Jump to content

does it matter how much is paid for a debt


Recommended Posts

Does it matter how much is paid for a debt by a second owner? Interrogatory questions ask this and how did the plaintiff come to own the debt.

I can't think of any reason it is relevant. How plaintiff "came to own the debt", however, is highly relevant. You need proof of assignment to make sure plaintiff has standing to sue you in Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about unjust enrichment. If the original debt is for $1000 but a CA only paid 10 cents on the dollar they still want to collect or sue for $1000. In business law class we were told if you write a check for $100 no matter how many times it is sold and discounted the check writer is still going to have $100 deducted from his account.

This why I do not understand the relevance of questions about how much paid, how they became owner etc.

Edited by hackberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the 1000.00 you ran up on the card and the amount of check.

How much they paid is irrelevant. Making obscene profits is still allowed in the United States. Now participating in making a junk debt buyer rich is another thing all together.

As CALAWYER stated, how they came to allegedly own the debt is very relevant. In fact, it's the best defense (other than proof the debt was paid) there is, challenging their standing.

Also a second in line junk debt buyer probably paid two to three cents on the dollar, more likely around two cents. Sometimes for really old debts that have been through many junk debt buyers the costs will get below a cent on the dollar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Illinois, yes it is important. Section 8b of the collection agency act states:

Sec. 8b. Assignment for collection. An account may be assigned to a collection agency for collection with title passing to the collection agency to enable collection of the account in the agency's name as assignee for the creditor provided:

(a) The assignment is manifested by a written agreement, separate from and in addition to any document intended for the purpose of listing a debt with a collection agency. The document manifesting the assignment shall specifically state and include:

(i) the effective date of the assignment; and

(ii) the consideration for the assignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but I doubt they have to say how much consideration was paid.

"Consideration was paid to XXX" I've seen a ton of times on bill of sales or affidavits.

There always has to be consideration for there to be a valid contract. That is why parents sometimes sell a 250K house or a car to their kid for a dollar.

However, for the sake of argument (as I might be wrong about ILL specific state law) even if they bought the account for a penny total, it's now their account and they can legally sue for the total amount that was due to the original creditor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but I doubt they have to say how much consideration was paid.

"Consideration was paid to XXX" I've seen a ton of times on bill of sales or affidavits. QUOTE]

“For value received and subject to the terms and conditions of the

Purchase and Sale Agreement dated October 3, 2006, between Buyer and the

Bank (the ‘Agreement’), the Bank does hereby *** assign *** to Buyer, and to

Buyer's successors and assigns, good and marketable title to the Accounts

described in Section 1.2 of the Agreement, free and clear of all encumbrances

***.”

...Based on the record before us, however, it does not appear that the assignment of defendant's account from Citibank to Unifund Portfolio A satisfies section 8b because it does not specifically state the consideration and the account.

I had been reading that some people were going to claim unjust enrichment on these JDBs, which in my mind is a loser. I would just hit standing all day long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you saying you found a case and the judge ruled since the consideration amount was not stated the assignment failed?

Interesting if you found that, but I also agree with you, forget unjust enrichment and lack of standing is the way to go.

If you're talking about my comment, I was referring to making them cough the number up if *they* were using unjust enrichment as a cause of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I heard you say that you told a judge that yes I owe so and so, just not the plaintiff, I thought you were crazy.

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that the underlying debt is not really the issue in question, and admitting or denying it is hardly as relevant as prove that you're entitled to collect what you claim you're owed.

But if you are looking for giggles,

business service bureau v webster and

unifund v shah

they are both appellate decisions in IL, and I would use this method if standing wasn't so easy to attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay I understand where you're coming from now as far as when the amount paid could be used as a defense, under certain arguments.

Oh, and I am crazy. Not just that day in court, but pretty much everyday. Makes me an absolute joy to work with. It always turns out so nice, cordial, non time consuming and legal fees for the other side being kept as low as I can possibly make them.

"Teamwork" and a "Spirit of mutual cooperation" is what I would call it.

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.