Jump to content

Is this signature fraudulent?


1moreX
 Share

Recommended Posts

I received a letter from a debt collector claiming that their firm is the attorney for Capital One. This letter was signed by a particular attorney in this firm.

During discovery I received several documents signed by this particular attorney, including a "Declaration of Responding Party" that states:

"I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State Oregon that I am an attorney for Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., and am authorized to make the foregoing answers. I declare that I have read the foregoing answers, know the contents thereof, and believe them to be true and correct."

But the signature on this document and others doesn't match the signature in the very first letter I received from this attorney. The printed names are the same, but the signatures above them are completely different in two of the documents. I know that people's signature vary a little, but these signatures are totally different from each other!

I'm not sure if the OC is suing through these debt collects, or if all this is one big fraudulent game! I feel something's not right because of certain discrepancies like this signature thing.

Anyone have any ideas? Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since no one else has given it a shot, I'll give it a go.

I noticed something similar in my wife's paperwork: sometimes the lawyer's signature looked one way, sometimes another way (if you can call a scrawl a signature.)

I suspect that what's going on is these bottom dwelling lawyers are doing a high volume business, and they're churning out tons of paperwork, so they've got underlings signing some documents for them, but maybe only the least important ones.

But what are you gonna do? If you accuse the attorney of not having signed the paperwork, the judge asks him if he signed it, and he says "Oh yes indeed your honor, absolutely!" If pressed on why his signature appears two different ways, it'll be something like "If I'm tired my signature changes" or "that must have been one of those times my hand cramped up" but "Oh yes your honor I signed that document."

Based on what you posted, I think you can accept that Capitol One still owns the debt, and they are the plaintiff in the lawsuit against you, and they have hired this attorney to handle the lawsuit. That's not the kind of thing these lawyers will try to lie about.

Good luck.

DH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest usctrojanalum

I have two different signatures on documents. When I am signing things I deem not important or not "official" I just sign my initials. When I'm using my signature to notarize a document, file an affidavit with the Court, or something that is more "official" I will then sign my full name in my signature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are pursuing something that has no value. Any lawyer can authorize a paralegal or other lawyer to sign his name for him if he so desires. Bottom line is the lawyer who allegedly signed will come to court and tell the judge he authorized the signature. Now what do you do? You just wasted the court's time with a trivial matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that what's going on is these bottom dwelling lawyers are doing a high volume business, and they're churning out tons of paperwork, so they've got underlings signing some documents for them, but maybe only the least important ones.

I think you're probably right. The signatures are too different to think otherwise. I think the only thing I can do with this is use it as one of my reasons for suspecting that other issues may be questionable.

I asked the attorneys to send documentation, like a contract or agreement, showing that Capital One hired these attorneys to represent them in this case. So far, nothing.

Thanks for everyone's input!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are pursuing something that has no value. Any lawyer can authorize a paralegal or other lawyer to sign his name for him if he so desires. Bottom line is the lawyer who allegedly signed will come to court and tell the judge he authorized the signature. Now what do you do? You just wasted the court's time with a trivial matter.

I think you're right, too. The last thing I want to do is appear to be wasting time.

But I'm curious...I live in a semi-secluded place in the state. The attorney would have to drive 6 hours to get to this town. Wouldn't they just hire a "rent-an-attorney" for this case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the only thing I can do with this is use it as one of my reasons for suspecting that other issues may be questionable.

This is pure speculation. Don't out such notions into pleadings. An underlying worthless issue doesn't get any better if you try to attach it to something else that you haven't proven yet.

I asked the attorneys to send documentation, like a contract or agreement, showing that Capital One hired these attorneys to represent them in this case. So far, nothing.

This is completely improper, they will never respond to this. They don't have to, either, under attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. If they have a law license they can represent anybody they want for free, none of the defendant's business. They signed an appearance form, that's all you get.

Wouldn't they just hire a "rent-an-attorney" for this case?

Probably, who knows. Doesn't much matter who shows up in court, concentrate on a defense.

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.