Jump to content

Motion to Quash Subpoena?


Recommended Posts

Hello all. I’d appreciate any and all advice pertaining to this situation. I have looked through the forum and I haven’t seen anything dealing with my type of situation, yet. About 90 days ago I received a letter in the mail from a JDB for a debt approx. $6,000. I sent one of those Legal looking letters I found online requesting Validation. About two weeks ago the same JDB send me Verification. I read that the legal forms online basically show the collector that you know nothing about the law other than copy and paste (which I hadn’t thought of, but it makes sense.) So, I sent a much simpler letter stating that I disputed the debt and requested validation. I also said to only contact me through US mail. Today, I received a letter from the original creditor saying that JDB served them a subpoena requesting all credit card statements. It then says that they are obligated to respond with the requested info if I don’t properly file a Motion to Quash the subpoena.

What is this? If I figure out how to write and file one will this buy me some time? Could filing such a motion be harmful to me in any legal way? Any advice would be welcomed. Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) The records are going to be relevant, but they're still inadmissible hearsay unless they also subpoena a records custodian from the OC.

2) The records will in no way prove that they have standing to sue you anyway unless they subpoena a person who has personal knowledge of the sale with your account.

3) If you're sending debt validation letters and receiving notices that there are subpoenas in play, you are sending useless letters because subpoenas tend to go hand-in-hand with a lawsuit. If you can find an online case lookup for your state, search on your name. Otherwise, go to your courthouse(s) and check to see if they are suing you.

Besides, they can fully ignore the 2nd letter because it's outside of the validation period and they already received the 1st one and properly validated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) The records are going to be relevant, but they're still inadmissible hearsay unless they also subpoena a records custodian from the OC.

2) The records will in no way prove that they have standing to sue you anyway unless they subpoena a person who has personal knowledge of the sale with your account.

3) If you're sending debt validation letters and receiving notices that there are subpoenas in play, you are sending useless letters because subpoenas tend to go hand-in-hand with a lawsuit. If you can find an online case lookup for your state, search on your name. Otherwise, go to your courthouse(s) and check to see if they are suing you.

Besides, they can fully ignore the 2nd letter because it's outside of the validation period and they already received the 1st one and properly validated.

They didn't send me validation after my first letter, they sent what they called VERIFICATION

The only reason I got the subpoena, which was served to the OC, was because the original creditor sent it to me. I'm not in a lawsuit yet.... I don't think. Wouldn't I have been served something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't send me validation after my first letter, they sent what they called VERIFICATION

The only reason I got the subpoena, which was served to the OC, was because the original creditor sent it to me. I'm not in a lawsuit yet.... I don't think. Wouldn't I have been served something?

It doesn't matter what they called it. If it fit the legal requirements of validation, it was a validation. You can call a magpie a crow and it's still a magpie. A validation is pretty much "Yup, we checked our records and yup, you're the one who owes us." Did they meet that requirement?

As for the subpoena, maybe MI is different, but in NM, if there is a subpoena, there is either a court case or somebody is breaking some rules. Did the OC send you a copy of the subpoena?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

like the court would grant your motion due to privacy concerns. They are doing this to bully you.

you can use this as a guide and change it for preventing pre trial stuff and the subpoena without a case is an FDCPA Violation.

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/there-lawyer-house/309532-motion-quash-subpoena-preserve-objections-trial-appeal.html#post1119991

this is a disturbing turn of events. you are right to fight pre suit discovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter what they called it. If it fit the legal requirements of validation, it was a validation. You can call a magpie a crow and it's still a magpie. A validation is pretty much "Yup, we checked our records and yup, you're the one who owes us." Did they meet that requirement?

As for the subpoena, maybe MI is different, but in NM, if there is a subpoena, there is either a court case or somebody is breaking some rules. Did the OC send you a copy of the subpoena?

Well, they sent me a magpie! It was a letter written on their letter head, that only included their PO address, it states my name, last 4 didgets, OC, account #< date of last payment, date opened, and charge off date.

I've looked closer at the subpoena. My name is on it with a case number. It appears I am being sued I just haven't been served yet. This must be all new. I will call the court house today.

The OC sent me the copy with a letter. In the letter it says it has to hand over info if I don't properly file a Motion to Quash in the next ten days of the date of the letter....MONDAY!

I am curious if this was a clue from the OC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for the guidance! I'm looking for Michigan rules for privacy concerns. Also, do you think I could possibly take the this subpoens is too vague angle?The subpoena says "Produce all credit card statements regarding defendants (says my SS# and Account #) from date of last payment, September 2008 and going back one year including but not limited to cc acccount agreement and/or signed credit card app for same."

or is that stretching? Is it okay to stretch? I am so short on time. By the time I got this letter, yesterday, over half of my ten days have passed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a defendant's responsive pleading. Make sure you send a copy of the nitice to quash to the OC or whoever sent the notice of subpeona. If you don't they will not know and give the records anyway.

also motion for a more definite statement when you are served.

This is a new procedure they are doing. I will help all I can.

here is a michigan answer.

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/1130054-post54.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a couple updates on my case.... in case anyone is reading....

1) I am being sued. JDB has till mid july to serve me

2) I spoke with OC and I don't have only until monday to show them prove of a properly filed motion to quash (thank you!!!!) I have until June 1st

3) I'm looking into Michigan Financial Privacy Acts and searching through the court rules (thank you internet!!!)

Any advise would be lovely and thank you for what has been given!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not finding useful privacy codes of civil procedure for michigan online. Do I need to go to a law library? I've never done any legal research before, but now that I have time, I'm hoping to figure it out. Anyone have any advise? Or a data base of some sort that has michigan codes? I've found the court rules online and I'm going to spend my day trying to figure the parts I need out. Thoughts?

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michigan Legislature - Basic MCL Search

Subpoenas are covered under Rule 2.500 in the Rules of Civil Procedure.

I don't see anything in any of these rules that indicates that you should file a motion to quash. Did the OC say on what grounds? It seems to me that since they were served, it would be up to them to object. It would have to be too burdensome or expensive for them to produce the records. Legally, they don't even have to keep them as far as I know, once they sell the account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did not say on what grounds... I think they were just letting me know they were releasing the info requested unless I faxed them a motion to quash or court order stating that OC didn't have to comply.

I thought maybe I would fill this motion to either 1) buy some additional time till suit or 2) Scare away JDB (pipe dream, I know.)

Are you saying that my best bet would to just start preparing for my lawsuit to begin which is most likely inevitable?

Thanks again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of grounds, they are prying into personal data here and if they do not have solid grounds to do such prying then the subpoena can be quashed. Been there done that. It is done all the time. An alternative is a protective order to bar anyone but outside counsel from viewing the documents due to your concern with a JDB having unfettered access to your accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kent, yes, they are looking into personal data. that aside, this is information reasonably related to proving their case. I don't recall the poster's info, but if he denied making payments on the account, this could be justified. Again, I think it is a fight between the OC and the JDB. What do you think? This is a new tactic, I appreciate your input. Also see you PMs. Something you need to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what the poster posted it is discovery before an answer is even made. I do not know why they would waste time, unless they are so full of themselves they expect they are going to get a default and this will help them with that.

I would go into it as they have no grounds as discovery has not begun, I deny that I even owe them money, they lack standing, etc.

As a party to the suit you always have standing to object to third party discovery. Double so when it is your information they seek. But for me it is every bit about beating opposing counsel over the head with a baseball bat. He soon realizes what a hornets nest he has gotten into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what the poster posted it is discovery before an answer is even made. I do not know why they would waste time, unless they are so full of themselves they expect they are going to get a default and this will help them with that.

I would go into it as they have no grounds as discovery has not begun, I deny that I even owe them money, they lack standing, etc.

As a party to the suit you always have standing to object to third party discovery. Double so when it is your information they seek. But for me it is every bit about beating opposing counsel over the head with a baseball bat. He soon realizes what a hornets nest he has gotten into.

I agree and believe that the key to quashing the subpoena would be the fact that it was issued before OP was even served. There hasn't even been an opportunity to retain council or to do legal research on court procedure, and BAM! There's a subpoena to deal with.

As for the privacy issue, I would call the records from the OC quite relevant. Too bad they're not going to get somebody from the OP into the courtroom to authenticate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that this is an issue between the JDB and the OC, but I don't think the OC cares too much about my lawsuit. I care about my lawsuit...

I think I do need to angle this as a privacy issue if I move forward with this motion. I think it's really messed up that the JDB can sue me with no evidence. I want to insure my privacy is protected and JDB don't receive any evidence for free using the court system tax payers pay for.

The only communication I have had with JDB has been written and I disputed the debt in its entirety. They have not shown me any prove at all. The whole system is completely screwy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of grounds, they are prying into personal data here

I'm not entirely sure, but I think there may be some confusion over what they are trying to get. The poster says they are subpoenaing credit card statements (monthly billing statements) from the OC. I fail to see how this would be a privacy issue. They are not requesting her checking account statements or personal banking records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that this is an issue between the JDB and the OC, but I don't think the OC cares too much about my lawsuit. I care about my lawsuit...

I think I do need to angle this as a privacy issue if I move forward with this motion. I think it's really messed up that the JDB can sue me with no evidence. I want to insure my privacy is protected and JDB don't receive any evidence for free using the court system tax payers pay for.

The only communication I have had with JDB has been written and I disputed the debt in its entirety. They have not shown me any prove at all. The whole system is completely screwy...

If you claim on one hand that they shouldn't get the records because of privacy concerns, then claim on the other hand that they should have had them before they filed the suit, you may have some problems. What they are subpoenaing is part of what you're claiming that it's messed up that they don't have.

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.