leanix3

Bill of Sale from Chase Bank USA to Portfolio Recovery

Recommended Posts

Hi I am recently in a court case against portfolio and they sent me bill of sale which reads------

 

Bill of Sale

Closing 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, LLC

By Jeffrey Judd                                                                    By (can't read name or does it say who signed it)

Date 05/19/2011                                                                  Date 05/20/2011

Title: 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?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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?.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 .

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

@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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.