Jump to content

Being sued by PRA, need to answer! Help please


Recommended Posts

Hello. I was served last week and need to answer. Ive spent the weekend off and on reading, but Im still unsure of how I should answer the complaint/summons correctly. I have 15 more days to answer. Thank you in advance for any help, im completely overwhelmed.




1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit?

PRA

2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? (should be listed at the top of the complaint.)
Robert  Dunphy is the lawyers name. Everything other than that name lists PRA

3. How much are you being sued for?

2k

4. Who is the original creditor? (if not the Plaintiff)

GE/Care Credit

5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?)

Served

6. How were you served? (Mail, In person, Notice on door)
In person at home

7. Was the service legal as required by your state?

As far as I know

Process Service Requirements by State - Summons Complaint

8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued?

None

9. What state and county do you live in?

WA state. Pierce county

10. When is the last time you paid on this account? (looking to establish if you are outside of the statute of limitations)

2010 (as stated in documents and by credit report)

11. What is the SOL on the debt? To find out:
6 yrs

12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed? You can find this by a) calling the court or B) looking it up online (many states have this information posted - when you find the online court site, search by case number or your name).
I searched my name and it does show that I am a defendant. Just shows case #, my name and defendant. No other info

Case number is not on the paperwork but it is stamped that it has been filed

13. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?)

No

14. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? Note: if you haven't sent a debt validation request, don't bother doing this now - it's too late.

No

15. How long do you have to respond to the suit? (This should be in your paperwork).

20 days - 15 days left

 

If you don't respond to the lawsuit notice you will lose automatically. In 99% of the cases, they will require you to answer the summons, and each point they are claiming. We need to know what the "charges" are. Please post what they are claiming. Did you receive an interrogatory (questionnaire) regarding the lawsuit?

 

Jurisdiction
1. The above-captioned court has jurisduction over this case as the claims arises out of action for damages up to $75,000

 

Parties and venue

2. Plaintiff, PRA, is a Delaware Limited Liability Company and is duly licensed to conduct business in the State of Washington

3. Defendant is an individual who, at all times material hereto, resided in the State of Washington, County of Pierce

 

Factual Allegations

4. Plaintiff is the assignee and owner of the account described herein, having heretofore purchased the same. GE/CC sold all of its rights and interest it had in the account and all amounts owed under said account to Plaintiff.

5. On or about April 12, 2010 Defendant entered into an agreement with GE/CC ("Agreement" hereafter) whereby Defendant applied for and was issued an account with GE/CC ending in XXXX ("account" hereafter). The defendant agreed to the terms and conditions of the Account when Defendent used the card associated with the Account and/or made purchases on same.

6. Defendant defaulted on the Agreement when Defendant failed to make payments on the account. The account was charged off for deliquency on Dec 1, 2011

7. There is currently an outstanding balance on the account owed by Defendant to Plaintiff in the sum of $2,000

 

Causes of action - blank

 

Breach of Contract

8. Plaintiff re-allefes, as if restated para 1-7, above

9. GE/CC performed its obligations under the TOA

10. Defendant failed to fulfill its obligations under the TOA when Defendant defaulted on the Account by discontinuing payment

11. Due to default, the full indebtedness under the Agreement is immediately due and owing, and the same remains unpaid.

12. by virtue of Defendant's breach of the Agreement, Defendant is indebted to Plaintiff, as assignee of the Account, in the amount of $2,000

 

Account Stated

13. Plaintiff re-alleges, as if restated, paragraphs 1 through 12, avove

14. GE/CC furnished regular statements of account to Defendant, which included the amount(s) due

15. Upon information and belief, Defendant never disputed the amount due, as stated in regular statements furnished to Defendant

16. Despite numerous demands for payment, Defendant has failed to pay the balance due and owing on the Account

17. Defendant is indebted to Plaintiff, as assignee of the Account, in the principal sum of $2,000

 

Relief Requested

Wherefore, Plaintiff requests judgement against Defendant for:

The prinicipal sum of $2,000 with interest thereon at the rate of 12% annum from the date of judgment until paid;

Plaintiff's costs and disbursements incurred herein;

Such further relief as the Court finds just proper

16. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affidavit? Statements from the OC? Contract? List anything else they attached as exhibits.

Nothing. Packet I received was Cover Sheet, Notice of Appearance, Summons and Complaint.

Any help on how to answer is greatly appreciated. I dont even understand what #3 says. Material hereto? Resided in WA when? Currently or at the time of getting the card and defaulting?
 

edited to ask some more questions - what exatly do I need to answer admit/deny to? Everything from 1-17 or things after Factual Allegations?

Im really confused on that part. Not sure how to answer the jurisdiction and the parties and venue section. 

Also, if i deny everything do I need to put that next to each number or can I just say "Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same." ? Im assuming no cause that seems too easy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until they provide you with something else, assume this is the agreement they will rely on.

http://files.consumerfinance.gov/a/assets/credit-card-agreements/pdf/creditcardagreement_6727.pdf

It states the laws of the State of Utah are the governing laws for the agreement. Unfortunately it looks like you're still within SOL regardless, but be sure you assert SOL as an affirmative defense along with everything else.

For your answers, it looks to me like the only one you would possibly admit is the one where they said you lived in washing for "all of the times material hereto". If you ever lived in another state, deny this one too.

I don't know Washington law, but this will get you started and is probably all you need to file your answer and protect your rights. Post your answer here for review before you file it to make sure it's ok.

You're in good hands here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could use some feedback. Im working on my answer some more this morning and Im unsure how to write my affirmative defenses for things I have denied.

 

Do I just list the paragraph with Deny and then explain why I deny in the affirmative defenses or do I just repeat myself?

 

Should it look like this:

 

 

1. DENY

2. DENY

3. DENY

 

 

Affirmative defenses

1. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

2. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

3. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

 

 


or like this

 

 

1.Deny.  Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them.

 

Affirmative defenses

1. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them.

 

 

 

Another question I have is for areas like #8 and #13. Is "Paragraph 8 of the Complaint states a legal conclusion for which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendant denies the allegations of Paragraph 8 of the Complain" the correct response to "Plaintiff re-alleges, as if restated, paragraphs 1 through 12, above."?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@WaRain

 

 

1. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

2. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

3. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to either admit or deny the allegations contained therein and therefore deny them

 

 

The above are not affirmative defenses.  Those are answers to allegations in a complaint.  If you can't admit or deny an allegation, you can say that you don't have enough information to admit or deny.

 

An affirmative defense is a reason that you should not be held accountable for the debt.  For instance, if the account was time-barred, you'd use the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations meaning the account is outside the SOL, so you shouldn't be sued. 

 

If this is your debt and considering you're being sued by a JDB, you could use the affirmative defense of Lack of Standing.  Standing means that a plaintiff has been injured in some way (in this case, it would be an economic injury) and has a right to be compensated for that injury.  

 

In the case of a JDB, they have to prove they own the account in order to have standing to sue.  If they can't prove ownership of the account, they can't prove they were injured.  No proof of an injury, no standing (right) to sue. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you BV80! My overthinking is doing more harm than good. This is my first time so Im panicked and all over the place.

I denied everything and then got confused about how to word my affirmative defenses.  Do i need one for all 17 paragraphs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@WaRain

 


 

 

Do i need one for all 17 paragraphs

 

 

If you're referring to affirmative defenses, no.   A defense is why you shouldn't be sued or why you shouldn't be held accountable for why you're being sued.  

 

The 17 paragraphs are allegations (claims).   An allegation is a claim made by a party in a lawsuit.  In #1, they claim the court has jurisdiction over the matter.  Well, if they sued in the wrong court, you could deny that claim. 

 

Each claim doesn't require a defense.  A defense has to do with the lawsuit as a whole.  Did that make sense?

 

All of this being said, check your state laws.  Does a JDB have to be registered in your state as a collection agency?   While some states require CAs to be registered, they don't require an out-of-state CA/JDB to be registered.  Also, some states differentiate between JDBs and CAs and don't require JDBs to register as a collection agency.   A CA collects for other creditors.  A JDB collects for themselves.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BV80, Thank you so much!! That answer helped me so much. I was thinking I had to write affirmative defenses to all 17 claims.

If I remember correctly, CA's do need to be licensed but that isnt taking effect until Oct 1st. Im going to go look that up again just to make sure Im right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I have for my answer. Is this okay? Is there anything I should remove, rewrite or add? Thank you again for your help.
The ones in red are the ones im most unsure about.

 

I. Defendant answers the complaint as follows:

1.     Deny. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


2.    Deny. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


3.     Deny. Defendant has not been material hereto in the State of Washington, County of Pierce at all times.


4.    Deny. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.



5.     Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


6.    Deny. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.



7.    Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


8.    Paragraph 8 of the Complaint states a legal conclusion for which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendant denies the allegations of Paragraph 8 of the Complaint.


9.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


10.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.



11.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


12.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


13.    Paragraph 13 of the Complaint states a legal conclusion for which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendant denies the allegations of Paragraph 13 of the Complaint.


14.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


15.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.


16.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.



17.    Deny.  Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation(s) in the Complaint, and therefore denies the same.








II. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES


1.The defendant denies the lawsuit in its entirety.

   

2. Plaintiff’s complaint is not properly verified and is not grounded in fact because it does not exhibit the alleged contract the debt is based upon, a valid statement of account, nor any valid assignment that gives Plaintiff legal title to the claim.


3. Plaintiff is not who I entered into any Contract with and does not have standing to sue defendant.


4. Plaintiff has not suffered any damages because of the defendant.


5. Defendant claims a Failure of Consideration, as there has never been any exchange of any money or item of value between the plaintiff and the Defendant.

   

6. Defendant claims Accord and Satisfaction as Defendant alleges that the original creditor accepted payment from a third party for the alleged debt, or a portion of the alleged debt, or that the original creditor received other compensation in the form of monies and/or credits.


7. Plaintiff admits to purchasing the defaulted debt allegedly owned by the Defendant, causing Plaintiff's injury to its own self, therefore Plaintiff is barred from seeking relief for damages.


8. Plaintiff’s Complaint is not based on its personal knowledge of the alleged debt.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it were me, I'd deny #'s 7, 12, and 17.  In those allegations, the JDB is claiming you owe them (the JDB).  

#7 - "to Plaintiff".  The Plaintiff is the JDB.

#12 - "Defendant is indebted to Plaintiff"

#17 - "Defendant is indebted to Plaintiff"

Unless they can prove they own the account, you are not indebted to the plaintiff.

Carefully read your court rules regarding answers to a complaint.  There should be something about answering with "insufficient information".  If so, do the rules require you to include some kind of explanation?  If not and in my non-attorney opinion, your responses to the allegations should be fine as far as I can tell.

 

Affirmative Defenses

 

#3.  I would not include "Plaintiff is not who I entered into any Contract with".  You really don't want to imply you entered into a contract with anyone.  The burden of proof is on the JDB to prove you had a contract with the original creditor (OC).

 

#4 goes along with standing to sue.  If the JDB can't prove they own the account, then they can't prove they suffered damages as a result of your failure to pay.

 

To be honest, #'s 5, 6, and 7 don't really apply here because purchasers of a debt can "step into the shoes" of the OC.  For instance, that happens all the time with mortgages.  Mortgage Company #1 will sell a mortgage to Mortgage Company #2.  That new MC will have all the rights of MC #1.  It doesn't matter that you didn't open the account with MC #2. 

 

The same goes for JDBs. 

 

#8 is not an affirmative defense.  As far as I know, personal knowledge is not required to file a lawsuit.  It's required if the JDB files a motion for summary judgment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your amended answer will be fine you did not admit to owing them any money.

The other side wants for you not to deny one of the allegations in plaintiffs complaint.

 

8. Plaintiff’s Complaint is not based on its personal knowledge of the alleged debt.

Plaintiff bases its complaint off a CD Disk and a spread sheet that has been sold several times. Plaintiff has no personal knowledge of the debt.

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, THE CHARGED-OFF

ACCOUNTS ARE BEING SOLD "AS IS" AND "WITH ALL FAULTS",

WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY WHATSOEVER

AS TO EITHER CONDITION, FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR

PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR ANY OTHER WARRANTY,

EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND SELLER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS

ANY WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION, ORAL OR WRITTEN, PAST OR

PRESENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE CHARGEDOFF

ACCOUNTS, OR THE STRATIFICATION OR PACKAGING OF THE

CHARGED-OFF ACCOUNTS.

1.Number of Accounts

2.Total Unpaid Balances

3.Premium

4.Due Seller

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your amended answer will be fine you did not admit to owing them any money.

The other side wants for you not to deny one of the allegations in plaintiffs complaint.

 

8. Plaintiff’s Complaint is not based on its personal knowledge of the alleged debt.

Plaintiff bases its complaint off a CD Disk and a spread sheet that has been sold several times. Plaintiff has no personal knowledge of the debt.

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, THE CHARGED-OFF

ACCOUNTS ARE BEING SOLD "AS IS" AND "WITH ALL FAULTS",

WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY WHATSOEVER

AS TO EITHER CONDITION, FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR

PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR ANY OTHER WARRANTY,

EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND SELLER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS

ANY WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION, ORAL OR WRITTEN, PAST OR

PRESENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE CHARGEDOFF

ACCOUNTS, OR THE STRATIFICATION OR PACKAGING OF THE

CHARGED-OFF ACCOUNTS.

1.Number of Accounts

2.Total Unpaid Balances

3.Premium

4.Due Seller

 

 

 

Not gonna lie, I dont understand this at all. I can add this?

 

WaRain are you the former MissingtheRain from Kansas if I remember you had some arbitration cases.

 

Not me. My husband actually found this forum the other day when he googled the lawyers WSB number. a thread popped up from someone else that had gotten served

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, THE CHARGED-OFF

ACCOUNTS ARE BEING SOLD "AS IS" AND "WITH ALL FAULTS",

WITHOUT ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY WHATSOEVER

AS TO EITHER CONDITION, FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR

PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR ANY OTHER WARRANTY,

EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND SELLER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS

ANY WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION, ORAL OR WRITTEN, PAST OR

PRESENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE CHARGEDOFF

ACCOUNTS, OR THE STRATIFICATION OR PACKAGING OF THE

CHARGED-OFF ACCOUNTS.

 

 

What the above means is that the OC is not guaranteeing that the collectability or accuracy of the sold accounts.   When you buy a new product, you get a warranty.  That warranty usually says that the sold item is in good working condition, etc., but if you have a problem, you have a period of time to address the issue.

 

If you buy a used item, you usually buy it "as is".  That means it might have some problems, and if there's a problem with it, you can't get your money back because you agreed to buy it "as is".

 

In this case, the bill of sale specifically states that the accounts are sold "as is" and "with all faults".  That could mean that that not all of the details related to each account are accurate.  That could go to challenging the balance of the account.  Unless the JDB has every single credit card statement so that the balance can be calculated, the balance is not guaranteed to be correct.

 

Another example would be the accuracy of the credit card statements.  "With all faults" could possibly mean that the OC is not guaranteeing that the details on the cc statements are correct.  As a result, they're not guaranteeing that all of the charges and fees showing on any cc statements are correct. 

 

That's just a couple of examples.

 

All that being said, I'm not sure #8 is an affirmative defense.  It's something you'd use if the JDB filed a motion for summary judgment.  You'd include the language from the bill of sale in your opposition to the motion.

 

  • 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.