Jump to content

Coltfan update


Recommended Posts

These things make me wonder who I'm posting to when posting my personal cases and histories.

 

Take advice received from any single poster with a "grain of salt." Ask yourself these questions as to replies or advice:

  • Did anyone else echo similar advice?
  • Does that person post advice that is consistent over at that other board?

I saw a post that @howucan2 advised someone and Kristy commented that it was good advice. Over at the other board, @howucan2's advice is consistent with what gets posted here and others at both boards tend to agree with that advice. So does that absolutely prove that @howucan2 is NOT a JDB (sorry @howucan2, just using you as an example... ;-) )? No, but by looking at posts and the replies of others, I am comfortable that @howucan2 is not a JDB in "wolf's clothing."

 

Are CA's and JDB's posting here and on the other board to give misleading advice? You would be naive to think otherwise, but it can't be proven with absolute certainty. Just remember it could be possible and keep that in mind when you are making the decision on whether to take the advice given or not. At the end of the day, you're the one that has to be satisfied, no one else. I hope I don't trip climbing down off of my soapbox.  x:-)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take advice received from any single poster with a "grain of salt." Ask yourself these questions as to replies or advice:

  • Did anyone else echo similar advice?
  •  
  • Does that person post advice that is consistent over at that other board?
  •  

I saw a post that @howucan2 advised someone and Kristy commented that it was good advice. Over at the other board, @howucan2's advice is consistent with what gets posted here and others at both boards tend to agree with that advice. So does that absolutely prove that @howucan2 is NOT a JDB (sorry @howucan2, just using you as an example... ;-) )? No, but by looking at posts and the replies of others, I am comfortable that @howucan2 is not a JDB in "wolf's clothing."

 

Are CA's and JDB's posting here and on the other board to give misleading advice? You would be naive to think otherwise, but it can't be proven with absolute certainty. Just remember it could be possible and keep that in mind when you are making the decision on whether to take the advice given or not. At the end of the day, you're the one that has to be satisfied, no one else. I hope I don't trip climbing down off of my soapbox.  x:-)

If I was a JDB at least I would read and learn something!

 

BTW, I only give myself advice and that's using my judgement when I post or when I have to make a decision. I only know the laws of one jurisdiction and that's the one I reside in, it will be a disservice to others if I ramble about something I don't know or haven't experienced !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I wonder is why this coltfan controversy is happening at the same time he's winning and posting about his apparently precedent setting case.  I'm sure the CA industry doesn't want people to know about the court case, wants to keep it shut up, and certainly wants to discredit the person who's winning.  This is my concern, and also why clydesmom appears to be so successful at keeping people from helping each other.  These things make me wonder who I'm posting to when posting my personal cases and histories.

Why do you think he's winning?  He only "won" (and that's the wrong word)  the right to post online.  I don't see that as an earth-shattering precedent - that's first amendment stuff.  

 

And no personal attacks on Clydesmom.  Just saying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was a JDB at least I would read and learn something!

 

BTW, I only give myself advice and that's using my judgement when I post or when I have to make a decision. I only know the laws of one jurisdiction and that's the one I reside in, it will be a disservice to others if I ramble about something I don't know or haven't experienced !

 

Agreed, as long as the advice is along the lines of this is what I would do. I just said something similar on Cavalry's tactics in another thread. My observations are only based on what they've done in NY, not other jurisdictions,

 

By the way, if anyone does want to take a look at filings in NYS Supreme Court in most of the counties in NY here is a link to the electronic filings.

 

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/Login

 

You can go in and as a Guest. Some cases are "secure" so you can't see specific documents, but it has saved me a lot of time in my research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take this for whatever it's worth to you.

 

Coltfan was a popular poster here...his style was dramatic and he had an element of humor and tenacity associated with himself and his persona here at CIC.  However, his ego got too big for his britches and the staff asked him to tone things town...he did not so he was banned, then the ban was lifted as mentioned before upon request. 

 

He came back and his behavior did not change (in fact it got worse) and so he was banned again. 

 

Personally (mod hat off) I enjoyed reading his posts.  However, "Coltfan1972" was a character...a persona he played.  Like pro wrestling...not the real him.  His posts were entertaining, his posts were helpful to others, but his posts were not him.

 

As a mod, who has seen the full story, I fully support his banning, as well as the banning of the others previously listed for TOS violations.  "My way or the highway" attitudes do not work in a place like this, at a board like this where our aim is to help everybody. Not to mention the scathing emails sent to Kristy after his banning.  Not cool at all, not just from a mod perspective, but from the perspective of a decent human being.

 

Those that want to follow Colt and his exploits are fully encouraged to go over to debtorboards (follow the link posted earlier to his thread) and read it over and follow along...there are many members here that also belong there.  It is very well known that they're more litigious over there than we are here, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

 

But Coltfan has chosen by his words and actions to part ways with CIC, and we need not dwell on that here.  CIC was here before Coltfan, will be here after Coltfan, and will be here after many more Coltfan's to come.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@numbersguy

 

@howucan2

 

Exactly.  Most of us post based upon our experiences.  That's why we encourage readers to read and learn their own court rules.  It's also why we post state laws and case law from a poster's state.  We can tell them what worked in our own cases, but they must understand their own rules, state laws, and how their courts have ruled.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

I can't agree more !

 

Online forums such as this one is for education and encouragment only , they must not be mistaken for professional legal advice.

 

I am not your typical pro se litigant, I have done extensive work on appeal (when no lawyer wanted to touch my case) , But I credit it to my own diligence, reserach and preperation and my NOT so bright opponents. :)%

 

At the time all I wanted to do was to defend myself when no one thought I had the slightest chance of success. I proved them wrong !

 

My learning did not come from online forums but actual case laws and opinions of the courts, BUT my HOPES and encouragements came from my online comrads whom I followed the footsteps and stood on their shoulders. Their valuable experiences set the precedent for me to do what I had to do.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not made any personal attacks on anyone.  Your response is interesting though.

 

I don't think you were being accused of a personal attack. I read it as to mean it was just a friendly reminder not to let it get personal. Nothing more, nothing less.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hardcore types like LizardKing can bring out the crusader types like James Keener, which can result in boards like Art of Credit going down. The mods sometimes need to head that off at the pass. I can see their point, even though I enjoy Coltfan's stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have stayed out of this until now, but I think I have a perspective that has not yet been voiced on the board.

 

In my view, every time one of you makes an appearance in court, you stand as an ambassador for the thousands or millions of pro pers that will follow in your wake.  If you are a debt collection defendant, you must be prepared.  You must expect no assistance from the Court simply because you are not a lawyer.  You must understand any briefs you file—you must read the statues and cases you cite and understand them.  You don’t have to be a great speaker but you should be prepared, polite and respectful.

 

If you are a pro per plaintiff in an FDCPA case, you need to do all of the above and more.  Many Federal Judges do not love FDCPA cases.  They view them as “small cases” that take valuable time away from deciding tough constitutional cases, heinous federal crimes or difficult statutory construction.  So you need to show these judges that the cases DO matter.  Debt collectors ruin lives, jobs,  and marriages.  As Congress found, “There is abundant evidence of the use of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by many debt collectors. Abusive debt collection practices contribute to the number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of individual privacy.”  15 USC 1592(a). 

 

Again, you  are all ambassadors.  When pro pers appear unprepared, that can feed or create a judicial preconception that can cast a pall on those who follow.  When FDCPA plaintiffs trivialize the injury caused by violation of the statute, that can similarly create hurdles for those whose lives have been seriously injured by an industry that seeks to profit from others’ misfortune.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have stayed out of this until now, but I think I have a perspective that has not yet been voiced on the board.

 

In my view, every time one of you makes an appearance in court, you stand as an ambassador for the thousands or millions of pro pers that will follow in your wake.  If you are a debt collection defendant, you must be prepared.  You must expect no assistance from the Court simply because you are not a lawyer.  You must understand any briefs you file—you must read the statues and cases you cite and understand them.  You don’t have to be a great speaker but you should be prepared, polite and respectful.

 

If you are a pro per plaintiff in an FDCPA case, you need to do all of the above and more.  Many Federal Judges do not love FDCPA cases.  They view them as “small cases” that take valuable time away from deciding tough constitutional cases, heinous federal crimes or difficult statutory construction.  So you need to show these judges that the cases DO matter.  Debt collectors ruin lives, jobs,  and marriages.  As Congress found, “There is abundant evidence of the use of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by many debt collectors. Abusive debt collection practices contribute to the number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of individual privacy.”  15 USC 1592(a). 

 

Again, you  are all ambassadors.  When pro pers appear unprepared, that can feed or create a judicial preconception that can cast a pall on those who follow.  When FDCPA plaintiffs trivialize the injury caused by violation of the statute, that can similarly create hurdles for those whose lives have been seriously injured by an industry that seeks to profit from others’ misfortune.

 

Very well put.  Your bad, poorly prepared case can make bad law for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.  These things make me wonder who I'm posting to when posting my personal cases and histories.

Then some good has come from all of this.

I have not noticed that anyone has stopped helping or giving their opinions due to Clydesmom rants however.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think he's winning?  He only "won" (and that's the wrong word)  the right to post online.  I don't see that as an earth-shattering precedent - that's first amendment stuff.  

 

And no personal attacks on Clydesmom.  Just saying. 

I do FDCPA work and I am a member of NACA.  While his case was not dismissed, the judge allowing the posting history into evidence as the potential to be devastating to his case.   If a jury finds the BFE defense is valid just because they do not like Coltfan, I guarantee you the CA will try to assess him with attorney's fees and costs and there is a genuine risk of a judge awarding fees given the posts.   I do not think the BFE defense is valid, but juries do what they do sometimes because they do not like a litigant or a litigant's attorney or because they ran out of their favorite cereal for breakfast.

 

Litigation and trials are scary and unpredictable, especially FDCPA.   I see the decision as a heavy blow because the character evidence stays out at most trials.  It could be devastating to his case. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calawayer, as a respected member of the Calif. bar. I for one appreciate your input into this matter. As always, your inputs have been highly regarded along with those of the other attorneys that we have on this board. I thank you again.

 

As a long time member here, I hope that this board will now settle down and continue with business as usual before those in the minority try to destroy the good that has been provided us. As an owner of a forum myself, I have seen things happen, such as this. In the end, right shall prevail, as this board was here before us, and will be so after us. I have watched many people come and go on here. Hopefully we have been able to help them resolve their problems.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I wonder is why this coltfan controversy is happening at the same time he's winning and posting about his apparently precedent setting case.  I'm sure the CA industry doesn't want people to know about the court case, wants to keep it shut up, and certainly wants to discredit the person who's winning.  This is my concern, and also why clydesmom appears to be so successful at keeping people from helping each other.  These things make me wonder who I'm posting to when posting my personal cases and histories.

The only precedent that will be set is if a jury despies Coltfan so much that they find in favor of the BFE defense.  It is a BS BFE defense but a jury's determination of fact is rarely overturned.   If the jury finds for the BFE defense, Coltfan is going to have one heck of a legal bill to pay because I can easily see there being a determination that he used the litigation to harass and for an improper purpose (even though I think that would be a horribly wrong decision).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@numbersguy

 

@howucan2

 

Exactly.  Most of us post based upon our experiences.  That's why we encourage readers to read and learn their own court rules.  It's also why we post state laws and case law from a poster's state.  We can tell them what worked in our own cases, but they must understand their own rules, state laws, and how their courts have ruled.

Absolutely! The ONUS is on one's self!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

I can't agree more !

 

Online forums such as this one is for education and encouragment only , they must not be mistaken for professional legal advice.

 

I am not your typical pro se litigant, I have done extensive work on appeal (when no lawyer wanted to touch my case) , But I credit it to my own diligence, reserach and preperation and my NOT so bright opponents. :)%

 

At the time all I wanted to do was to defend myself when no one thought I had the slightest chance of success. I proved them wrong !

 

My learning did not come from online forums but actual case laws and opinions of the courts, BUT my HOPES and encouragements came from my online comrads whom I followed the footsteps and stood on their shoulders. Their valuable experiences set the precedent for me to do what I had to do.

And BRAVO for everything you said. Humility comes in many flavors, some more recognizable than others (of which I have suffered mightily at my own hand (one would think that I would learn..)) Stand on the shoulders of those who have come before, learn what APPLIES to you personally and use it at your own fully-discriminated-and well-thought-out risk. The onus resides with the individual, and if I may be so bold, that is what separates "us" from whatever-you-may care-to-insert. Past or future contribution in no way absolves one from principalled action or expectation. No one is above the law... Period. Most especially me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have stayed out of this until now, but I think I have a perspective that has not yet been voiced on the board.

 

In my view, every time one of you makes an appearance in court, you stand as an ambassador for the thousands or millions of pro pers that will follow in your wake.  If you are a debt collection defendant, you must be prepared.  You must expect no assistance from the Court simply because you are not a lawyer.  You must understand any briefs you file—you must read the statues and cases you cite and understand them.  You don’t have to be a great speaker but you should be prepared, polite and respectful.

 

If you are a pro per plaintiff in an FDCPA case, you need to do all of the above and more.  Many Federal Judges do not love FDCPA cases.  They view them as “small cases” that take valuable time away from deciding tough constitutional cases, heinous federal crimes or difficult statutory construction.  So you need to show these judges that the cases DO matter.  Debt collectors ruin lives, jobs,  and marriages.  As Congress found, “There is abundant evidence of the use of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by many debt collectors. Abusive debt collection practices contribute to the number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of individual privacy.”  15 USC 1592(a). 

 

Again, you  are all ambassadors.  When pro pers appear unprepared, that can feed or create a judicial preconception that can cast a pall on those who follow.  When FDCPA plaintiffs trivialize the injury caused by violation of the statute, that can similarly create hurdles for those whose lives have been seriously injured by an industry that seeks to profit from others’ misfortune.

AMEN. Which is (partially... I cannot shift any responsibility other than myself) why I will be checking out the post judgement forum POST HASTE. I was not prepared, did not understand, was actually concerned about wasting the court's time, but mostly, and it might be all ego, but I felt that I did not want to appear feeble and thus cast undue aspersions upon myself and people in similar positions and circumstance. Education is never free, and rarely without sacrifice. BRING IT ON!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...