Jump to content

Please Help Me!!! Request For Admission Of Facts


Recommended Posts

I have received Request For Admisison Of Facts from Midland Funding. I have pulled my credit report and I have never had a credit card with the card number they are stating. I am a single Mom, full time student and unemployed. I don't have the extra money to get a lawyer to help me get rid of this! Can anyone give me suggestions of how to answer this and maybe a template of the format the letter should be in. I am in Georgia. Any help will be greatly appreciated!!! I also received Request For Production Of Documents And Notice To Produce To Defendant and also Plaintiff's First Interrogatories To Deffendant. But I think I should deal with one at a time!

In The Superior Court For the County of XXXXX

State of Georgia

Midland Funding LLC

Assignee of

FIA Card Services, N.A.

Plantiff

vs.

Me

Defendant

Request for Admission of Facts

TO: Me

You are hereby required to admit or deny the following statements of facts and serve a copy of your response within (30) days upon the office of Plaintiff's attorney, Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C. pursant of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated ("O.C.G.A.") 9-11-36. Failure to respond to these requests may result in the matters requested being admitted as a matter of law.

In this document, the word "Plaintiff" refers to the Plaintiff or its Assignor, if any.

1.

You applied for, and received, a credit card account No. XXXX from the Plaintiff.

2.

You made purchases or received cash advances using the credit card, leaving a net unpaid balance on the account of $6,XXX.XX

3.

When you applied for the credit card, you agreed to make at least the minimum payment due every month on the indebtedness owing by you on the credit card.

4.

You received the credit card agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint, you understood its terms and conditions and you agreed to abide by the terms and conditions imposed thereby.

5. You made at least the minimum monthly payments owing on the credit card account for a period of time.

6.

You ceased making the minimum monthly payments on the credit card.

7.

You materially breached the terms and conditions of the credit card agreement, leaving you in material default on the credit card agreement.

8.

You have refused to pay the principal balance due Plaintiff on the credit card.

9.

You owe to Plaintiff the current past due principal balance of $6,XXX.XX.

10.

You owe to Plaintiff interest on the past due balance of $2,XXX.XX.

11. You owe to Plaintiff contractual attorney's fees on the unpaid principal balance in the amount of $.00.

12.

You are legally and financially responsible to the Plaintiff for the indebtedness owing on the credit card.

13.

You have benefitted, either directlyor indirectly, from the use of the credit card.

14.

You have not been released from liability by the Plaintiff for this debt.

15.

You did not dispute any of the charges within sixty(60) days of their apperance on your monthly statment as required by your cardholder agreement.

16.

There is no legal or factual basis to suppor any defense, claim or contention asserted by you in your Answer.

17.

You do not have any documents that support your contention that the amount claimed due in the Complaint is incorrect.

18.

You do nt have any legal or factual basis for your contention that a different amount is owed than that claimed by the Plaintiff.

19.

You have no defense to this lawsuit.

____________

Mary Lou Morris

Georgia Bar No. 122059

Attorney for Plaintiff

Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C.

1427 Roswell Road

Marietta, GA 30062

770-988-9055

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell Mary to go pound sand and object to every damn one of them as the assignor will require you to draw a legal conclusion, and even if you were required to draw a legal conclusion, it's one you could not draw as your not privy to the facts.

This is a new low on a way to try and establish standing right out of the gate. I guess it does go to show that challenging their standing is the way to go. They prove it by these requests. OBJECT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am completely illeterate when it comes to legal wording and legal advice! lol I have researched and researched and I am over my head with information and very confused! When you say object how do I do this? I don't mean to sound stupid but I have never had to do something like this! :( I just want this all gone and over with! I don't have time to be stressing about something that I don't even owe!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortuantely this is not just going to go away. They have already invested in an attorney, and while Midland is beat up on more times by members of this site than a rented mule, they are not just going to go away.

If you can't afford or don't want to hire an attorney (understand that, been there and know when you can't), you will be forced by default to learn the rules and the law, or you can just chalk up a victory, even for turds like Midland. Even Midland will be able to get a summary judgement slapped on you if you don't learn procedure.

Here is what I would do if you want to win. I would read the Georgia Rules of Civil Procedure. Then look online or ask the court if they have any local rules or standing orders.

Then read this site for a night and read everything you can on standing. You can start here but there are a ton of great threads. I tried to put all the arguments in one thread. This is how you beat Midland. http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/there-lawyer-house/312714-standing-when-dealing-jdb.html

When I say object to their requests, that is a form of an answer. You object and the reason you object is because certain questions require you to make a legal conclusion for you to answer. That is improper.

Have you answered their lawsuit? What is the amount they are suing you for and when is the approx date of the alleged last payment. Also, who is the alleged original creditor.

Then ask a lot of questions. I watched a lady in Florida that did not know what debt validation was, where the courthouse was located or what a junk debt buyer even was, learn and just got an email stating a news crew just left here house. They were doing a story on consumers that fight back against debt suits and they located her case as she was bascially the only one that fought back.

So you can do it, it's just up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you! I refuse to let them win this! and me get stuck with this! I have responded to the lawsuit and denied everything. Then I get these forms. They are saying it was originallly Bank of America and last payment was in 2006. The amount is $6,126. Thank you for your help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My credit report says 04/2006 but they are suing me for a different credit card number than my own and a different amount. They haven't sent me any evidence and I requsted that when I responded to the lawsuit but still haven't received any evidence.

Edited by lclark1108
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My credit report says 04/2006 but they are suing me for a different credit card number than my own and a different amount.

It could be their own account number. The amount is different because they've added interest and fees. If it is they're own account number that they've stated in the Complaint, there's no way for you to know to what account they're referring.

Is this in Magistrate court? Again, what evidence did they include, if any, with the Complaint?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See I am completely clueless, don't even know what court! Ok Superior Court. Yes I answered the complaint and I did deny everything...I am fixint to sound stupid again but when you say add defence what does that mean? I apologize for my lack of knowledge!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you take out the personal info and post the answer you filed with the court.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF XXXXX

STATE OF GEORGIA

MIDLAND FUNDING LLC )

ASSIGNEE OF )

FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A. )

)

Plaintiff )

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION FILE

) NO.

ME )

)

Defendant )

)

COMPLAINT ON CREDIT CARD ACCOUNT

COMES NOW the Defendant ME in answering the allegations of the Complaint on file herein, affirms, denies and alleges as follows:

(1)

The defendant affirms the statement in paragraph 1.

(2)

Defendant does not have sufficient knowledge of plaintiff's claim, and therefore cannot affirm or deny the statement in paragraph 2 without more information.

(3)

Defendant does not have sufficient knowledge of plaintiff's claim, and therefore cannot affirm or deny the statement in paragraph 3 without more information.

(4)

Defendant does not have sufficient knowledge of plaintiff's claim, and therefore cannot affirm or deny the statement in paragraph 4 without more information.

(5)

Defendant does not have sufficient knowledge of plaintiff's claim, and therefore cannot affirm or deny the statement in paragraph 5 without more information.

(6)

Defendant does not have sufficient knowledge of plaintiff's claim, and therefore cannot affirm or deny the statement in paragraph 6 without more information.

Defendant cannot affirm or deny the last unnumbered paragraph beginning with “WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands” and ending with “plus court costs of $255.00”, and request the following documents:

1) Agreement with your client that authorizes you to collect on this alleged debt.

2) Agreement that bears signature of the alleged debtor wherein he promises to pay the creditor.

3) Complete payment history on this account so as to prove that the debt amount you wish to collect is correct.

With regards,

ME

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good. You denied everything.

Coltfan,

She can object, but can she object on the basis that the admissions call for a legal conclusion? "You made purchases or received cash advances using the credit card, leaving a net unpaid balance on the account of $6,XXX.XX" doesn't seem to call for a legal conclusion. Or am I missing something?

Also, she stated that the account number in the complaint doesn't match the account number on her CR. It could be that Midland has used their own account number.

Since she doesn't recognize the account number, and they've provided no evidence, wouldn't she simply deny most of them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good. You denied everything.

Yes, Good, and no crazy affirmative defenses, good again!!!

Coltfan,

She can object, but can she object on the basis that the admissions call for a legal conclusion? "You made purchases or received cash advances using the credit card, leaving a net unpaid balance on the account of $6,XXX.XX" doesn't seem to call for a legal conclusion. Or am I missing something?

Look right above request for admission number one where they list their definition of Plaintiff. It should be alleged assignor or just the definition of Plaintiff, for this document, is Midland.

Then your right about the you made purchases leaving an unpaid balance, ect..... no problem there, but look at the end it says, "from the Plaintiff."

Plaintiff can be, by their Definition, the assignor (them). So they are asking her to admit she left an unpaid balance to "The Plaintiff", in other words, them. She would have to draw a legal conclusion that they are an assignor and the only proof at this time is their word and their definition of the Plaintiff.

Also, she stated that the account number in the complaint doesn't match the account number on her CR. It could be that Midland has used their own account number.

Since she doesn't recognize the account number, and they've provided no evidence, wouldn't she simply deny most of them?

She could do that also, but my policy is anytime standing is put in issue, no matter when or where, I'm attacking their standing. It's not like she would be conceding standing with just denials, like you just pointed out. Again, I never leave standing not addressed.

She could just deny since it does not appear she is comfortable with objecting at this stage. However, I think one should object based on requesting a legal conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean you could really pick these apart. Request one says you applied for a credit card number. You don't apply for a credit card with a specific account number. She could deny because she applied for a credit card but not a credit card account number XXXX.

3. calls for another legal conclusion on what was in the terms of the contact as far as "minimum payment" That is part of the contract that would defaulted.

4. could be objected as is a compound question and asks about the agreement attached which should be one question and then agreed to the terms another question.

5. has facts not in evidence and disputed where is states payments owing on the credit card.

6. assumes payments were ever stated to even be stopped, therefore, trying to set up the old account stated. Objection assumes payments were ever made that would even be stopped.

7.???? Please !! You materially breached the contract. Asking for a legal conclusion all day long. Also "the contact" is vague.

8. "due plaintiff" objection assumes anything is owed to plaintiff.

9, 10, 13, 16, 19 you could just deny

11 & 12 and twelve are back to legal conclusions.

14. LOL, well NO, she is being sued. You usually don't sue people you've released from any liability. However there we go with that Plaintiff definition.

15. Your monthly statement? That's been proven they are her monthly statements.

17 and 18, what contention????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean you could really pick these apart. Request one says you applied for a credit card number. You don't apply for a credit card with a specific account number. She could deny because she applied for a credit card but not a credit card account number XXXX.

3. calls for another legal conclusion on what was in the terms of the contact as far as "minimum payment" That is part of the contract that would defaulted.

4. could be objected as is a compound question and asks about the agreement attached which should be one question and then agreed to the terms another question.

5. has facts not in evidence and disputed where is states payments owing on the credit card.

6. assumes payments were ever stated to even be stopped, therefore, trying to set up the old account stated. Objection assumes payments were ever made that would even be stopped.

7.???? Please !! You materially breached the contract. Asking for a legal conclusion all day long. Also "the contact" is vague.

8. "due plaintiff" objection assumes anything is owed to plaintiff.

9, 10, 13, 16, 19 you could just deny

11 & 12 and twelve are back to legal conclusions.

14. LOL, well NO, she is being sued. You usually don't sue people you've released from any liability. However there we go with that Plaintiff definition.

15. Your monthly statement? That's been proven they are her monthly statements.

17 and 18, what contention????

Thank you everyone!! Cotfan1972 thank you so much! I have a better understanding of what I need to do! I've done some research also! I'm typing my letters now and will get these filed today!

One more question when they are able to respond the SOL will be able to be applied. But since the case is a pre-existing case does that throw out the fact that its been 6 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Good, and no crazy affirmative defenses, good again!!!

Look right above request for admission number one where they list their definition of Plaintiff. It should be alleged assignor or just the definition of Plaintiff, for this document, is Midland.

Then your right about the you made purchases leaving an unpaid balance, ect..... no problem there, but look at the end it says, "from the Plaintiff."

Plaintiff can be, by their Definition, the assignor (them). So they are asking her to admit she left an unpaid balance to "The Plaintiff", in other words, them. She would have to draw a legal conclusion that they are an assignor and the only proof at this time is their word and their definition of the Plaintiff.

She could do that also, but my policy is anytime standing is put in issue, no matter when or where, I'm attacking their standing. It's not like she would be conceding standing with just denials, like you just pointed out. Again, I never leave standing not addressed.

She could just deny since it does not appear she is comfortable with objecting at this stage. However, I think one should object based on requesting a legal conclusion.

What does "standing" mean? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does "standing" mean? :confused:

Think of standing as their right to sue and win. Without standing, their case is dead in the water.

Think of it this way: Some drunk guy is racing around in his car in a way that would be reckless even if he were sober. He hits you, totals your car and puts you in the hospital, where you now are on the hook for some medical bills. His reckless actions caused you both physical and financial injury. The injury can be redressed, as you can be compensated for those with money. You have standing to sue.

Now then, Bob, who was 20 miles away at the time, hates drunk drivers, especially reckless ones. He read about your plight in the paper and gets really pissed off and wants to teach the drunk a lesson, so he decides to sue. He suffered no real injury, unless you want to count getting pissed off, and there is no real way to redress any supposed damages that he suffered. He has no standing to sue, and his case should be dismissed.

With the case of JDBs, if they cannot prove that they actually own the account, they cannot actually prove that they suffered any injury and thus cannot prove that they have standing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think of standing as their right to sue and win. Without standing, their case is dead in the water.

Think of it this way: Some drunk guy is racing around in his car in a way that would be reckless even if he were sober. He hits you, totals your car and puts you in the hospital, where you now are on the hook for some medical bills. His reckless actions caused you both physical and financial injury. The injury can be redressed, as you can be compensated for those with money. You have standing to sue.

Now then, Bob, who was 20 miles away at the time, hates drunk drivers, especially reckless ones. He read about your plight in the paper and gets really pissed off and wants to teach the drunk a lesson, so he decides to sue. He suffered no real injury, unless you want to count getting pissed off, and there is no real way to redress any supposed damages that he suffered. He has no standing to sue, and his case should be dismissed.

With the case of JDBs, if they cannot prove that they actually own the account, they cannot actually prove that they suffered any injury and thus cannot prove that they have standing.

That makes SO much sence now!!! Thank you so much!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted the link for you about standing in post number four. I'd read it, it will be the difference in winning or losing most of the time.

Also, I would not be sending anything off until the last minute. Give yourself time to learn. You mentioned letters. You don't send letters anymore. Also if you answer their requests but answer in the wrong procedural form, you can lose just on procedure alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted the link for you about standing in post number four. I'd read it, it will be the difference in winning or losing most of the time.

Also, I would not be sending anything off until the last minute. Give yourself time to learn. You mentioned letters. You don't send letters anymore. Also if you answer their requests but answer in the wrong procedural form, you can lose just on procedure alone.

Coltfan1972 I've been working hard on this all weekend. Can you tell me what you think of what I have came up with?? Sorry for the spacing, copy and paste didn't work so good! :(

STATE OF GEORGIA

MIDLAND FUNDING LLC )

ASSIGNEE OF )

FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A. )

)

Plaintiff )

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION FILE

) NO. XXX

ME )

)

Defendant )

)

RESPONSE TO ADMISSIONS

1.

Defendant lacks sufficient information or knowledge about the truth and accuracy of the allegations in Paragraph 1, and therefore denies allegations contained in Paragraph 1. Plaintiff failed to provide proof of debt or documentation for alleged charge off, or certification to substantiate any alleged balances. No credit card accounts ever opened or existed between Plaintiff and Defendant.

2.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint, as Defendant is without information or knowledge sufficient to form an opinion as to the truth and accuracy of alleged assignments and entitlements.

3.

Deny - Plaintiff has yet to produce an authenticated contract, nor any proof a contract actually existed.

4.

Deny. Receipt of contract by Defendant has not been proven. In addition, even if contract were received, Defendant wonders how the Plaintiff could have knowledge of what the Defendant does or does not understand, nor whether the terms of alleged contract were agreed to.

5. Deny. If plaintiff has proof of such payments, they should be submitted into evidence.

6.

Deny. Defendant objects, as it calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper. Defendant has asked the Plaintiff to provide this proof during and prior to his Response to Summons. The Plaintiff did not attach a copy of the Alleged Contract to the Complaint, thus the probity of the requested information is speculative. The Defendant has sought the Contract Alleged as well as alleged debt account information from Plaintiff. Defendant demands strict proof thereof.

7.

Deny - Plaintiff has yet to produce an authenticated contract, nor any proof a contract actually existed. Contract provided was generic and neither dated nor signed.

8.

Deny. Defendant objects, as it calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

9.

Deny. Defendant objects, as it calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper. In addition, the method of the calculation of the amount of the debt was not entered into evidence.

10.

Deny. Defendant objects, as it calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper. In addition, the method of the calculation of the amount of the debt was not entered into evidence.

11.

Deny. To the extent that defendant avers she owes nothing to plaintiff, therefore, with no principle balance owed, there can be no interest owed.

12.

Deny. Defendant objects, as it calls for admission of matter defendant has denied and thus it is improper.

13.

Deny. Defendant has denied knowledge of the alleged account, and Plaintiff has not proven ownership of said account.

14.

OBJECTION. Lacks foundation to the extent that liability has yet to be established by admissible evidence.

15.

Denied. Defendant has denied knowledge of the account. Furthermore, Plaintiff has not provided a copy of the card member agreement referenced in the request.

16.

OBJECTION Calls for a legal conclusion and impressions of counsel, which is protected under the work product doctrine and attorney-client privilege. The Answer requires only that defendant admit or deny the truth of the allegations contained therein. Any "factual basis" is to be set forth after discovery is complete.

17.

OBJECTION Calls for a legal conclusion as to the legitimacy and correctness of "the amount," which is the basis for the instant action and is therefore best left to the trier of fact to establish.

18.

OBJECTION Repetitive of the above request, calls for a legal conclusion and imnpressions of counsel, conclusory and assumes facts not in evidence, specifically that defendant contends a "different amount is owed." The amount defendant claims he / she owes plaintiff is not one penny.

19.

Deny.

Respectfully submitted, April 2, 2012

For:

By: ______________________________

ME

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have mailed a copy of the foregoing Request for Admissions, this __________ day of __________, 2012, by, to Mary Lou Morris, Georgia Bar No. 122059, Attorney for Plaintiff, Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C., 1427 Roswell Road, Marietta, GA 30062,770-988-9055 by U.S. Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested, Receipt no.______________________________________

____________________________________

ME

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not Coltfan, but I'm throwing in my 2 cents. You need to make sure your responses match the admission request. You stated that the account number in the Complaint doesn't match the account number you had with the OC...correct?

I included some of Coltfan's suggestions in the responses. I also copied and pasted the admissions so readers wouldn't have to flip back and forth to the 1st page.

The 1st admission request is:

1. You applied for, and received, a credit card account No. XXXX from the Plaintiff.

Stating that they haven't provided proof of a charge off has nothing to do with that. Since the account number on the Complaint doesn't match the account # you had with the OC, I would simply deny #1. No explanation. It's also the truth. You didn't get a credit card with that account number.

2. You made purchases or received cash advances using the credit card, leaving a net unpaid balance on the account of $6,XXX.XX

3. When you applied for the credit card, you agreed to make at least the minimum payment due every month on the indebtedness owing by you on the credit card.

4. You received the credit card agreement attached to Plaintiff's Complaint, you understood its terms and conditions and you agreed to abide by the terms and conditions imposed thereby.

I would simply deny 2 - 4, as well. Others may different opinions.

5. You made at least the minimum monthly payments owing on the credit card account for a period of time.

Objection. Calls for an admission or denial based upon facts not in evidence. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

6. You ceased making the minimum monthly payments on the credit card.

Objection. Objection assumes payments were ever made that would even be stopped. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

(In your answer for #6, you stated that you had asked the plaintiff to provide proof. Have you sent discovery requests or did you simply request proof in your answer? Requesting proof in the Answer to the Complaint is not considered a discovery request.)

7. You materially breached the terms and conditions of the credit card agreement, leaving you in material default on the credit card agreement.

Objection. Calls for a legal conclusion. Not only has Plaintiff provided no evidence of the existence of the alleged account, Plaintiff has not provided a copy of the alleged credit card agreement. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

8. You have refused to pay the principal balance due Plaintiff on the credit card.

Admitted in part and denied in part. Defendant admits that she has refused to pay Midland Funding. Defendant denies that Midland Funding is due an alleged balance on the alleged account.

(Remember: In the definitions, the term "Plaintiff" refers to both the OC and Midland)

9. You owe to Plaintiff the current past due principal balance of $6,XXX.XX.

Denied

10. You owe to Plaintiff interest on the past due balance of $2,XXX.XX.

Denied.

11. You owe to Plaintiff contractual attorney's fees on the unpaid principal balance in the amount of $.00.

Denied.

12.You are legally and financially responsible to the Plaintiff for the indebtedness owing on the credit card.

Denied.

13. You have benefitted, either directlyor indirectly, from the use of the credit card.

Denied.

14. You have not been released from liability by the Plaintiff for this debt.

I think your answer for this one works. I'd add "Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies."

15. You did not dispute any of the charges within sixty(60) days of their apperance on your monthly statment as required by your cardholder agreement.

Objection. Plaintiff has provided no evidence of any alleged charges made to the alleged account. In addition, Plaintiff has not provided a copy of the card member agreement referenced in the request. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

16. There is no legal or factual basis to suppor any defense, claim or contention asserted by you in your Answer.

Denied.

(Responding with "protected under the work product doctrine and attorney-client privilege" doesn't work. You're Pro Se. You don't have an attorney. Therefore, there's no attorney-client privilege.)

17. You do not have any documents that support your contention that the amount claimed due in the Complaint is incorrect.

Objection. Defendant has made no claim that the amount claimed in the Complaint is incorrect. Plaintiff has provided no evidence that the amount claimed in the Complaint is valid. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

18. You do nt have any legal or factual basis for your contention that a different amount is owed than that claimed by the Plaintiff.

Objection. Defendant has made no claim that a different amount is owed. Defendant denies that any amount is owed to Plaintiff. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant denies.

19. You have no defense to this lawsuit.

Denied.

I'm sure others will chime in to help change or tweak these suggestions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also copied and pasted the admissions so readers wouldn't have to flip back and forth to the 1st page.

You the man !! I'd already moved on and was going to come back when I had time to toggle back and forth.

ICLARK1008,

When you post legal questions, make sure you keep it all in one spot. It's tough going back and forth or going back to another thread. You can just copy and paste.

Plus that is the way (I can only assume) you will have to write them for the other side. I don't know of a state where you don't have repeat the question before answering.

I've already told you what I think of those questions and how I would respond, in my post where I said I would pick them apart. That is how I would answer.

A judge is going to have to compel me to accept their definition of "Plaintiff."

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.