Jump to content

Plaintiff's request for production of documents and things


Recommended Posts

I am being sued by 3rd party JDB I am preparing my own answers to the Plaintiff's Request for Admissions (Denying all of them). I am currently reviewing the INTERROGATORIES and Request for Production of Documents and Things. Below are examples of the questions.

INTERROGATORIES.

15. Give your complete marital history. Identify each spouse and former spouses by current name. maiden name, current address and phone numbers. Include dates married an dates divorced.

Request for Production of Documents and Things.

10. copies of my last two paycheck stubs.

21. any and all lawsuit petitions, complaints and judgements against you or in favor of you.

25. any and all credit bureau reports, and documents concerning debts, whether current or past due, owed to any third party creditors.

I am new to this forum, and the information I have briefly reviewed is fantastic. I would hire a lawyer, but can not afford one right now.

My question is HOW DO I ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS without providing personal information to the plaintiffs, while still meeting the rules of discovery?....

Edited by Soccerman45
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could reply with "Objection. Overbroad and not likely to lead to admissible evidence."

Just because they ask, does not mean you have to tell, you just need a solid legal reason not to. Discovery is limited to questions or production of admissible evidence OR something that is likely to lead to admissible evidence. You can easily argue that none of these are likely to lead to admissible evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not necessarily irrelevant, Texas is a community property state. You will have to read the rules for Texas to determine under what circumstances a spouse can be held liable for the other spouse's debts. That's what they're fishing for. Post ALL the requests here exactly as written. Don't make typos, one word changes the meaning entirely. Also read the Texas rules of civil procedure concerning discovery. Most likely, the advice you got from the other members is correct. Just be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also these types of questions are highly irrelavant to the case at this stage and I would object on that basis as well.

This

Not necessarly irrelavant, but at this time they are fishing. However, Legaleagle is also correct about what they are fishing for.

No matter what, the one question about the pay check stub is a no brainer objection, in my opinion, at this stage in the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For number 10, I would respond with:

Objection. Plaintiff requests personal and private information that is irrelevant and unlikely to lead to admissible evidence.

Here is why personal and private information is NOT a legal argument for why you should not have to answer particular discovery questions. This is a transcript of an actual deposition of a collection employee, some of the questions are VERY personal.

http://www.philipstern.com/files/2011.01.13.Galic_Deposition_Transcript.REDACTED.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS

Pursuant to Rules 193 and 198 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant responds as follows to the Request for Admissions filed by plaintiff:

1. Admit that the account # XXXX correctly states the balance due to plaintiff after all offsets, payments, claims, and credits have been allowed to Defendant.

2. Admit that payment of the account # XXXX is past due and owing

3. Admit that the account is just and true.

4. Admit that Defendant has made payments in the past on account # XXXX

5. Admit that Defendant made purchases and received goods and /or services set forth on the Account.

6. Admit that all the prices charged on the Account were agreed to by Defendant

7. Admit that the debts incurred on the account # 5187 4811 0901 XXXX were for necessaries

8. Admit that Defendant made promises to pay the Account balance on Account # XXX

9. Admit that the Defendant failed to pay the account # XXXX in full.

10. Admit that Defendant knew that Defendant did not have the ability to pay for the purchases at the time Defendant purchased the goods and/or services at issue in this cause.

11. Admit that plaintiff is entitled to pre- and post- judgment interest, court costs and attorney’s fees from Defendant as alleged in Plaintiff’s most recently filed Petition.

12. Admit that Plaintiff through its attorney, made written demand upon defendant for payment of the account XXXX more than 30 days prior to filing suit.

13. Admit that Defendant has received invoices or statement on the Account # XXXX

14. Admit that defendant did not reply to written demands for payment for payment of the Account # XXXX

15. Admit that the facts alleged in plaintiff’s most recently filed petition are entirely true and is entitled to the requested relief Plaintiff

16. Admit that there are no documents which support any defense against plaintiff

17. Admit that Defendant has no offset, credit, or claim against Plaintiff.

18. Admit that based on facts known to you, the Court should render judgment against Defendant for relief requested in Plaintiff’s most recently filed Petition.

19. Admit that Defendant now owes Plaintiff’s balance of XXXX on the account# as alleged in Plaintiff’s most recently filed Petition.

20. Admit that Defendant made purchases and/or obtained cash advances by using a line of credit on account #XXXX

21. Admit that Plaintiff has notified Defendant that Chase Bank USA, NA assigned the account # XXXX to plaintiff.

22. Admit that Defendant applied for a line of credit from Chase Bank USA, NA or its predecessor in interest

23. Admit that Defendant was issued a line of credit on account# XXX by Chase Bank USA, NA

24. Admit that the Defendant used the line of credit on account #5187 4811 0901 XXXX from Chase Bank USA, NA

25. Admit that you understood that having an Account meant you were approved for a line of credit upon which you could chose to borrow or not to borrow, subject to the terms and conditions of the Account.

26. Admit that you received a complete copy of the terms and conditions of the Account when you were approved to use the line of credit on the Account, and familiarized yourself with those terms and conditions prior to using the account.

27. Admit that you knew that interest would be charges on the Account if it was not paid in full by the due date on your statement of Account

28. Admit that you have applied for other credit cards that are familiar with the fact your other credit issuers charge interest on balances that are not paid in full by the due date on the statement.

29. Admit that Defendant do no presently have the ability to repay any of the charges on the Account.

30. Admit that all prices charged on the Account to Defendant are usual, reasonable, and customary prices.

31. Admit that jurisdiction and venue are proper in this case.

32. Admit that Defendant is aware of the law that Defendant has 60 days to dispute in writing any item on Defendant’s credit card statement or else the right to make such a dispute is waived.

33. Admit that the interest rate and interest charged were disclosed on each monthly statement that you or someone acting as your agent.

34. Admit that the debts incurred on the account # were incurred by you or someone acting as your agent.

35. Admit that Defendant did not dispute any item on any credit card statement of account XXXX within 60n days of receipt of such statement.

36. Admit that this debt represented by the Account is not dischargeable in bankruptcy under the facts in this case.

37. Admit that Defendant allowed others to use the credit card account #

38. Admit that the Defendant is past due on payments to Defendant’s other creditor besides Plaintiff.

39. Admit that the Default interest rate on Defendant’s Account is 6% per year and that is the rate that should be used to calculate prejudgment interest and post judgment interest.

40. Admit that the Defendant is currently insolvent

41. Admit that Defendant would like to be contacted by Plaintiff to work out a settlement on this account.

42. Admit that you were aware of the terms and conditions of the Account when you applied for the Account or accepted the invitation to open an Account.

43. Admit that the charges made on the Account were not for luxuries

44. Admit that Defendant did not have the ability to repay any of the charges that /defendant made on the Account at the time Defendant made such charges.

45. Admit that each use of the credit card by Defendant was a representation of Defendant’s ability to repay the charges on the Account.

46. Admit that you knew late fees would be charged if you did not pay by the due date on your statement of Account.

47. Admit that an over-limit fee would be charged to you if you exceeded the line of credit granted to you on the Account.

48. Admit that Defendant knew Defendant did not have the ability to pay such charges on the account as and when payment on the charges became due.

ANY IDEAS ON HOW TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE WOULD BE HELPFUL. I PLAN TO DENY ALL THAT REQUIRE A DENIAL. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE SOME TRICKY ?'s.

Edited by Soccerman45
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually it is a matter of context where it is asked. The question concerning marital history and other questions does not lead to anything that is related to determining the validitity of a decision in the case. Those are appropriate in the damages phase or in post judgement proceedings. Community property has nothing to do with the facts and merits in a case over a debt.

The personal questions in a deposition goes directly to the veracity and character of the witnesses and is proper to formulate rebuttal of their testimony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Deny” with this explanation:

- I cannot affirm or deny this debt until validation has been made for this claim in the form of the original application with my signature. I cannot respond until this documentation has been submitted to me by the other party.

will this work in Texas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A signed application is not needed.

Denied, Defendant is without knowledge to admit or deny, so must deny.

or if you have denied in your answer to the suit: Objection, Defendant has already denied the alleged debt, therefore the request is not proper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Response to Requests for Admissions.

C. Content of response.

Unless the responding party states an objection or asserts a privilege,

the responding party must specifically admit or deny the request or explain in detail the reasons that the responding party cannot admit or deny the request. A response must fairly meet the substance of the request. The responding party may qualify an answer, or deny a request in part, only when good faith requires. Lack of information or knowledge is not a proper response unless the responding party states that a reasonable inquiry was made but that the information known or easily obtainable is insufficient to enable the responding party to admit or deny. An assertion that the request presents an issue for trial is not a proper response.

Would the previous "Denial" statement still work?

Edited by Soccerman45
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A signed application is not needed.

Denied, Defendant is without knowledge to admit or deny, so must deny.

or if you have denied in your answer to the suit: Objection, Defendant has already denied the alleged debt, therefore the request is not proper.

I find this interesting, it goes toward foundation and the way these banks rely upon federal law when they sue you. However, they don't seem to care much for it when you use it as a defense.

Regulation Z Part 226 Truth in Lending, Subpart B—Open-End Credit, giving that agency plenary jurisdiction over issuance of credit cards, has impliedly pre-empted contrary or nonexistent state laws. The governing statute states in pertinent part:

§ 226.12 Special credit card provisions.

(a) Issuance of credit cards. Regardless of the purpose for which a credit card is to be used, including business, commercial, or agricultural use, no credit card shall be issued to any person except--

(1) In response to an oral or written request or application for the card or

(2) As a renewal of, or substitute for, an accepted credit card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is why personal and private information is NOT a legal argument for why you should not have to answer particular discovery questions. This is a transcript of an actual deposition of a collection employee, some of the questions are VERY personal.

http://www.philipstern.com/files/2011.01.13.Galic_Deposition_Transcript.REDACTED.pdf

I can understand certain personal questions such as if one has been convicted of a crime in the last few years. That can go to the credibility of the defendant. But the OP's last 2 pay stubs have nothing to do the lawsuit. All they prove is that he has a job. The stubs might show his address and social security #, but unless the OP has denied those facts, there's no information on them that would be relevant to the JDB's case.

In the admissions, they request, "Admit that Defendant knew that Defendant did not have the ability to pay for the purchases at the time Defendant purchased the goods and/or services at issue in this cause."

That has nothing to do with the cause of action. It doesn't matter if the Defendant made purchases with the card knowing he couldn't pay. It matters in BK but not in a JDB lawsuit.

I would never suggest refusing to respond to all requests of a personal nature, but in a JDB lawsuit, I can't see a reason for them to know whether or not the OP has a job or the amount of his salary.

BTW, the link you posted is great. I have it already and that attorney's documents are very informative.

Edited by BV80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this interesting, it goes toward foundation and the way these banks rely upon federal law when they sue you. However, they don't seem to care much for it when you use it as a defense.

Regulation Z Part 226 Truth in Lending, Subpart B—Open-End Credit, giving that agency plenary jurisdiction over issuance of credit cards, has impliedly pre-empted contrary or nonexistent state laws. The governing statute states in pertinent part:

§ 226.12 Special credit card provisions.

(a) Issuance of credit cards. Regardless of the purpose for which a credit card is to be used, including business, commercial, or agricultural use, no credit card shall be issued to any person except--

(1) In response to an oral or written request or application for the card or

(2) As a renewal of, or substitute for, an accepted credit card.

The problem with using that statute as a defense is the fact that one has used the card. Cardmember agreements state that the use of the card indicates the cardholder's acceptance of the terms and conditions. If you didnt request the card, why would you use it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Please identify each person who participated in preparing the responses to these interrogatories. See definition of “Identify” above.

2. Please identify all documents and tangible things, including all tangible reports, physical models, compilations of data and other material prepared by an expert or for an expert in anticipation of the expert’s trial or deposition testimony or prepared by or for an expert used for consultation in anticipation of litigation. See definition of Identity above.

3. Please identify any statement that you have obtained from any person (s) with knowledge of relevant facts. See definition of Identity above.

4. In preparing your answers to these interrogatories identify what documents to which you refer? Please identify who the document was sent to, who it was received from, the date it was created, the type of document (invoices, correspondence, etc.) and who has possession, custody or control of the documents now. Alternatively you may attaché a true and correct copy of each document to your response to these interrogatories.

5. Please identify every document containing any relevant facts to this litigation, as defined in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, and state the particular facts each such document contains.

6. Please state whether any document which contains relevant facts, as defined in Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, has been destroyed, altered or eliminated in whole or in part. If documents have been destroyed, altered, or eliminated, give a description of each document or identify each document.

7. Please describe in detail any kind of settlement, agreement, or understanding of any kind, reached with any other person (whether a party to this lawsuit or not) regarding the subject matter of this litigation.

8. Please state whether you intend to impeach requesting party, or any of its agents or representatives, directors, officers, employees, or any other persons acting or purporting to act on behalf of Requesting Party, with evidence of a criminal convictions, if any. If so, please describe such evidence by giving the name of the accused, the nature of the crime, and the date of the conviction.

9. Have you ever been arrested or convicted of a felony or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude? If so, when, where, and what was the nature of the offense?

10. . State the amount, if any, which defendant claims is owed by Defendant to Plaintiff and the calculation used to derive the amount.

11. State all business names, trade names, nicknames, and aliases ever used by or attributed to Defendant.

12. State specifically each and every reason why the Defendant claims does not owe the plaintiff on the Account as alleged.

13. If you claim another is liable or jointly liable on this Account, state the correct name, address, and phone number of the individual or entity, and all the facts supporting the reason for the other person’s liability.

14. State the amount and specific facts for every alleged credit, offset or claim that you claim is due to you by Plaintiff.

15. Give your complete marital history. Identify each spouse and former spouses by current name, maiden name, current address and phone number (s). Include date (s) married and date (s) divorced.

any suggestions on how to answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not necessarily irrelevant, Texas is a community property state. You will have to read the rules for Texas to determine under what circumstances a spouse can be held liable for the other spouse's debts. That's what they're fishing for. Post ALL the requests here exactly as written. Don't make typos, one word changes the meaning entirely. Also read the Texas rules of civil procedure concerning discovery. Most likely, the advice you got from the other members is correct. Just be sure.

Thanks for help. greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took the time to read the Admissions. Some of them are laughable. They have included these so if you do not respond, they can use them as evidence against you. That is the only purpose of them. A simple denial makes them moot. ie 18. Admit that based on facts known to you, the Court should render judgment against Defendant for relief requested in Plaintiff’s most recently filed Petition.

The key is to use a nuanced approach. Give them answers that will help or not harm you. Admit or deny the easy ones.

1,2,3,7,1,11,15,16,18,19,21,32 are ripe for a flat out denial. Some of the other one's you can object to for various reasons; not likely to lead to admissible evidence, calls for a legal conclusion, improper - goes to the core issue of the lawsuit, irrelevant.

So you can mix your answers up as though you have spent some time on them instead of using the same generic denial or objection.

BV80 - someone else posted a link to another document from that site. The site has a wealth of information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Deny” with this explanation:

- I cannot affirm or deny this debt until validation has been made for this claim in the form of the original application with my signature. I cannot respond until this documentation has been submitted to me by the other party.

will this work in Texas?

Validation has nothing to do with the case once it's in trial. Not a good answer, with all due respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with using that statute as a defense is the fact that one has used the card. Cardmember agreements state that the use of the card indicates the cardholder's acceptance of the terms and conditions. If you didnt request the card, why would you use it?

It isn't neccessarily a defense, but it can be used as part of a counterclaim. Some states have no laws concerning the issuance of credit cards. Therefore, federal law prevails per preemption. These card companies love to rely upon federal law when they come after you or when you use it to defend yourself, IE the NBA etc. However, when you ask them to state how THEY complied with the federal law they so love when they issued a credit card in violation of Regulation Z, they have no answer.

As you state, the carholder agreement states use and acceptance. The question is, under whose state law? What is the choice of law provision, or lex fori? My state has no such law. The only states that appear to have this law are the states in which these thieves incorporate; Delaware, Nevada, and most conspiculously, South Dakota.The NBA grants no authority for a lender to export the laws of their state. I want a Citibank employee to tell a jury why Citi moved to this hell hole. Was it for the stunning nightlife, which must have been better than that in Citi's former location of New York City? Did they move there for the mild forty below winters? I have an interview I downloaded with former Gov. Bill Janklow. The move was nothing more than political bribery. The interview is on line.

I think outside the box as any good lawyer would do. I look at things the way they were contemplated and acted upon, and the reasons therefore. This forms the basis for a good legal argument connected to unfair trade practices. Research the doctrine of evasion of law, and see what you find.

I got into this because the more research I did, the more I saw. These people are nothing more than common criminals who circumvent the law for their own advantage. You are bound by SD law when you get a Citi card? Says who? Did they explain SD law in the so called application or agreement you never got? NO. What if SD has mandatory prison time for failure to pay credit card debt? How would you know? Is this fair? Attack it from the point of any judge who would be bound to consider facts, as well as what the law says.

The lawyers who pursue these cases are largely overeducated idiots who have NO concept as to what law is about or how to litigate a case. I know, because I forced a major law firm into a settlement for the manner in which they ruined my case through inactivity. The sooner you learn this the better. All they know is "the statute says this, settle settle settle." No, I won't. Do something about it. 90 percent of all attorneys have never been to court, and don't want to. I have. And I will continue to do so. You need to fight for yourself, because in the end, you're the only one who will. I'm sure Coltfan, bless his heart, will agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately legaleagle, most of these questions have already been answered by the courts. It is well established that you can import laws from other states concerning contract law. There are usually limits based on if the foreign law is substantive or procedural. And usually you retain your own states consumer protections.

Thinking outside of the box in courts of law mean testing untried issues or claims. Or searching for judicial opinions in cases that are similar to yours although the case may not be connected to yours. IE finding a contract dispute that involved two businesses and using the opinion to apply to credit card debt.

Fighting against the windmills is not good advise. Most judges are not interested in rewriting established contract law. If you agreed to be bound by foreign state law, foreign state law applies. Use this to your advantage. An attorney of bar in your state is likely not familiar with the foreign law. Study and learn that law and use it against them in your case instead of arguing it does not apply. And then flip the script on them and apply your own states law when it comes to consumer protections and counterclaims watch their heads spin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NBA grants no authority for a lender to export the laws of their state.

Yes it does. Section 85:

"Any association may take, receive, reserve, and charge on any

loan or discount made, or upon any notes, bills of exchange, or

other evidences of debt, interest at the rate allowed by the laws

of the State, Territory, or District where the bank is located..."

GENERAL COUNSEL'S OPINION NO. 10; INTEREST CHARGES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT

FDIC Law, Regulations, Related Acts - General Counsel's Opinions

"Currently, section 85 authorizes national banks to charge their customers interest rates allowed by the laws of the state where the bank is located."

Don't get me wrong. I agree that cc companies are deceitful. But the law does allow them to charge their state's interest rates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cited the general counsel's opinion you mentioned in my case. You are correct in one way....the NBA allows National Banks to export their home state's interest rates. Not the REST of their crazy laws. My point about choice of law is this.....these banks claim that when you used their card, you agreed to the terms of an agreement THEY NEVER SENT YOU. I have them on record as stating in pleadings that they DO NOT execute cardholder agreements. How then are consumers agreeing to be bound by the laws of SD or any other state? This was argued in Citbank v. Wilson in Missouri. The judge affirmed the obvious, that yes, they can export their interest rates, but NOTHING ELSE. That's what they tried in this case....they claimed that use of the card constituted agreement to the terms just as if you had received the agreement. HUH? Are they serious? Where does it say this, the judge asked? In the agreement we never sent! The basis for their argument was a completely different SD statute concerning use and acceptance. The NBA is clear....interest rates only.

Lheart is correct, courts can and do regularly use foreign state laws in contract cases. But ONLY if the parties to the contract agreed to it. In these scam credit card deals, nobody gets a chance to agree to anything, because they don't send you a "contract." SD law is not explained in any generic cardholder agreement. What are you supposed to do, go to law school in some frozen wasteland for three years just to get a credit card? Why don't they tell you just what SD laws you are agreeing to? They don't tell you, because they don't want you to know.

They conveniently ignore the SD law that says interest is limited to 15% absent a written agreement. The SD Supreme Court affirmed this. This junk they mail people does not constitute a written agreement, in my opinion. That is, if they even bother to mail it, which I doubt. But fear not, they have another SD statute that says you agreed anyway, and yet another one that exempts THEM from all SD law as a national bank.

Here's a good one....ask them to prove you received this crazy agreement, any one of these banks. You know what they offer as proof? The post office didn't return it as undeliverable. That's it! That's not proof that they mailed it, and it isn't proof that you received it or agreed to it, assuming you can decipher three to five pages of legalese designed to protect them, not you. We here at the forum can, but can the average Joe figure this stuff out? They can't even figure out what do do when they get sued. I did the same thing to them......I made MY cardholder agreement. The post office didn't return it, and from the terms I put in it, they agreed to it. Let's see them wiggle out of that one. My BS is just as good as theirs.

I realize that judges don't often like deciding cases based on wild theories and new ideas with no support. Nobody wants to go first and be the first one to actually think about what the law says and act accordingly. I've seen judges who won't, and a few that will. A couple in particular sat right up when I advanced an interesting theory. Win some, lose some. All I can say is this....you have to try.

This credit card junk really bothers me. Who invented this account stated garbage? The creditors? Their lawyers? We can walk into court and just declare you owe us XXXX because you didn't dispute the bill? Yes I did, I refused to pay it! What more dispute do you need? They don't have to put up any evidence of any kind. Don't YOU try it, though. Tell them you paid in full, and that they should take your word for it just like you''re supposed to take theirs. Yeah, right. Show us the cancelled check, pal.

I'll fight this on the grounds I think are legally sound and morally right. I may lose, but it won't be for lack of trying. The vehemence with which they oppose me shows me I'm on to something they don't want on their record as a precedent. You think all these banks want people lining up by the millions suing them for all the illegal interest they charged? Not hardly. Consider this.....that judge hearing your case has a credit card in his pocket. Bet he'd like to see his interest rate cut in half and 31 years of interest rebated. Probably put them out of business, but who cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cited the general counsel's opinion you mentioned in my case. You are correct in one way....the NBA allows National Banks to export their home state's interest rates. Not the REST of their crazy laws. My point about choice of law is this.....these banks claim that when you used their card, you agreed to the terms of an agreement THEY NEVER SENT YOU. I have them on record as stating in pleadings that they DO NOT execute cardholder agreements. How then are consumers agreeing to be bound by the laws of SD or any other state? This was argued in Citbank v. Wilson in Missouri. The judge affirmed the obvious, that yes, they can export their interest rates, but NOTHING ELSE. That's what they tried in this case....they claimed that use of the card constituted agreement to the terms just as if you had received the agreement. HUH? Are they serious? Where does it say this, the judge asked? In the agreement we never sent! The basis for their argument was a completely different SD statute concerning use and acceptance. The NBA is clear....interest rates only.

Lheart is correct, courts can and do regularly use foreign state laws in contract cases. But ONLY if the parties to the contract agreed to it. In these scam credit card deals, nobody gets a chance to agree to anything, because they don't send you a "contract." SD law is not explained in any generic cardholder agreement. What are you supposed to do, go to law school in some frozen wasteland for three years just to get a credit card? Why don't they tell you just what SD laws you are agreeing to? They don't tell you, because they don't want you to know.

They conveniently ignore the SD law that says interest is limited to 15% absent a written agreement. The SD Supreme Court affirmed this. This junk they mail people does not constitute a written agreement, in my opinion. That is, if they even bother to mail it, which I doubt. But fear not, they have another SD statute that says you agreed anyway, and yet another one that exempts THEM from all SD law as a national bank.

Here's a good one....ask them to prove you received this crazy agreement, any one of these banks. You know what they offer as proof? The post office didn't return it as undeliverable. That's it! That's not proof that they mailed it, and it isn't proof that you received it or agreed to it, assuming you can decipher three to five pages of legalese designed to protect them, not you. We here at the forum can, but can the average Joe figure this stuff out? They can't even figure out what do do when they get sued. I did the same thing to them......I made MY cardholder agreement. The post office didn't return it, and from the terms I put in it, they agreed to it. Let's see them wiggle out of that one. My BS is just as good as theirs.

I realize that judges don't often like deciding cases based on wild theories and new ideas with no support. Nobody wants to go first and be the first one to actually think about what the law says and act accordingly. I've seen judges who won't, and a few that will. A couple in particular sat right up when I advanced an interesting theory. Win some, lose some. All I can say is this....you have to try.

This credit card junk really bothers me. Who invented this account stated garbage? The creditors? Their lawyers? We can walk into court and just declare you owe us XXXX because you didn't dispute the bill? Yes I did, I refused to pay it! What more dispute do you need? They don't have to put up any evidence of any kind. Don't YOU try it, though. Tell them you paid in full, and that they should take your word for it just like you''re supposed to take theirs. Yeah, right. Show us the cancelled check, pal.

I'll fight this on the grounds I think are legally sound and morally right. I may lose, but it won't be for lack of trying. The vehemence with which they oppose me shows me I'm on to something they don't want on their record as a precedent. You think all these banks want people lining up by the millions suing them for all the illegal interest they charged? Not hardly. Consider this.....that judge hearing your case has a credit card in his pocket. Bet he'd like to see his interest rate cut in half and 31 years of interest rebated. Probably put them out of business, but who cares.

I agree it's crazy. For instance, a cardmember agreement will state they card is governed under the laws of a particular state (SD, DE, etc), and then they charge the interest rate of that state. BUT, if that "governing state" has a shorter SOL, and you try to claim that SOL, the cc company will scream like banshees. They want to have their cake, and eat it, too.

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.