leanix3 Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 Hi I am recently in a court case against portfolio and they sent me bill of sale which reads------ Bill of SaleClosing Date: 05/24/2011 Chase Bank USA, NA ("seller"), for value received and purusant to the terms and conditions of Credit Card Account Purchase Agreement dated 12/10/2010 between Chase USA, NA and Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC ("Purchaser"), its successors and assigns ("Credit Card ACcount Purchase Agreement"), hereby assings effective as of the File Creation Date of 05/18/2011 all rights, title, and interest of Seller in and those certain receivables, judgments or evidences of debt described in the Final Date File, enitiled (Account's Primary File Name) attached hereto and made part hereof for all purposes. Amounts due to seller by Purchaser in hereunder shall be paid U.S. Dollars by a wire transer to be reveived by Seller on (the "closing date") 05/24/2011 by 2:00pm Seller's time, as follows: Chase Bank USA, N.A. Beneficiary Name: Chase Bank USA, N.A. This Bill of Sale is executed without recoure except as stated in the Credit Card Account Purchase Agreement. No other resprestntion of or warranty of title or enfoceabiled is express or implied Chase Bank USA, NA Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLCBy Jeffrey Judd By (can't read name or does it say who signed it)Date 05/19/2011 Date 05/20/2011Title: Team Leader Title Authorized Signature No where On this bill of sale mention my name or account ?Can someone help me understand what this means? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaDiane Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 I'm pretty sure that it has to have YOUR name and account number specifically referenced in order to be actual PROOF. But you have to challenge them about it in court (if you are already in court). If I am wrong, would anyone please correct me....? I'd also like to know this for my situation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shellieh98 Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 They are saying they bought a pool of accounts, and yours was included. t will not have your name or account number on the BOS, as it is for an entire pool of accounts. Lucky for you Chase has so many problems lately, that if you fight this, there is documentation out there that they did not keep accurate record keeping. Just helps when fighting these JDB's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spikey Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 You need to see the referenced documents to know if your account was actually part of the pool of accounts. They won't want to turn them over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 They usually use an affidavit to link the bill of sale to your account. Did they give you an affidavit that mentions your name and account number? They can be challenged and beaten but you have to supply all info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
credit2011 Posted January 21, 2014 Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 They are saying they bought a pool of accounts, and yours was included. t will not have your name or account number on the BOS, as it is for an entire pool of accounts. Lucky for you Chase has so many problems lately, that if you fight this, there is documentation out there that they did not keep accurate record keeping. Just helps when fighting these JDB's. When you said this "there is documentation out there that they did not keep accurate record keeping" is that documentation available somewhere in an article or legal brief?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leanix3 Posted January 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2014 They are saying they bought a pool of accounts, and yours was included. t will not have your name or account number on the BOS, as it is for an entire pool of accounts. Lucky for you Chase has so many problems lately, that if you fight this, there is documentation out there that they did not keep accurate record keeping. Just helps when fighting these JDB's.Where can I find the doumenyayion of chase having problems keeping accurate records Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wins the Battle Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Check your state's Rules of Civil Procedure (RCP). If you are sued, all the photocopies in the world won't work for the JDB, unless you let them. Nearly all states have language that allows paper records only if accompanied by the physical presence of the Keeper of Records at the OC. That person is not an employee of the JDB, obviously. He or she is a person who was in charge of YOUR account, and can swear to the accuracy of the records, all the way back to the original zero balance. I wouldn't worry about any bill of sale. It doesn't prove anything, legally. JDBs win, not because they have the proof, but because consumers don't know what proof is, or demand that they put up that proof, or shut up . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BV80 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 @Wins the Battle What states require the physical presence of the records custodian of the OC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wins the Battle Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I apologize. I said RCP, when I meant Rules of Evidence. Minnesota's, does for certain. The RoE do not state physical presence, but they DO state the "testimony" and it's up to the defendant, of course to insist on physical presence. Here is a piece from my Motion in Opposition to a Motion for SJ: 7. Minnesota Rules of Evidence allow, in limited circumstances, the use of business records as evidence. Rule 803 (6) defines the use of: “Records of regularly conducted business activity. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness…” 8. The Plaintiff has offered, as evidence, apparent business records. However, absent the availability of “a person with knowledge…the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness,” the apparent business records fall to the level of hearsay, which is defined in Minnesota Rules of Evidence, 801 © as “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BV80 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 @Wins the Battle I assume you were sued and won your case. The rule does not require the testimony of the custodian of records. It also references "other qualified witness". The purpose of the business rule exception is to show that the records being offered are business records. This is to differentiate business records from other types of records. It seems that business records are presumed to be more accurate than other types of records because they are needed to conduct business. An office memo would probably not qualify as a "business record" and could not be submitted under that rule. One's argument in regard to that rule would hinge upon precedential rulings by one's higher courts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.