Jump to content

A Hypothetical Question... Kind Of!


Recommended Posts

Okay, for the sake of discussion, let's say an OC sold the debt to JDB1, JDB1 sold the debt to JDB2 and JDB2 has filed suit. JDB2 is going through the motions to solidify the chain of ownership (unsuccessfully with BS affidavits) but they seem to think it is going to be good enough. Well, here's the hypothetical:

Let's say the defendant while cleaning some old boxes finds a collection notice from a third JDB that has not been mentioned anywhere in any of the proceedings or mentioned in the chain of ownership.

What might be the bast way to handle this type of find? :twisted:

Any thoughts?? :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how admitting that they even sent something to you is gonna help your position.

The best way to deal with them is object for the correct things such as their affiants lack of personal knowledge, an out of states lack of ccp 2015.5, failure of the witness to appear if response to a subpoena.

the JDB2 may have sent it out to another collector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the JDB2 may have sent it out to another collector.

Thanks Seadragon. I understand about ccp 2015.5 and their BS Affidavits, but, let's say this hypothetical finding appears to date as though it may actually be the first JDB to own the debt?

Might there be fraud there??? Missing a link in the chain??? Not even mentioning it? Hypothetically of course...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would investigate the third debt collector and find out if the debt was sold to them or if they were trying to collect for the second. If you can prove that someone else owns the debt they have no standing to sue.

I would not hesitate to bring it up in court to prove they do not own the debt. Then I would fil;e an fdcpa countersuit against them

§ 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1962e]

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

(1) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof.

(2) The false representation of --

(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or

(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.

Or if you are in to a good fight I would file fraud charges against them for knowingly suing you over a debt they do not own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The suing DB may very well own the debt, my question/issue is if they put together a nice clean chain of ownership to bring to court with affidavits and all showing OX sold to DB who sold to DB, who is suing, what about the period of time mystery DB owned the debt???? Without a clearly outlined chain of ownership including ALL owners of the alleged account, their standing would blow up!

Yes????

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.