------------------------

The packet's first page is a motion for substitute service, followed by a Justice Court Citation from June. The third page says "Plaintiffs Original Petition" and requests discovery be conducted at level 1(TRCP 190.2)......?

Here is what they are requesting:

1. Admit defendant entered an agreement whereby the Plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor extended credit to defendant on the account.

2. Admit defendant, or another with permission of the defendant, accepted the credit extended for the purchase of goods, wares, merchandise services, or for cash advances.

3. Admit the prices charged for the goods, wares... referred to in request 2 were the prices agreed to by defendant, or another with permission of defendant.

4. Admit defendant received periodic account statements summarizing the accounts billing

5. Admit defendant promised to pay plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

6. Admit defendant made payments to plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

7. Admit the is an unpaid balance on the account due and owing from the defendant to plaintiff

8. admit the balance due and owing o plaintiff from defendant on the account, after all offsets, payments, claims, and credits is at least $xxxxxx

9. admit that more than thirty days ago, plaintiff presented to defendant a demand for payment of the outstanding balance stated in request 8

10. Admit defendant has failed to pay the balance due plaintiff on the account

11. admit that due to defendants nonpayment of the account, plaintiff has obtained the lawfirm representing plaintiff herein to file suit on the account

12. admit the debt, the subject of this suit, is just, due, and unpaid.

13. Admit defendant has no documents which support any defense in this case.

Request for production 1

If your response to No. 14 is anything other than admit, produce all documents which support your defense.

14. Admit defendant has no offset, credit, or claim against plaintiff

15. Admit defendant consents to this court's jurisdiction

16. Admit plaintiff's predecessors conveyed, transferred, assigned rights to the account to plaintiff.

then a request for diclosure and "Exhibit A"

I've been reading these forums for hours and hours now, and am not quite sure what to do. any help is greatly appreciated. Also, i dont know if it could help or not, but i know this has been through several collectors before Midland and on the citation there was no info filled out in the "Officers Return" section.

If any more info would be helpful please let me know.

Edited by TXguy7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

would it possible to simply answer with a blanket statement saying something like "defendant denies all admissions due to lack of evidence regarding the plaintiffs ownership of the account, and calculations used to determine amount owned."

again, any help would be great. thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this thread. It is basically the same as what you have. It's the usual garbage discovery from a JDB. They can't prove their case or their standing so they want you to do it for them.

Also I added a bunch of discovery you can ask them and another poster posted an additional link to more good discovery.

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/there-lawyer-house/309798-replying-request-admissions.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, i bookmarked that page for when i get home. i do have one more quick question though. I originally went to the court a few days ago (didn't file anything) and the clerk gave me a single page from with about 10 lines for a response. is it necessary to use that form or am i supposed to just write "see attached" and staple my typed up stuff to it? a bit on the logistical side, but the ocd in me needs to know, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can probablyjust type it up yourself and don't have to use that form. However, your going to have to look up the rules of procedure. They are different in all states and sometimes courts have their own rules different from the state rules.

Sounds like they gave you something they would all people without an attorney so the person would at least have something to go with and stand some chance at not getting a default.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, i bookmarked that page for when i get home. i do have one more quick question though. I originally went to the court a few days ago (didn't file anything) and the clerk gave me a single page from with about 10 lines for a response. is it necessary to use that form or am i supposed to just write "see attached" and staple my typed up stuff to it? a bit on the logistical side, but the ocd in me needs to know, lol.

While many posters have GREAT intentions when advising Newbies...Please be advised if you do not know what you are doing...It is in your best interest to keep things simple.

Coltfan1972 is presenting an approach to handling your case which will most certainly create a hostile forum for prosecuting your case.

You are already embroiled in an adversarial battle for which you have no experience...

There is absolutely zero benefit in antagonizing the Plaintiff when you will need all of the time that you can possibly get in order to study and comprehend what is happening if you have any hope of prevailing.

Please review and contrast the strategy being offered by Coltfan1972 and those offered by Xcalibar and make a decision as to what is in your best interest...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coltfan1972 is presenting an approach to handling your case which will most certainly create a hostile forum for prosecuting your case.

That is 100% correct, and if for some reason there was any confusion or misunderstanding, I apoligize. I don't want to imply it is anything but hositle and cut throat.

I want and will win. I don't give a flip about working with the other side and I don't care what the other side thinks or feels about me or my approach.

The bottom line is I'm going to win. If the other side gets their feelings hurt or embarassed in court, that is simply icing on the cake.

I can and will and cash the checks my approach writes. Your mileage might vary.

There is absolutely zero benefit in antagonizing the Plaintiff.

Totally disagree with that. Serving notice, right from the start, your not the typical debtor, and you not only want to fight, but want a war, can have advantages.

Please review and contrast the strategy being offered by Coltfan1972 and those offered by Xcalibar and make a decision as to what is in your best interest.

Another statement I agree with 100%.

Either strategy, a different strategy, or a combo of different strategy, Good Luck! Always a good idea to research what will or might work best for you and your level of comfort.

Edited by Coltfan1972
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coltfan1972...I applaud your zeal and zest to win...

However, when a Newbie is seek instructive advice, better care should be given to what the requester should do with their current skill level as opposed to what anyone could or would do...That is the nature of advice...

Something that will be helpful and beneficial to the recipient of the advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. However, the newbie does not need to be given the false hope if they are nice, work with the other side, and not rock the boat, it will somehow work out for them.

That attorney for the other side will smile, act like they are helping, and then have no issue with tearing you a new one at the drop of a hat. In their defense, they represent their client and if doing their job will do whatever, as long as legal, to win.

I've seen way too many posters talk about working with the other side and then finding themselves with a stipulated judgement and totally lost on what just happended to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now for a third "two cents worth" opinion from another non lawyer who is going through this. You have to have a valid legal reason to fight these people, and it has to be presented in a way that a judge will accept. Valid means some reasonable principle of law that you can prove. Most people don't have one, and just want to stall the inevitable by playing lawyer. They file a bunch of incorrect pleadings, waste the court's time, and get hit with attorney's fees in addition to the credit card bill when they lose. A REAL defense requires intimate knowledge of laws that apply to your case as well as rules of procedure. This stuff takes a long time to learn; waiting until the day you get served with suit is not the proper time to start. There are ways to mount a defense, and you'll find them here. The main thing is to find out what the jdb has as admissible evidence. Look up their cases in the court you will be appearing in, and see how they do. If they win 99% of their cases, you're in trouble because that would indicate that judges are sympathetic to their theories. Usually it is account stated, which I consider to be the most prejudicial theory of litigation ever devised. You need to post their stated claims against you, and whatever that form was the clerk gave you. It could be anything, and nobody can advise you as to what to do with it unless we know what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to have a valid legal reason to fight these people, and it has to be presented in a way that a judge will accept..

Agree. If it is a JDB suing you, there are so many valid defenses, you just pick the top two or three to use. It must be presented by the rules of procedure. That will take care of a judge accepting.

Valid means some reasonable principle of law that you can prove.

Agree

Most people don't have one.

Disagree. They have one. They just don't use it or try to assert some affirmative defense without even understanding an affirmative defense is something YOU must prove. In other words, they shift the burden from the party suing them to themselves. Also they file defenses without even knowing what the defense means or the burden of proof required.

They file a bunch of incorrect pleadings, waste the court's time, and get hit with attorney's fees in addition to the credit card bill when they lose.

Agree for the most part. It usually ends with a summary judgement if the rules of procedure and wasting the courts time are involved. However, you can waste a ton of time and run up the other sides bills and never even come close risking it being deemed frivilous.

A REAL defense requires intimate knowledge of laws that apply to your case as well as rules of procedure.

Agree

This stuff takes a long time to learn.

Not so much if you just concentrate on your specific case only and don't try to learn everything. However, it is not overnight, but not a long time if you put your mind to it and have a win at all costs mentality. It all depends on how much work one wants to put into it and their desire to fight and not be taken advantage of.

.Waiting until the day you get served with suit is not the proper time to start.

True, unless you get completely blind sided by the suit. If there is a good chance a lawsuit is around the corner, start preparing before your served.

There are ways to mount a defense, and you'll find them here.

Agree with that 100%

.The main thing is to find out what the jdb has as admissible evidence.

The most important sentence in the whole post. This is where discovery comes into play. See above about rules of procedure.

Look up their cases in the court you will be appearing in, and see how they do.

The second most important sentence in the whole post.

If they win 99% of their cases, you're in trouble because that would indicate that judges are sympathetic to their theories.

Disagree. If they are not winning 99% of their cases, the lawyer does not have a pulse. If your counting defaults and summary judgement, it should at least be 95%.

If you can find a case a JDB that went all the way with a trail where a legit defense was mounted, you will be finding the needle in the haystack.

I fought a JDB three years ago and I still go about once a month to the court website to check on the JDB and their lawsuits. To date, my case is still the only one that was not settled or dropped by the JDB. In three years since not even one went through a trail.

You will be luck to find cases that involve any detailed discovery.

Usually it is account stated, which I consider to be the most prejudicial theory of litigation ever devised.

Agree. However, an account stated asserted by a JDB is one of the easiest claims to beat. A JDB can't have an account stated. They were not part of the process that established the account stated. They did not originate the records, did not send you the statements, and can't assert an account stated.

Their also not a holder in due course. All those claims are claims for an original creditor, and for an original creditor work just about everytime.

If you use some of the requests for admissions in the linked thread, those easily give a JDB zero chance of winning on an account stated. They simply don't have first hand knowledge of the account and that is the vital key to an account stated argument.

You need to post their stated claims against you.

Agree, that would defiantley help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many come in bleeding, cut, run over by the vicous circumstances of the events leading up to the start of litigation.

So we all rush in too help, just like the ER teams. Just like the ER the simplest things are often the best. an arterial clamp is better than a torniquette. you see we rush to get an answer to the court because lets face it it takes a good long time to get here to CIC. That leaves only 15 to 5 days to answer.

So what we need the most is the CIC ER. We need based on best practices to come up with a standardized answer( I know everybody's case is different) but we don't want to come out with guns blazing. We have to have finess. The inclusion of fancy things that no first time pro per understands is really going to piss the judge off.

A more logical approach is the one that works here best. you can check cases on here the ones that win more consistently are the ones with less affirmative defenses but more relevant ones, with simpler denials but specific objections noted, and ones with the language that allows future amendment.

But if we press too hard in the beginning, They will move for summary judgment when the admissions are not answerred correctly, or the documents are not asked for specifically.

So to make it easier for new CIC members and to help the most we need to K. I. S. S. and make up emergency answer responses that can be made ready in 5 days or less.

We should also have elections for the NEW CIC MEMBERS ER Staff. It is ok to press Plaintiff's stress and budget up. but we are necessarily just staunching the bleeding enough to get them into the operating room. Pleadings can be amended so let's work together to make something that works all the time everytime to prevent default.

also some new members may want to deliver a big blow in the beggining and make it all go away quickly, but that is not possible. Glaciers move faster than the courts so we have to get it started.

Lets work on that, the safe thorough answer that makes AMENDMENT possible.

I know that some FDCPA claims have to be pled early on, but we can work on it. Also we need more consistent mentoring of new people. They are afraid they will lose everything. They may have a fear of going to court because of other issues beyond the scope of this post. It all relates back to the post I had about picking areas for us to concentrate in.

I am in it to win it also so we can go for a medium approach that makes it more flexible for the newbies to decide later how tough they want to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coltfan1972

Xcalibur

LegalEagle

MarvinArizona

CALawyer(who has been doing the ER staff for a loooong time so Attending DR.)

Myself( I know you cant nominate your self but I am going to help regardless)

Linda7

and any posters who are in the new persons state for the procedural deadlines

To prevent over burdening of the new complaint posters thread any disagreements about issues and such will respectfully (and keeping with the ER tradition will be kept to a new thread for the hashing out of differences.) We don't want to overwhelm new people with a food fight on their first week.

And to make sure that each new poster gets focused addressing of the problem we should just ask every new member to make their own thread and not jump into a thread in progress.

Just my recommendation I think it will work very nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so i know its been a little while but i just haven't had time to sit down and do this for a couple of days. After reading all the posts i will post their claims (or at least what i think your referring to) and begin working on responses that should best suit my case. i'll post those as soon as i can.

I. plaintiff midland assignee of BoA requests discovery be conducted at Level1 (TRCP 190.2). In the usual course of business, Midland assignee of BoA and/or it predecessor extended credit to ME for the purchase of goods, wares, merchandise, services or for cash advances ME or one duly authorized accepted, use4d, and derived from the credit account. "Exhibit A" represents the evidence of the balance due as liquidated damages resulting from ME use of the credit account

II. ME failure to honor payment obligations created a balance due and owing to Midland assignee BoA as shown in "Exhibit A." Despite Midland assignee of BoA timely demand for payment, payment has not been forthcoming. All conditions precedent have been performed.

III. The breach of ME led Midland assignee of BoA to employ the undersigned law firm to file suit, necessitating a reasonable fee for attorney services.

Prayer: Plaintiff midland assignees of BoA prays judgement against defendant ME be granted for $XXXX, plus reasonable attorneys fees, cousts of court, post judgement interest rate allowable by law, and such other and further relief, legal or equitable as the Court deems appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

heres what I have so far. I'm trying to keep it (relatively) and to the point while just denying and pointing out what they don't have where i can.

1. Admit defendant entered an agreement whereby the Plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor extended credit to defendant on the account.

Deny. Defendant at this time does not have sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

2. Admit defendant, or another with permission of the defendant, accepted the credit extended for the purchase of goods, wares, merchandise services, or for cash advances.

Deny. Defendant at this time does not have sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation contained therein, and leaves the Plaintiff to provide proof. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

3. Admit the prices charged for the goods, wares... referred to in request 2 were the prices agreed to by defendant, or another with permission of defendant.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

4. Admit defendant received periodic account statements summarizing the accounts billing

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

5. Admit defendant promised to pay plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

6. Admit defendant made payments to plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

7. Admit the is an unpaid balance on the account due and owing from the defendant to plaintiff

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

8. Admit the balance due and owing to plaintiff from defendant on the account, after all offsets, payments, claims, and credits is at least $xxxxxx

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

9. Admit that more than thirty days ago, plaintiff presented to defendant a demand for payment of the outstanding balance stated in request 8

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

10. Admit defendant has failed to pay the balance due plaintiff on the account

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

11. Admit that due to defendants nonpayment of the account, plaintiff has obtained the lawfirm representing plaintiff herein to file suit on the account

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

12. Admit the debt, the subject of this suit, is just, due, and unpaid.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

13. Admit defendant has no documents which support any defense in this case.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

Request for production 1

If your response to No. 14 is anything other than admit, produce all documents which support your defense.

14. Admit defendant has no offset, credit, or claim against plaintiff

Admit or should this be Objection: Request calls for a legal conclusion and Defendant is not a lawyer.

15. Admit defendant consents to this court's jurisdiction

Admit or should this be Objection: Request calls for a legal conclusion and Defendant is not a lawyer.

16. Admit plaintiff's predecessors conveyed, transferred, assigned rights to the account to plaintiff.

After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of this request and therefore DENIES the same.

Affirmative Defenses

1.Admit that Plaintiff is not the original creditor of the alleged debt which is the subject of this lawsuit.

2.Admit that Plaintiff is not an affiliate or subsidiary of BoA

3.Admit that Plaintiff does not have an application for an extension of credit from the Defendant.

4.Admit the Plaintiff's have no signed contract from the Defendant obligating the Defendant to the Plaintiff

5.Admit that Plaintiff is not in possession of a Bill of Sale from BoA to Midland

6.Admit that Plaintiff cannot prove that Midland purchased the alleged account which is the subject of this lawsuit from BoA

7.Admit affiant has no first hand knowledge to the business records creation of BoA

8.Admit affiant is not an employee of BoA

9.Admit affiant has never been employed by BoA.

Would defenses 5 & 6 be correct if one knew of previous JDB's who owned the account or at least tried to collect on it? I'm also not really sure about responses to 14 or 15; should I go with objection based on legal conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something stands right out when I read this....what is their cause of action? There should be something akin to account stated or breach of contract, I don't see it. Here, anyway, complaints have to state a "valid cause of action" upon which relief can be granted. It seems that they should at least say that you entered into an agreement with them, but they did not. This thing is too vague the way they wrote it; it could be interpreted as sounding in account stated, breach of contract, or anything else they can dredge up. If they gave this to me, I would do a Request to Revise and demand that they be more specific. Until that happens, answering discovery requests is rather difficult, since you don't know what they are angling for. Personally, I do not like your answers to discovery, they are too cut and paste and do not attack the underlying deficiencies. Your special defenses as posted are not special defenses; they are Requests for Admissions. Special defenses usually accompany the answer to the complaint; you are a long way from doing that, since the complaint is so vague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something stands right out when I read this....what is their cause of action? There should be something akin to account stated or breach of contract, I don't see it. Here, anyway, complaints have to state a "valid cause of action" upon which relief can be granted. It seems that they should at least say that you entered into an agreement with them, but they did not. This thing is too vague the way they wrote it; it could be interpreted as sounding in account stated, breach of contract, or anything else they can dredge up. If they gave this to me, I would do a Request to Revise and demand that they be more specific. Until that happens, answering discovery requests is rather difficult, since you don't know what they are angling for. Personally, I do not like your answers to discovery, they are too cut and paste and do not attack the underlying deficiencies. Your special defenses as posted are not special defenses; they are Requests for Admissions. Special defenses usually accompany the answer to the complaint; you are a long way from doing that, since the complaint is so vague.

can you give me an example of what you might say in response or how i would submit a request to revise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/rules/trcp/rcp_all.pdf

Took a quick look at your rules, they appear not to have what I was looking for. It seems to be incorporated in the answer. Rules 45 and 47 seem to define what the complaint should have in it. 68 shows that the court can order pleadings to be done over, 83-85 cover the answer. Maybe somebody from Texas can be of more help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i took a look, but it wasn't too clear to me what was being said or what exactly it meant. however, i did find Rules 90 -94 more interesting and potentially useful.

91. Special Exceptions

92. General Denial

93. Certain Pleas to be Verified

94. Affirmative Defenses

Edited by TXguy7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, i actually have to head to work in the next few minutes, so this will likely be my last post before i have to submit whatever i have to the court for answers in the morning (they only gave me 10 days and i didn't find CIC until about halfway through that already small amount of time). And since i doubt too many of you will be still awake by the time i get off work and home to review this again, any further help for is, again, greatly appreciated. and i will keep this thread updated as things happen. Thanks to everyone who has already helped and in advance for any further assistance!

Edited by TXguy7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the rest of the day and you have given enought info to get the "major Bulldozing" done.

I like the direction you went I will look at those statutes and check case law for how the courts are ruling on those.

Midland is out here in California so I don't think they will be able to come up with an affiant.

Rest assured I will post the answer and we can add to it.

Be safe at work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so i know its been a little while but i just haven't had time to sit down and do this for a couple of days. After reading all the posts i will post their claims (or at least what i think your referring to) and begin working on responses that should best suit my case. i'll post those as soon as i can.

I. plaintiff midland assignee of BoA requests discovery be conducted at Level1 (TRCP 190.2). In the usual course of business, Midland assignee of BoA and/or it predecessor extended credit to ME for the purchase of goods, wares, merchandise, services or for cash advances ME or one duly authorized accepted, use4d, and derived from the credit account. "Exhibit A" represents the evidence of the balance due as liquidated damages resulting from ME use of the credit account

II. ME failure to honor payment obligations created a balance due and owing to Midland assignee BoA as shown in "Exhibit A." Despite Midland assignee of BoA timely demand for payment, payment has not been forthcoming. All conditions precedent have been performed.

III. The breach of ME led Midland assignee of BoA to employ the undersigned law firm to file suit, necessitating a reasonable fee for attorney services.

Prayer: Plaintiff midland assignees of BoA prays judgement against defendant ME be granted for $XXXX, plus reasonable attorneys fees, cousts of court, post judgement interest rate allowable by law, and such other and further relief, legal or equitable as the Court deems appropriate.

The first one is open book account, The second is account stated

that is what we have to go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

heres what I have so far. I'm trying to keep it (relatively) and to the point while just denying and pointing out what they don't have where i can.

proof thereof.

3. Admit the prices charged for the goods, wares... referred to in request 2 were the prices agreed to by defendant, or another with permission of defendant.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

4. Admit defendant received periodic account statements summarizing the accounts billing

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

5. Admit defendant promised to pay plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

6. Admit defendant made payments to plaintiff or plaintiffs original assignor on the account.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

7. Admit the is an unpaid balance on the account due and owing from the defendant to plaintiff

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

8. Admit the balance due and owing to plaintiff from defendant on the account, after all offsets, payments, claims, and credits is at least $xxxxxx

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

9. Admit that more than thirty days ago, plaintiff presented to defendant a demand for payment of the outstanding balance stated in request 8

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

10. Admit defendant has failed to pay the balance due plaintiff on the account

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

11. Admit that due to defendants nonpayment of the account, plaintiff has obtained the lawfirm representing plaintiff herein to file suit on the account

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

12. Admit the debt, the subject of this suit, is just, due, and unpaid.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

13. Admit defendant has no documents which support any defense in this case.

Deny. This request calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

Request for production 1

If your response to No. 14 is anything other than admit, produce all documents which support your defense.

14. Admit defendant has no offset, credit, or claim against plaintiff

Admit or should this be Objection: Request calls for a legal conclusion and Defendant is not a lawyer.

15. Admit defendant consents to this court's jurisdiction

Admit or should this be Objection: Request calls for a legal conclusion and Defendant is not a lawyer.

16. Admit plaintiff's predecessors conveyed, transferred, assigned rights to the account to plaintiff.

After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of this request and therefore DENIES the same.

Affirmative Defenses

1.Admit that Plaintiff is not the original creditor of the alleged debt which is the subject of this lawsuit.

2.Admit that Plaintiff is not an affiliate or subsidiary of BoA

3.Admit that Plaintiff does not have an application for an extension of credit from the Defendant.

4.Admit the Plaintiff's have no signed contract from the Defendant obligating the Defendant to the Plaintiff

5.Admit that Plaintiff is not in possession of a Bill of Sale from BoA to Midland

6.Admit that Plaintiff cannot prove that Midland purchased the alleged account which is the subject of this lawsuit from BoA

7.Admit affiant has no first hand knowledge to the business records creation of BoA

8.Admit affiant is not an employee of BoA

9.Admit affiant has never been employed by BoA.

Would defenses 5 & 6 be correct if one knew of previous JDB's who owned the account or at least tried to collect on it? I'm also not really sure about responses to 14 or 15; should I go with objection based on legal conclusion?

Notice is given that defendant answers the complaint of <plaintiff> and denies any and all claims unless expressly admitted herein and defendant further states the following:

1. Objection. Paragragh 1 calls for a legal conclusion as to the existence of a contract between the parties. The plaintiff's failed to attach the contract pled by the plaintiff. Without waving objection, defendant states: Defendant lacks information and belief in the truth of plaintiff's averments and therefore denies the claim in Paragraph 1. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

2. That one is good

14. Objection. paragraph 4 is vague and ambigous as stated, additionally It requests information protected by the Attorney Work Product priviledge. Pleading is ongoing. Defendant reserves the right to amend the answer to add claims, or offsets at any time. Defendant therefore denies paragraph 14 as stated and Request for Production 1 as stated.

15. Objection Paragraph 15 calls for a legal conclusion and defendant is not an attorney. Without waving objection, defendant states: Defendant lacks information and belief in the truth of plaintiff's averments and therefore denies the claim in Paragraph 15. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

16. Objection Paragraph 16 calls for a legal conclusion and defendant is not an attorney. Without waving objection, defendant states: Defendant lacks information and belief in the truth of plaintiff's averments and therefore denies the claim in Paragraph 16. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

As and for a First Defense

Plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff's Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the Defendant for which relief can be granted.

As and for a Second Defense

Plaintiff admits to purchasing the defaulted debt allegedly owned by the Defendant, causing Plaintiff's injury to its own self, therefore Plaintiff is barred from seeking relief for damages.

As and for a Third Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint violates the statute of Frauds as the purported contract or agreement falls within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing. the purported contract or agreement alleged in the Complaint is not in writing and signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

As and for a Fourth Defense

Defendant claims a Failure of Consideration, as there has never been any exchange of any money or item of value between the plaintiff and the Defendant.

As and for a Fifth Defense

Defendant claims Lack of Privity as Defendant has never entered into any contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff.

As and for an Sixth Defense

Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege a valid assignment and there are no averments as to the nature of the purported assignment or evidence of valuable consideration.

As and for a Seventh Defense

Plaintiff's complaint fails to allege whether or not the purported assignment was partial or complete and there is no evidence that the purported assignment was bona fide.

As and for a Eighth Defense

Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege that the Assignor even has knowledge of this action or that the Assignor has conveyed all rights and control to the Plaintiff. The record does not disclose this information and it cannot be assumed without creating an unfair prejudice against the Defendant.

As and for an Ninth Defense

The Plaintiff is not an Assignee for the purported agreement and no evidence appears in the record to support any related assumptions.

As and for a Tenth Defense

Defendant claims Accord and Satisfaction as Defendant alleges that the original creditor accepted payment from a third party for the alleged debt, or a portion of the alleged debt, or that the original creditor received other compensation in the form of monies and/or credits.

As and for an Eleventh Defense

Defendant invokes the Doctrine of Unclean Hands as the Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff or the person or entity that assigned the alleged claim to Plaintiff acted in a dishonest or fraudulent manner with respect to the dispute at issue in this case.

As and for an Twelveth Defense

Defendant invokes the Doctrine of Laches as the Plaintiff or the person or entity that assigned the claim to the Plaintiff waited too long to file this lawsuit, making if difficult or impossible for the Defendant to find witnesses or evidence or that evidence necessary to provide for Defendant's defense has been lost or destroyed.

As and for a Thirteenth Defense

Plaintiff's alleged damages are the result of acts or omissions committed by non-parties to this action over whom the Defendant has no responsibility or control.

As and for a Fourteenth Defense

Defendant reserves the right to amend and/or add additional Answers, Defenses and/or Counterclaims at a later date.

Wherefore the Defendant prays that plaintiff takes nothing, for costs of suit,

and any and all relief the court deems proper

Edited by Seadragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.