Jump to content

REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS...input please


NotaLawyer
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am working on the Request for Admissions to serve on a JDB (LA county - CA)...  There are so many things I think should be added to this, but while I want to cover all issues, I want to save for other discovery (prod of docs and interrogatories).

 

Hope that some of you more experienced individuals can provide me input on my requests below as well as provide other suggestions.

 

 

Thank you in advance for your help.

 

1. Admit you have no personal knowledge of the method or manner of the record-keeping practices of the original creditor of the debt that is the basis of this action.

 

2. Admit that you have no personal knowledge of the method or manner of the record keeping practices of any of the collection agencies that may have been at one time assignees of the right to collect this alleged debt.

 

3. Admit that you do not possess any written or executed agreements or promises to pay this alleged debt from the Defendant _________.

 

4. Admit you do not possess the original documents which you claim obligates Defendant.

 

5. Admit that the amounts claimed by Plaintiff include interest and legal fees.

 

6. Admit that you do not intend to call any witness from the original creditor.

 

7. Admit that you do not intend to call any witness that has a personal knowledge of this account at the time of its creation or had knowledge of the account when it was allegedly breached.

 

8. Admit Defendant never entered into a contract with Plaintiff.

 

9. Admit Plaintiff purchased Defendant's alleged debt after said debt was in default.

 

10. Admit Plaintiff never provided goods or services to Defendant.

 

11. Admit Plaintiff never paid money to anyone on behalf of Defendant.

 

12. Admit Plaintiff never lent money to Defendant.

 

13. Admit you have no written contract entitled Cardmember Agreement that states the terms and conditions that the Defendant agreed to.

 

14. Admit that Plaintiff is not entitled to recover upon the theories of "quantum meruit," "money had and received," and "unjust enrichment" as it was not a party.

 

15. Admit that Plaintiff verified debt in letter dated XX-XX-XX with original account stated as ____________. (NOTE: Plaintiff has since admitted that this acct. in verification letter was not mine and has tried to include an acct that is mine in discovery served upon me)

 

16. Admit that Plaintiff failed to identify the original creditor and the original account in the complaint for money filed on XX-XX-XX. (NOTE: Believe Plaintiff realized he screwed up on verification letter and left wrong acct off and correct acct off actual complaint so conflict is buried.)

 

???  what else am I missing that should be address ???

 

----------

 

Also assuming that I should send Form Interrogatories with 17.1 checked concurrently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would limit yourself to only a few of the best RFA's you listed, #8, 10, & 12 are pretty good. You can only have 35 discovery request (if you are in limited civil) and the interrogatories and request for production are going to be more important. Also, you will have to file a motion to compel discovery with the court later and it will be easier to do if you keep it simple.

RFA's are also very easy for them to object to, and you cover a lot of that ground with your interrogatories anyway. RFA's are often used in a second set of discovery, example: "admit the alleged cc statements provided to defendant in plaintiff's response to request for productions are not copies of the original and have been reproduced".

They are going to object to everything thing in discovery, but it will keep them working on the case, taking the profit out of it.

You don't want the form rogs. you need to draft your own, called special interrogatories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would limit yourself to only a few of the best RFA's you listed, #8, 10, & 12 are pretty good. You can only have 35 discovery request (if you are in limited civil) and the interrogatories and request for production are going to be more important. Also, you will have to file a motion to compel discovery with the court later and it will be easier to do if you keep it simple.

RFA's are also very easy for them to object to, and you cover a lot of that ground with your interrogatories anyway. RFA's are often used in a second set of discovery, example: "admit the alleged cc statements provided to defendant in plaintiff's response to request for productions are not copies of the original and have been reproduced".

They are going to object to everything thing in discovery, but it will keep them working on the case, taking the profit out of it.

You don't want the form rogs. you need to draft your own, called special interrogatories.

Thank you for your input!  

I already served a Bill of Particulars on the Plaintiff.  What came back were copies of statements from an account which WAS NOT referenced in the original dunning letter, nor the verification letter (different account mentioned then), an improper and unreadable terms and conditions - wrong date applicable as well as two improper attempts of showing chain of assignment - no name/acct #/copied from an obvious court case previously used - don't even believe either were actually part of chain in assignment for my debt.

At any rate, I don't want to focus on Plaintiff providing me statements (because I want to shoot holes in what he has already provided under BofP) - but I do want to focus on legal standing/chain of assignment documents.

...so if I understand your input you would suggest I start off with set one for prod of docs and special interrogatories and then RFA's afterwards...  not concurrently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your input!  

I already served a Bill of Particulars on the Plaintiff.  What came back were copies of statements from an account which WAS NOT referenced in the original dunning letter, nor the verification letter (different account mentioned then), an improper and unreadable terms and conditions - wrong date applicable as well as two improper attempts of showing chain of assignment - no name/acct #/copied from an obvious court case previously used - don't even believe either were actually part of chain in assignment for my debt.

good job, I did not realize you sent the BOP, it sounds like a typical CACH, LLC response (but all bottom feeders are typical). Looks like you do have something to poke holes in. Also, they are probably not "copies" of anything but rather their own reproductions (the cc statements may say somethingg to that effect) Study up on the state rules of evidence.

At any rate, I don't want to focus on Plaintiff providing me statements (because I want to shoot holes in what he has already provided under BofP) - but I do want to focus on legal standing/chain of assignment documents.

Yes, always attack standing as a starting point, it doesn't matter what they can prove (if anything) if they cannot prove  they have standing to sue you.

...so if I understand your input you would suggest I start off with set one for prod of docs and special interrogatories and then RFA's afterwards...  not concurrently?

My main point was no so much as don't run them concurrently, but rather, not so many RFA's (I saw a nightmare when you have to file a motion to compel them), and I believe many of them you can do without, however you may be able to use the RFA's to get them to admit certain facts about the cc statements you already received. You may not have the time (or desire) for 2 sets of discovery because it takes time to deal with their objections. You can send all the discovery together, just remember only 35 request and you will have to write motions to compel all your request later. You can send all the discovery together but make sure the RFA's are on separate pages from the rest.

It sounds like you have things under control...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

1. Plaintiff has no personal knowledge as to the mailing by the Original Creditor to Defendant of any written agreement governing the Account.

___ADMIT ___DENY

2. Plaintiff has no personal knowledge as to the mailing by the Original Creditor to Defendant of any billing statement for the Account.

___ADMIT ___DENY

3. Plaintiff has no personal knowledge as to why the Original Creditor entered any transaction, debit, credit or charge on any billing statement for the Account.

___ADMIT ___DENY

4. Neither Plaintiff nor its attorney(s) possess an affidavit, certificate or other document executed by or on behalf of the Original Creditor which purports to authenticate the genuineness of any documents related to the Account.

___ADMIT ___DENY

  • Like 1
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.