Jump to content

Pressler & Pressler says my answers to their interrogatories were non-responsive...


Recommended Posts

Hi all!

I received this letter from Pressler & Pressler saying that my answers to their interrogatories were non-responsive and I need help in how to respond...

Interrogatory number one (1) asks that you set forth your defense/dispute regarding the underlying HSBC credit card account. In reply, rather than setting forth any facts in support of an affirmative defense, you object stating that the interrogatory is overly broad, premature, and lacks specificity. This is non-responsive as the interrogatory is clear, appropriate and permissible. Please specify as to the underlying nature of your dispute of the debt, responsively addressing interrogatory number one by providing details, dates, and documentation in support of your disputes.

Interrogatory number two (2) asks for you to provide any documents that support your response to interrogatory number one (1). You object to this interrogatory and state that the documents remain the burden of the Plaintiff to produce. This is non-responsive at this interrogatory is asking you to provide information about your claims and/or defenses. Please be advised that you may not rely on Plaintiff's proofs to formulate your defense. Furthermore, by asserting defenses in this action, you represent that there is a factual basis on which you rely on making those claims. Please provide a responsive answer.

Interrogatory number three (3) asks that you list any/all addresses at which you received mail between XX/XX/XX and XX/XX/XX and to provide any and all documentation evidencing same. In response, you state that you are not in possession of the requested documentation form this time period. This is not responsive as you did not even attempt to list the addresses at which you received mail during this time period in question. Please provide a responsive answer.

HERE WERE MY ORIGINAL ANSWERS TO THEIR INTERROGATORIES:

1. Set forth with specificity all facts in the support of each defense and/or claim which the defendant has in the above-entitled matter including dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or conversations.

ANS. OBJECTION. Overly broad, burdensome, vague and premature. Defendant has not asserted any valid affirmative defenses. Defendant cannot formulate a response to "persons present or involved in any actions or conversations" as it is ill defined and generally lacks any specificity.

2. Attach copies of all writings, documents, or any other records which related to said account or in any way support any defenses or claims, including but not limited to, correspondence, contracts, agreements, notices, monthly statements, applications, and any letters sent to or received in connection with the subject account.

ANS. OBJECTION. Defendant is not aware of the existence of these documents and therefore doesn't have them. Furthermore, the referenced documents remain the burden of the plaintiff to produce, as they are requires to prove plaintiff's case.

3. Attach any documentation evidencing defendant's mailing address(es) between XX/XX/XX to XX/XX/XX, which should include but is not limited to, copies of energy or water bills, telephone bills, lease(s) and/or deed(s)/mortgage(s) and drivers license(s). If said documentation is not in the possession of the defendant, please list each address at which the defendant received mail during the time period requested.

ANS. OBJECTION. Defendant is not in possession of the requested documentation from this time period.

Any ideas on how I should respond, I'm stuck...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.philipstern.com/files/pldg.NJ.credtdefense.Discovery_requests.pdf

Send them these and see how they respond.

To copy and paste with a pdf file you will see little hand,just to the left of the hand you will see a pointer click on the pointer,then highlight the lines you want to copy,then press Ctrl then c.right click your mouse hit paste.

RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Legal Practice Forms

Philip D. Stern & Associates, LLC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my suggestions:

1. Defendant has not asserted any affirmative defenses and has no information regarding dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or conversations.

2. Defendant is searching her records and will respond if any such documentation is located.

3. How many addresses have you lived at during the time period to which they refer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my suggestions:

1. Defendant has not asserted any affirmative defenses and has no information regarding dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or conversations.

2. Defendant is searching her records and will respond if any such documentation is located.

3. How many addresses have you lived at during the time period to which they refer?

Thx so much for your suggestions...to answer your question...I only lived at one residence during that time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Set forth with specificity all facts in the support of each defense and/or claim which the defendant has in the above-entitled matter including dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or CONVERSATIONS.

CA's and JDB's are starting to ask these type questions more and more,,one reason is they are aware of forums like this one. A suit I am in right now over old bills, the CA is trying to argue that they know I have got most of my information I used to argue their rogs and the suit its self came from the internet.

They claim that people who use the internet and forums all have the same type of defenses, and they are saying that this information and the instructions from people on a forum delays court proceedings. They also claimed that anyone that gives legal information on a forum or through the internet is practicing law without a license.

They also say that a Plaintiff should have the right to know who gives the Defendant information over the internet either by email or in a forum., that they should have the right to know who these people are so they can subpoena them.

Wait until they get my affidavits from three of my professors that told me they will gladly go to court and tell the court that I am a law student and I am in the top five in my class academically. That will blow their internet forum crap out of the water.

I see at one point some where in the future these jdb's are going to get together and file suit suit in the Supreme court to try and have forums like these ruled illegal in some way.

They will be wasting their time but it will not surprise me if they do. Any way just thought I would throw that out there so ya'll would know why these kind of questions are being seen more and more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hrmmm, since most users do not use names that can used to identify you AND since most user probably do not assigned an identifiable email address to the account, lets see what it would take to subpoena anyone from an internet forum:

1) They would have to ex-parte subpoena the owner of the forum to give up the email address and/or IP address of the user name.

2) If the email address and the IP address are connected to the same company, they would then ex-parte subpoena the internet provider for the mailing address of the owner.

3) If the email address is a gmail address or something similar, they would have to ex-parte subpoena the company running the email address server probably for connection IP addresses (since a user would not use their real address) and then either contact the internet company if they can determine one from the IP addresses or do a skip trace to find the person if they only connect from public locations such as the library.

At any time during the process, the user can come in (without identifying themselves) and quash the subpoena. The plaintiff would also have to prove that the email address or forum address account was not compromised in any way AND that the IP address actually points to the person being subpoenaed in the end.

Can you imagine the cost of that? And for a debt of less than $10,000? I doubt it will really happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I can see a possible legislative "solution" to the problem of people fighting their cases BUT there is still that pesky 1st amendment issue. Besides, that may drive some people that still have a conscience to get their law degree just to help out people being sued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Set forth with specificity all facts in the support of each defense and/or claim which the defendant has in the above-entitled matter including dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or CONVERSATIONS.

CA's and JDB's are starting to ask these type questions more and more,,one reason is they are aware of forums like this one. A suit I am in right now over old bills, the CA is trying to argue that they know I have got most of my information I used to argue their rogs and the suit its self came from the internet.

They claim that people who use the internet and forums all have the same type of defenses, and they are saying that this information and the instructions from people on a forum delays court proceedings. They also claimed that anyone that gives legal information on a forum or through the internet is practicing law without a license.

They also say that a Plaintiff should have the right to know who gives the Defendant information over the internet either by email or in a forum., that they should have the right to know who these people are so they can subpoena them.

Wait until they get my affidavits from three of my professors that told me they will gladly go to court and tell the court that I am a law student and I am in the top five in my class academically. That will blow their internet forum crap out of the water.

I see at one point some where in the future these jdb's are going to get together and file suit suit in the Supreme court to try and have forums like these ruled illegal in some way.

They will be wasting their time but it will not surprise me if they do. Any way just thought I would throw that out there so ya'll would know why these kind of questions are being seen more and more.

IIRC, one CA already tried claiming that a guy who was suing them was engaging in unauthorized practice of law on the internet because of his posts on a consumer forum. I don't think that much ever came of it. Besides, it was pretty much totally irrelevant to the case.

Their moaning and groaning pisses me off. After the hundreds of thousands or millions of cases filed around the country each year by banks and JDBs against people who are unable to defend themselves, there is some serious hypocrisy there. Somebody dares to stand up for themselves and they defecate in their pants, dig it out and start flinging it on the walls. Unless somebody makes them eat it first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPL is pretty much defined, I fail to see where anyone here is practicing law. We give opinions and information based on our own experience. What the posters do with it is their business. We don't prepare their pleadings, we do not represent them in court, we do not misrep ourselves as lawyers, and WE DON"T GET PAID. In fact, we tell them up front that we are not layers, those of us who are not.

Set forth with specificity all facts in the support of each defense and/or claim which the defendant has in the above-entitled matter including dates, places, names and addresses of persons present or involved in any actions and/or CONVERSATIONS

This thing is poorly written and nearly impossible to comply with. It's moot if you don't have any special defenses listed. No poster here will ever ID the forum as the place where they got help, anyway. If this ever happens to a poster, push comes to shove, just name the several practicing attorneys who post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon my ignorance, but Rog1 seems incredibily intrusive. Is that even permissable?

Explain why you believe it's intrusive. The Plaintiff asked for an explanation of the Defendant's defenses, and if the Defendant had any documents or witnesses to back up the defense and the details of those documents or witnesses.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending a JDB attorney. When a JDB makes a claim, you have a right to know how they can back it up. This is the same thing. If you assert a defense, they have a right to know how you can back up that defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending a JDB attorney. When a JDB makes a claim, you have a right to know how they can back it up. This is the same thing. If you assert a defense, they have a right to know how you can back up that defense.

Is a valid defense any less valid if you come across a post here at CIC stating the fact?

Places like Credit Infocenter (or DB) are thorns in the sides of CA/JDB's. Nothing pisses them off more than some absolute clueless, helpful little kitten of a debtor discovering how to beat them at their own game.

I wouldn't think twice about giving credit where credit is due...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is a valid defense any less valid if you come across a post here at CIC stating the fact?

Places like Credit Infocenter (or DB) are thorns in the sides of CA/JDB's. Nothing pisses them off more than some absolute clueless, helpful little kitten of a debtor discovering how to beat them at their own game.

I wouldn't think twice about giving credit where credit is due...

I don't understand your response. I was responding to Sal. I didn't say that a defense isn't valid just because you found it here or on another site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon my ignorance, but Rog1 seems incredibily intrusive. Is that even permissable?

Any request is "permissible" to the extent that they can ask it. You, as the defendant, also have the "permissible" right to object. You must state your reason. When I read this ROG, I immediately pick up on the part that demands that you set forth your defense and explain it. Yes, this is technically a permissible question designed to save the court time. It is reasonable. However, you may not have a specific "defense." In credit card cases, this often does not apply.

Look at it this way. A Trooper cites you for speeding. You send in the ticket and deny that you were speeding. It is now incumbent upon the Trooper to prove in court that you were speeding. He may introduce as evidence his readout from his radar unit. You may now challenge that by demanding that he provide certain information; how and when was the radar unit last calibrated? How does he prove that he tracked you, and not somebody else?

The burden of proof is on the claimant, be it criminal or civil. In today's environment, JDB lawyers want to turn the Constitution on its head and demand that YOU prove your innocence. There is a specific place that had this type of law system; the Soviet Union.

On the other hand, amnesia does not work. "I don't remember" gets you a judgment. You can go to court, but you had better be able to make the argument that the other side cannot prove their case. This is not a specific "defense," it is common jurisprudence. There is a thin line that most JDB attorneys either never learned, or don't want to face. They know what they are when they go to court. Incompetent, stuttering, stammering lightweights who get PO'd when they get their butts kicked by a pro se who knows more than they do.

It's like George Patton said; It's not your job to die for your country, it's your job to make the other poor SOB die for his. It's the same thing in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't catch who is suing who for what here. But if it were a collector suing me for a debt, AND they have NOT YET provided PROOF of standing, then I would be doing an objection to any and all rogs, etc, that would require providing personal and/or confidential information.

Answer: Objected. Plaintiff has not yet, at this time, provided any proof of standing in the matter. Until such proof is provided, plaintiff is assumed to be abusing the rules of procedure to obtain private, personal, and confidential information, that once provided cannot later be undone to correct the error. Proof of standing was previously demanded and has not been received in proper form and content.

I would have demanded that proof on initial answer to summons, spelling out the degree to which documentation must not be hearsay, and must be sufficient for any court to remove any and all other parties from any standing.

I don't want any information unrelated to a debt to ever get to any debt buyer/collector (or anyone that doesn't have a justified reason to have it). If it is a debt I really owe (not past SOL) I'm fine with paying it, but only to a party I know owns the debt, and only under clear written terms that bring it to an end. Just because someone is willing to sue does not convince me that they have a legal right to information. It is important to force this up front because there is no way to "return the horse to the barn" when dealing with any business or corporation (not just debt collectors).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at it this way. A Trooper cites you for speeding. You send in the ticket and deny that you were speeding. It is now incumbent upon the Trooper to prove in court that you were speeding. He may introduce as evidence his readout from his radar unit. You may now challenge that by demanding that he provide certain information; how and when was the radar unit last calibrated? How does he prove that he tracked you, and not somebody else?

The burden of proof is on the claimant, be it criminal or civil. In today's environment, JDB lawyers want to turn the Constitution on its head and demand that YOU prove your innocence. There is a specific place that had this type of law system; the Soviet Union.

That's exactly how I feel, that I have to "prove my innocence".

I hate them. They are evil.

On the other hand, amnesia does not work. "I don't remember" gets you a judgment. You can go to court, but you had better be able to make the argument that the other side cannot prove their case. This is not a specific "defense," it is common jurisprudence. There is a thin line that most JDB attorneys either never learned, or don't want to face. They know what they are when they go to court. Incompetent, stuttering, stammering lightweights who get PO'd when they get their butts kicked by a pro se who knows more than they do.

It's like George Patton said; It's not your job to die for your country, it's your job to make the other poor SOB die for his. It's the same thing in court.

This may sound like a silly question...but how is this done?

You aren't suppose to say "I don't remember" - you make them prove their case....but how?

for example, if they ask you

"you got xxx credit card" you have to answer yes or no or you don't remember....how do you answer that where it puts into question they have to prove it?

Does this question make sense?

Do you object to the question when they ask you?

If so, on what grounds?

I know I'm still really new and learning, I'm just confused about how it is that they have to "prove" their case when it seems like they get to ask all the questions, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

proof of standing first

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

I didn't catch who is suing who for what here. But if it were a collector suing me for a debt, AND they have NOT YET provided PROOF of standing, then I would be doing an objection to any and all rogs, etc, that would require providing personal and/or confidential information.

Answer: Objected. Plaintiff has not yet, at this time, provided any proof of standing in the matter. Until such proof is provided, plaintiff is assumed to be abusing the rules of procedure to obtain private, personal, and confidential information, that once provided cannot later be undone to correct the error. Proof of standing was previously demanded and has not been received in proper form and content.

I would have demanded that proof on initial answer to summons, spelling out the degree to which documentation must not be hearsay, and must be sufficient for any court to remove any and all other parties from any standing.

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

I am also new to this forum and have received the same request on interrogatory #1 from Pressler who is suing me on belalf of Midland Funding on a Chase credit card account. My initial response was "Defendent avers that she owes nothing to the Plaintiff. The remainder if the request is overbroad and non-specific, as well as premature. Defendent reserves the right to amend her answer per the rules of civil procedure as information becomes available."

They are asking me for a more responsive answer, and I like your proof of standing response. Of course, I will leave off the last sentence in your answer. Can I use this response if it was not part of my defense when I initially responded to their summons, and if I do, will I have to amended my defensenses in the answer to their summons which was submited in the begining of August?

Edited by Bjorken21
error
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of JDBs trying to pry into membership details here at CIC. I think quite a number of members would really enjoy that. How many separate motions to quash would they have to deal with within a day or two of serving their subpoena. I would think it might almost eviscerate any profits for the quarter that the company would make if not carry the potential to bankrupt them if they were not one of the huge JDBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking for feedback as to the best answer in response to Presslers request for a more responsive answer to the following interrogatory.

Did defendant utilize a checking account in 2011? If yes, please provide:

a) The name of the bank -

B) The account number -

c) Any bank statements currently in possession of defendant pertaining to same.

Answer 1.

Answer: Objected. Plaintiff has not yet, at this time, provided any proof of standing in the matter. Until such proof is provided, plaintiff is assumed to be abusing the rules of procedure to obtain private, personal, and confidential information, that once provided cannot later be undone to correct the error.

Answer 2.

The Defendant objects on the grounds that it is personal, confidential and private. This Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any issue in this action, is overly broad and ambiguous to the term "checking account", assumes facts not in evidence, and information not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, information not relevant to any subject matter of this action, and would result in the disclosure of information where such disclosure would violate the privacy rights of the Defendant.

My initial answer was " OBJECT. This interrogatory seeks personal, confidential and private information that is not relevant to any issue in this action, information not relevant to any subject matter of this action, and would result in the disclosure of information where such disclosure will violate the privacy rights of the Defendant"

However, Pressler claims this answer was unresponsive.

Thanks for your iinput. I need to provide an updated response today!

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.