Jump to content

My Response to JDB's request for admissions


Recommended Posts

Admissions:

1. Plaintiff, it's predecessors in interest, agents, attorneys or all other acting on its behalf, (Hereinafter Plaintiff) and Defendant entered into an agreement for the extension of credit from Plaintiff to Defendant:

Response: After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request one and therefore DENIES the same.

2. Defendant breached said agreement by failing to make payments to Plaintiff as required by the agreement.

Response: After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request Three and therefore DENIES the same.

3. Defendant has Master Card credit card bearing the account number ending XXXX.

Response:After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request Three and therefore DENIES the same.

4. Defendant presented said card to merchants in exchange for goods and/or services.

Response: OBJECTION: Request is duplicitous and designed to harass the Defendant. Defendant has denied any information or knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of the Plaintiff’s Complaint and given the time period involved, Plaintiff would be best able to provide the information sought.

5. Plaintiff has performed all of the Plaintiff's obligations under the agreement.

Response: OBJECTION: Request is vague as Plaintiff has not produced any Agreement sufficiently identified as being associated in any manner with the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s signature or identifying information so that said Agreement could reasonably be construed as being applicable to Defendant and thereby identifying any “obligation” of the Plaintiff as to the Defendant that could have been performed.

6. Defendant Received itemized monthly statements from the Plaintiff.

Response:After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request one and therefore DENIES the same.

7. That demand for payment has been made and payment has been refused.

Response:After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request one and therefore DENIES the same.

8. Defendant agreed to pay as per the terms of the agreement and remains indebted to the Plaintiff for the amounts requested in Plaintiff's petition.

Response:After a reasonable search and inquiry, Defendant is without knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of Request one and therefore DENIES the same.

9. The amount charged for the services and/or goods provided by Plaintiff is reasonable.

Response: OBJECTION: “reasonable” is not a defined term as related to the Plaintiff’s Discovery and Defendant is therefore rendered incapable of providing an ANSWER. The Request does not sufficiently identify “the services it rendered...” to allow the Defendant to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one's a little strange. There are 9 interrogatories corresponding with the 9 Requests for Admissions.

All of the interrogatories say: \

If Request One of the plaintiff's request for Admissions Driected to Defendant (first name, last name) is not admitted, state fully and compltetely the facts upon which defendant's denial of Request One is based.

Here's how I answered all nine of them:

Answer: DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have all 3 requests (Admissions, Interrogatories, and Documents) on the same reply. Is that ok or should I have each reply on a separate document?

The request for documents was very boilerplate so I responded to all with:

1. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

Here's the overall response I plan to send out tomorrow. The format for the top part is a little garbled but I'm sure you all get the point:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JOHNSON COUNTY, KS

MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, )

Plaintiff, ) Case No.

vs. ) Division: Chapter 61

)

Defendant(s). )DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS

DEFENDANT, appearing pro se, for DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, states as follows:

• All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Complaint.

• All allegations of the Complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein.

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

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

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

4. OBJECTION: Request is duplicitous and designed to harass the Defendant. Defendant has denied any information or knowledge to admit the truth or falsity of the Plaintiff’s Complaint and given the time period involved, Plaintiff would be best able to provide the information sought.

5. OBJECTION: Request is vague as Plaintiff has not produced any Agreement sufficiently identified as being associated in any manner with the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s signature or identifying information so that said Agreement could reasonably be construed as being applicable to Defendant and thereby identifying any “obligation” of the Plaintiff as to the Defendant that could have been performed.

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

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

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

9. OBJECTION: “reasonable” is not a defined term as related to the Plaintiff’s Discovery and Defendant is therefore rendered incapable of providing an ANSWER. The Request does not sufficiently identify “the services it rendered...” to allow the Defendant to respond.

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

DEFENDANT, appearing pro se, for DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, states as follows:

• All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories.

1. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

2. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

3. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

4. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

5. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

6. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

7. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

8. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

9. DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

DEFENDANT, appearing pro se, for DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, states as follows:

• All Answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Plaintiff’s First Request For Production of Documents.

1. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

2. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

3. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

4. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

5. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

6. DEFENDANT IS UNAWARE OF ANY SUCH DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE CANNOT PRODUCE SAID DOCUMENTS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

A copy of the foregoing mailed this DATE, to: PLAINTIFF, ADDRESS.

______________________________

DEFENDANT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Request is duplicitous and designed to harass the Defendant

Remove this.

Answer: DEFENDANT AT THIS TIME IS NOT COMPELLED TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL OF PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS. DEFENDANT LEAVES PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE PROOF OF ALLEGATIONS. DEFENDANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PLEAD DEFENSES WHICH MAY BECOME APPLICABLE AT A LATER DATE.

Better answer: In response to Requests 1-9, defendant objects to the extent that the requests are vague, overly broad, lacking in specificity, argumentative, conditional, and are nothing more than a fishing expedition designed to elicit information which would more properly sought in comprehensible interrogatories. Defendant is not required to supply a definitive blanket response concerning admission or denial. The admissions or denials should stand alone. If plaintiff is not satisfied with the answers, plaintiff may file appropriate motions. Requests 4, 5, and 9 were properly objected to and plaintiff should therefore follow the rules of procedure concerning objections. The remainder of the requests were denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the format should be ok? all 3 responses in 1 document?

I really appreciate you looking at this. After looking through these posts I know that you are one of the few goto people in this forum. You're looking at this makes me feel much better.

Also, I have to say that this whole process is not as scary now that I'm digging into it. It's empowering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legaleagle: I'm not sure I fully understand the better answer part of your response. Are you suggesting that I change the verbeage to the other requests for admission? I've been reading legaleze so long now that nothing's making sense:)

Racecar: I appreciate the links but I think that the answers to my questions may be buried too deep. I'll keep reading but again, any suggestions are VERY MUCH appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your answer is argumentative. That means you're trying the case rather than responding to what they asked for. It's also all over the place with the mention of defenses, etc.

Usually you take their document and place the responses under the questions. You don't have to repeat yourself nine times, you can do the 1-9 thing. If they sent it in three documents, keep it that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, the case was dismissed. I don't know why. All I wanted was proof that they legitimately had the right to collect on the debt that they were trying to sue me for. (sarcasm)

Originally, I checked with a lawyer when this issue originally came to light. They wanted to charge me $1500 to defend me. Instead of paying someone to help me I helped myself. I simply followed the rules of the court and it only cost me time. In addition to saving money, I get to walk away from this experience smarter and better armed to defend myself in the future.

Legaleagle, I can't thank you enough for helping me, both in previous informative posts to others, and for your direct help/suggestions with my request for docs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the case was dismissed. I don't know why. All I wanted was proof that they legitimately had the right to collect on the debt that they were trying to sue me for. (sarcasm)

Originally, I checked with a lawyer when this issue originally came to light. They wanted to charge me $1500 to defend me. Instead of paying someone to help me I helped myself. I simply followed the rules of the court and it only cost me time. In addition to saving money, I get to walk away from this experience smarter and better armed to defend myself in the future.

Legaleagle, I can't thank you enough for helping me, both in previous informative posts to others, and for your direct help/suggestions with my request for docs.

They dismissed it that quick huh? within a week of responding to their discoveries! So encouraging. I hope that happens in my case! lol

Congrats!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't intend to seek costs from them, the whole thing probably cost me $20 so it's kinda pointless. Live and let live:)

One last observation:

I think it's key for everyone to remember that the courts are your friends in this so long as you learn and follow the rules. The courts require the Plaintiffs to provide a specific level of proof that, in most junk debt cases, they can't.

Sure some of the cases are more complicated but mine went as follows

  • I was served
  • I denied the Plaintiff's claim
  • I filed an answer at the courthouse
  • I was sent discovery paperwork from the Plaintiff (Request for Admissions, Documents, and interrogatories)
  • I answered the paperwork (properly denying that I had any proof available to help them win their case against me) and sent copies via certified mail to both the Plaintiff and the court.
  • It was then my turn to take advantage of discovery. I requested any documents that the Plaintiff had that might substantiate their claim that I legitimately owed Midland Funding anything. That's the key to all of this since the courts demand very specific proof. I'm 100% positive that they had nothing since the account number and card in the original paperwork were not related to any account specifically. It was a fishing trip for them.

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.