Jump to content

Odd case


armysgt
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am baffled.

1. received collection letters from jdb. Denied and demanded verification.

2.JDB filed Complaint, I answered.

3. Asked for dismiss of Complaint due to JDB not licensed in state (no standing).

4.JDB filed for Summary J. I filed opposition.

5. Now we are scheduled for telephonic conf. to hear Plaintiff's motion for SJ.

a. Complaint filed before debt validation. Was in Opposition to SJ.

b. JDB not licensed or bonded in state. State law says can't do anything unlicensed. Was in my Opposition to SJ.

c. Sworn Affidavit of debt was signed by squiggle, not full name.

d. Suspect robo signing and robo notary.

e. Summary of Account was made in-house by Plaintiff. Was in my Opposition to SJ

f. JDB has been thrown out of several states for fraudulent affidavits, Maryland being the latest.

What the heck am I doing wrong? Or is this good ol boys stuff? Or bring all this up at SJ tele hearing? Send Bill of Particulars?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not odd. It's about 100% how it goes. Most likely the licensing issue will be a state regulatory agency that will enforce that and you have no private right of action to enforce.

I just had one similar. I filed a federal lawsuit and used the fact they violated a state law with no private right of action they triggered a federal law with a private right of action (FDCPA) and went at it that way to get around the no private right of action problems.

You said there is a hearing coming up. Just because you have some great arguments, does not mean they are not entitled to their day in court.

Shoot, about a month ago we had a poster where the other side said since they bought in just bulk it was not feasible to prove they had standing, but they should win anyway.

You should have seen the fun we had around here with that argument. Big shock I know, but that argument did not work.

I would say you need some more arguments other than they have been law breakers in the past. I had an agency use the argument that collecting debts is not conducting business and therefore no need to be licensed.

Have you challenged any of their evidence on procedural grounds or filed discovery. Sounds like you should have no problem beating them, but don't rest too much on their prior bad acts.

Make sure them not being licensed means does not simply mean that you can sue them for FDCPA violations and does not take away their access to the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Discovery they sent the same phony affidavit and their home-made statement of account. I think a bill of particulars is next.

Also, the Wyoming state law says:Wyoming Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 33-11-102. Licenses required.

No person shall conduct a collection agency or act as a debt collector or solicitor within this state without first having obtained a license as provided in this act, except that a debt collector or solicitor acting in the course of his employment for a collection agency licensed in Wyoming is not required to have an individual license.

So, I would imagine they had no standing to even bring the case and they must be bonded. But they have a long history of fraudulent efforts. Also, wouldn't using the Court as an accomplice to creating debt where none exists, should annoy the Court, but maybe us little folks just don't count.

The hearing is a telephonic hearing.

Also, I can find no authority in Wyoming civil cases for Bill of Particulars.

Edited by armysgt
added text
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Discovery they sent the same phony affidavit and their home-made statement of account.

This is a motion for summary judgement. Have you previously made this argument or moved to strike the affidavit or entered your own counter affidavit.

In a motion for summary judgement you can't stand on denials and conclusionary arguments only, even if you are right, which I'm sure you are. "Phony affidavit" "home-made statement" are not arguments that will defeat a motion for summary judgement.

"I think a bill of particulars is next."

Not sure Wyoming has that right, I don't think it does. However, it's moot. The hearing for summary judgement is scheduled. Time to argue on what has been filed to this date.

Also, the Wyoming state law says:Wyoming Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 33-11-102. Licenses required. No person shall conduct a collection agency or act as a debt collector or solicitor within this state without first having obtained a license as provided in this act, except that a debt collector or solicitor acting in the course of his employment for a collection agency licensed in Wyoming is not required to have an individual license.

That is almost word for word with what my state law is.

They will argue their lawsuit is not conducting a collection agency or acting as a debt collector. They will argue they are suing you and that does not go under the WFDCPA. I assume they are using an attorney that is licensed in Wyoming and they will argue since they are not licensed in Wyoming, that is why they are using a licensed attorney in Wyoming to argue the case on their behalf.

Finally they will argue your recourse, even if they have violated the WFDCPA is to sue them under that statute and no part of the statute states their lawsuit would be deemed void.

So I would imagine.

Very dangerous !!

Also, wouldn't using the Court as an accomplice to creating debt where none exists, should annoy the Court,

If you can prove that and not just say it then hell yeah.

But maybe us little folks just don't count.

Oh we count, but we are expected, when we go pro-se, to argue facts, laws, case precedent, and not "imagine" or draw conclusions, even if you are 100% right, which I'm sure you are.

The hearing is a telephonic hearing.

Don't let that happen again !!

You need to fully understand what a motion for summary judgement is. Previously undisputed or unchallenged evidence will, generally speaking, be taken as correct.

I think you are relying way too heavily on them violating collection laws. If they were suing then you could argue lack of standing perhaps, but I bet they are using an atty that will have standing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, everything was disputed. In the complaint answer and in the Opposition to Summary Judgement. I did have a sworn affidavit the I deny the debt and its amount. I also refiled this at "is there a lawyer in the house". In the O to SJ, I stated no admissible evidence of contract or statement of account. Also stated there should be proof of terms as required by Truth in Lending Act 1637. So basically I am screwed and a shyster lawyer, with no proof or evidence is going to nail me and create a debt where none exists. What a screwed up legal system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, everything was disputed. In the complaint answer and in the Opposition to Summary Judgement. I did have a sworn affidavit the I deny the debt and its amount.

Okay, that is good, you did not say that in your original post. In summary judgement all you must do is raise a legitimate issue of a material fact that needs a trial to resolve.

In other words you don't have to prove you're right, just that a trial is needed. In my opinion, that is where people mess up. They focus way to much on trying to prove their case that they mess up and make the wrong legal argument, thereby taking away the issue of a material fact.

For example, if you write me a ticket for speeding, and in the MSJ (I know you would not have one for a speeding ticket, just an example), I responded by saying "I was not speeding" might work, but if I said, "I dispute the radar gun was properly calibrate, the officer was out of his jurisdiction, the area is a known speed trap where an excessive amount of revenue from speeding tickets makes up the towns budget and therefore violates XXX state law (most states states have that type of stuff), etc...........

I know that is not a real example because it's not a civil case so I was not speeding would work, but you should get the idea.

I just raised material disputes that obviously can't be taken care of in summary judgment unless all those issues have been addressed in the motion for summary judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, if you write me a ticket for speeding, and in the MSJ (I know you would not have one for a speeding ticket, just an example), I responded by saying "I was not speeding" might work, but if I said, "I dispute the radar gun was properly calibrate, the officer was out of his jurisdiction, the area is a known speed trap where an excessive amount of revenue from speeding tickets makes up the towns budget and therefore violates XXX state law (most states states have that type of stuff), etc...........

I got out of a speeding ticket because the deputy wrote the worng time on the ticket. She put 20:15 instead of 21:15- if you can't tell time, you can't read the radar gun...

But Colt is right - raise material issues in your reply and the case will move to trial.

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.