Jump to content

midland sueing using wrong cc acount number court on monday help


Recommended Posts

I've viewed this forum for 2 years and now need some advise. Not sure how much info you will need. Here goes.

recieved summons on 9-8-09 stating midland was sueing me: Bank of america provided credit on a writren credit card. The indebtedess has been duly assigned to midland . An affidavit of account and or contract attached. Attached is the usual form or robo letter of our friedn Bernice Thell. She states she is a spe******t and am a custodian of records for midland. In the letter she gives account #xxxxxx6823. She also states she posses the books and records pertaining to this account.It also states I owed this as of 2006-05-30.

9-29-09

I sent a motion to dismiss without prejudice. The alleged accounts last payment was on 10/2005. and used sol 3 years. Oklahoma is 3 or 5 very unclear. Thought it might work.

10-13-09

Midland filed responce

they said I had yet filed as answer to the petition. That my sole complaint was sol. That I actually filed a affirmative defense. They stated the sol for oklahoma was 5 years 12 O>S>(A)(1). I did not cite ant legal support of a three year sol.

11-03-09

I filed a responce to plaintiff.

I requested a copy of the original debt.

11-13-09

Recieved a letter from Love,beal and Nixon? And whooos this?

The letter stated this is the information I requested. Midland Funding placed this account with our firm on 7-6-09. The original creditor was boa. the account #xxxxxxxx6823. They did give the last 4 of my social right. That was it.

11-18-09

I sent love beal a nletter stating that was not what I requested. I wanted the original debt holder contract signed by me.

11-24-09

midland per love beal and nixon sends admissions and interrogatories.

after looking up a old credit report ,that number is not on it. There is a paid infull to boa and another account not. So which one are they trying to sue me for. I denied any knowledge on the debt. In adm #2 demanded strict proof . In the interrogatories #2 stated that i had requested 2 times to recieve origial contract on acct #xxxxxxx6823. #4 let them know acct#xxxx6823 was no where on it.

1-14-10

recieved letter from love,beal with settlement opportunity.

DIDNT HEAR ANYTHING THOUGHT IT WAS OVER. NOT SO.

1-30-12

TWO YEARS LATER

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

Wants judgement in favor for the reason and on the grounds that there is no genuine issue as to any material facts in this action.

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS

Said i entered a agreement with boa acct#xxxxx7978 so now they give the correct alleged #. account agreement exhibit A it is an important notice of change in terms dated 2006. This alleged account was open in 2001.

Exibit B 4 credit card bills. AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE IT STATES . PRSUANT TO BANK OF AMERICA'S USUAL BOOKKEEPING PROCEDURES, DEFENDANTS ACCOUNT NUMBER WAS CHANGED FOLLOWING THE CHARGE OFF OF THE ACCOUNT XXXXX6823( THIS IS THE ACCOUNT NUMBER THEY REFERED TO ALL THIS TIME). THIS SECOND NUMBER IS THE ONE THAT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE ACCOUNT WHEN IT WAS ACQUIRED BY PLAINTIFF.

Exibit c is a form letter BILL OF SALE AND ASSIGNMENT OF LOANS. My name is no where on there.

EXIBIT D

Well loks like another robo letter. This one is from Kay Ostmoe. In this she states she has access to records. The account # she states is xxxxxxx6823. She states this account had a balance owed 2009-07-05. Midland becme the sucessor 2009-02-26.

They say the suit was filed 9-1-09 within the 5 years of last alleged payment on 10-26-05.

They go on to say I denied all the requests for admissions. duh.

Because defendant has provided no legal or factual support for her general denial or affirmative defense, plaintiff is entitled to judgement.

At the bottom ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITY

summary process focuses not on the facts which could be proven at a trial on the merits, but only on the evidence tendered to the court for consideration. If such evidence reveals undisputed material facts supporting judgement in favor of the movant,summary judgement is appropriate.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Ok how bad have i screwed up ? Court is in 6 days . Where do I go from here. Is this hopeless. I havd read so much I'm so confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love, Beal and Nixon, PC

6613 N. Meridian

Oklahoma City, OK 73123

Phone: (405) 720-0565

Fax: (405) 720-9570

Web Address: Love, Beal & Nixon, P.C. Attorneys

Head Debt Collectors:

David O. Beal William L. Nixon, Jr. Deborah A. Peterson

Gretchen M. Latham J. Michael Morrison

ATTENTION Greater Tulsa Area Residents: Contact us

for referral if approached by LB&N.

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

Quick Analysis Consumer Comments Below

This law firm that gives the impression they don't have a clue about what they are doing. Despite that, they flood the State of Oklahoma with questionable lawsuits, fingers crossed that sophisticated consumers or consumer attorneys don't challenge them.

LB&N appears to be severely lacking in the manner in which they approach debt collection law. Their paperwork is sloppy, shoddy, incomplete, lacking in substance and may be, (in several cases) perjured.

Their clients include some of the most disgusting, sleazy debt collectors in America. This includes the ever-slimy World Wide Asset Purchasing, LLC out of Atlanta, for old 'Bank of America' cases and Colorado Capital Investments, Inc. out of Hurst, TX.

Love, Beal & Nixon need a refresher course on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Consumers dealing with LB&N need to realize that perhaps this law firm is NOT as smart as they would think, nor are the court papers they file, always accurate.

Legal debt collecting is NOT for anyone who has a law license and looking for easy money. There is some skill, knowledge and experienced required to become a successful litigator, an area where LB&N appears to be sorely lacking.

If you are being sued by Love, Beal and Nixon on anything associated with Bank of America and/or Worldwide Asset Purchasing, DO NOT ignore their court summons. They are hoping you will lose by default, when you may be able to show them you are smarter than they are.

Having a law license does NOT necessarily mean that you are smart. It just means that...you have a law license!

CAUTION: I recommend you NEVER disclose your bank account or credit card information to a debt collector, as you risk them emptying your account, or maxing out your credit card. If you feel they are reporting on your credit bureau files in error or need assistance in dealing with them, email the details w/your location. Assistance and referral to a consumer legal spe******t may be available. Email for Assistance

Bud Hibbs

Edited by racecar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I've viewed this forum for 2 years and now need some advise. Not sure how much info you will need. Here goes.

recieved summons on 9-8-09 stating midland was sueing me: Bank of america provided credit on a writren credit card. The indebtedess has been duly assigned to midland . An affidavit of account and or contract attached. Attached is the usual form or robo letter of our friedn Bernice Thell. She states she is a spe******t and am a custodian of records for midland. In the letter she gives account #xxxxxx6823. She also states she posses the books and records pertaining to this account.It also states I owed this as of 2006-05-30.

9-29-09

I sent a motion to dismiss without prejudice. The alleged accounts last payment was on 10/2005. and used sol 3 years. Oklahoma is 3 or 5 very unclear. Thought it might work.

10-13-09

Midland filed responce

they said I had yet filed as answer to the petition. That my sole complaint was sol. That I actually filed a affirmative defense. They stated the sol for oklahoma was 5 years 12 O>S>(A)(1). I did not cite ant legal support of a three year sol.

11-03-09

I filed a responce to plaintiff.

I requested a copy of the original debt.

11-13-09

Recieved a letter from Love,beal and Nixon? And whooos this?

The letter stated this is the information I requested. Midland Funding placed this account with our firm on 7-6-09. The original creditor was boa. the account #xxxxxxxx6823. They did give the last 4 of my social right. That was it.

11-18-09

I sent love beal a nletter stating that was not what I requested. I wanted the original debt holder contract signed by me.

11-24-09

midland per love beal and nixon sends admissions and interrogatories.

after looking up a old credit report ,that number is not on it. There is a paid infull to boa and another account not. So which one are they trying to sue me for. I denied any knowledge on the debt. In adm #2 demanded strict proof . In the interrogatories #2 stated that i had requested 2 times to recieve origial contract on acct #xxxxxxx6823. #4 let them know acct#xxxx6823 was no where on it.

1-14-10

recieved letter from love,beal with settlement opportunity.

DIDNT HEAR ANYTHING THOUGHT IT WAS OVER. NOT SO.

1-30-12

TWO YEARS LATER

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

Wants judgement in favor for the reason and on the grounds that there is no genuine issue as to any material facts in this action.

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS

Said i entered a agreement with boa acct#xxxxx7978 so now they give the correct alleged #. account agreement exhibit A it is an important notice of change in terms dated 2006. This alleged account was open in 2001.

Exibit B 4 credit card bills. AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE IT STATES . PRSUANT TO BANK OF AMERICA'S USUAL BOOKKEEPING PROCEDURES, DEFENDANTS ACCOUNT NUMBER WAS CHANGED FOLLOWING THE CHARGE OFF OF THE ACCOUNT XXXXX6823( THIS IS THE ACCOUNT NUMBER THEY REFERED TO ALL THIS TIME). THIS SECOND NUMBER IS THE ONE THAT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE ACCOUNT WHEN IT WAS ACQUIRED BY PLAINTIFF.

Exibit c is a form letter BILL OF SALE AND ASSIGNMENT OF LOANS. My name is no where on there.

EXIBIT D

Well loks like another robo letter. This one is from Kay Ostmoe. In this she states she has access to records. The account # she states is xxxxxxx6823. She states this account had a balance owed 2009-07-05. Midland becme the sucessor 2009-02-26.

They say the suit was filed 9-1-09 within the 5 years of last alleged payment on 10-26-05.

They go on to say I denied all the requests for admissions. duh.

Because defendant has provided no legal or factual support for her general denial or affirmative defense, plaintiff is entitled to judgement.

At the bottom ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITY

summary process focuses not on the facts which could be proven at a trial on the merits, but only on the evidence tendered to the court for consideration. If such evidence reveals undisputed material facts supporting judgement in favor of the movant,summary judgement is appropriate.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Ok how bad have i screwed up ? Court is in 6 days . Where do I go from here. Is this hopeless. I havd read so much I'm so confused.

How did your court go?

One thing I've noticed about this law firm in my research is that they are sloppy and they tend to let cases sit in oblivion for loooooong periods of time.

Hope it went well for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the last payment was in 2005, this is zombie debt. It is beyond the SOL. BofA (FIA Card Services) is in Delaware with a strict 3 year SOL. The cardholder agreement will specify DE law. Make them stick to it. There is no reason for the court to set asdie an agreement where both parties agreed.

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.