Recommended Posts

I am looking for anyone who has copies of a Bill of Sale or Assignment from Citibank with Patricia Halls signature.  I have collected two  (from a Cavalry and Midland case)  that seem to be different signatures and I suspect robosigning. The wording on the Bill of Sale is also different.  I am particularly interested in any notarized signatures from her.  This person seems to be on many JDB cases and I am trying to establish if this is like the Mortgage robosigning scandal.  These are usually generic forms without any personal information on them, but if there is, you can certainly redact it.  I will post my findings here if I get any responses.   Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the 2 I have, They look very different to me, especially the last name.  I am objecting to the fact that mine is not notarized.  I believe there is a rule in Florida, looking for that  now.   Thanks for any help!

img037.pdf

img038.pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BassPlayr good advice, I have checked other debtor boards, this one seems to have the most posts about Patricia, most interested in seeing a notarized document.  I have private messaged many of those people but most strings are old and I doubt they will see the request. Still trying to figure out if Florida has a rule that states the documents must be notarized...seems like I have seen it somewhere but cannot locate it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my thoughts on the Robosign issue. I brought that up at my initial hearing when I was stating my plea, but I referred to the Affidavit from the Midland "legal Specialist". My understanding of the Robosign documents was that these "legal Specialists" received hundreds of these affidavits a day and just signed them without looking at any of the supporting documents or knowing where they came from. Then they just passed them along to a notary who signed them at a later time (hence the date being stamped instead of hand written date). With that said, Midland did not include that document with the Bill of Particulars (after the trial date was set) and I am curious as to why not. Now I wonder if there is a chain of custody issue because that Midland Affidavit document was suppose to verify the copies from Citibank.

 

Also, I was going to use the fact that the Bill of Sale is generic and that it has no account numbers. It refers to a Forward Flow Purchase Agreement which is a document that has many pages and other accounts. From my understanding if they want to include that in their evidence they have to supply the whole contract and not just one page from it as I should have a right to view the contact that states they bought an alleged debt that was in my name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally an Affidavit must be notarized, but rarely do I see the Bills of Sale or Assignment notarized.  I did find another one of her signed bills of sale if you want, though.  I found it interesting that it has the verbiage for the business records exception to the hearsay rule, which would make me think that this Patricia Hall is one of Citibank's 'books and records custodians'.  You could always subpoena her for a deposition and see what the JDB does.  I'd have to wonder if she really can be that familiar with all these records or not.  Looks like the JDBs are trying to head off the usual hearsay arguments by putting that language in there now.  But again, this is a bill of sale, not an affidavit, although that language would seem more appropriate in an affidavit than a bill of sale since it almost appears that she is attesting that what follows should be found to be a business record exception the hearsay rule.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1lsns7njges0sdp/load_Redact%20%2828%29.jsp%2012.pdf?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LawKitty

 

You could always subpoena her for a deposition and see what the JDB does.

 

 

I'm wondering if it would really be a good idea to subpoena her.  Neither the bill of sale or the affidavit reference the defendant or the account number.  All they show is that Citi sold some accounts to Midland in July of 2013.   They don't show that his account was included in that sale.

 

If he were to subpoena her, she might have records that would prove his account was included.  Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, she could have records, but often what happens is that the JDB quickly objects to taking depos of any of these 'robosigners', and occasionally even voluntarily dismiss.  I did actually include in my interrogatories a question asking how many affidavits one of their employees had signed on a particular day.  Naturally they objected to that and pretty much every single question I asked, which didn't surprise me.  Alternatively, in another case, I just motioned for the affidavit to be stricken as hearsay.  But this is a bill of sale, not an affidavit.  What I generally do is note the dates on the bill of sale, the complaint, any affidavits, and any other documents they either attach to the complaint or that you get through a request to produce and look for inconsistencies with dates, amounts, account numbers, names, etc.  Also, the bill of sale often references some other document or agreement that they generally never attach and so far, I haven't been able to get anyone to send me even through a request to produce.  So I always question the chain of title because they only include the bill of sale, and often it is dated right before they file suit, so I also argue it was prepared in anticipation of litigation, so therefore cannot be a legitimate business record exception to the hearsay rule.  I had one case that allegedly had been assigned to a JDB right after it was defaulted, yet the bill of sale had a date that was 2 years later.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Midland Funding -- California.

I plan to object to the bill of sale and the Affidavit as there is nothing identifying "my" account on the bill of sale and the affidavit was signed over a year after the sale making the business records exception not applicable.   

post-166684-0-15610000-1413432824_thumb.

post-166684-0-37382700-1413432887_thumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dotheyeverstop?

 

Actually, it doesn't matter that the affidavit was signed over a year after the bill of sale.   The affidavit is just a sworn statement under oath that the sale took place.  But, it doesn't appear to contain the required language in the business record exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

Writing Objections now, writing argument later, looked up my local rules of court and Objections must state legal basis only, I can't argue, so the legal basis stays the same i.e. "does not meet requirements in the business record exception"   Arguing is going to take some work though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just received mine yesterday. It is a copy of a copy or a really bad printout. I can barely read it and they whited out the top right corner where it reads "contract ID/Document ID/Document ID"

 

 

post-166365-0-33944400-1413471305_thumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 @LawKitty, my bill of sale has two different dates. I noticed yours you posted had the same dates throughout the document.

would this be suspicious? or normal practice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hf2272

 

The bill of sale posted by LawKitty has 2 different dates:  March 12 and March 15.  Your dates are Feb. 12 and March 26.  I'm not sure that's a big deal.  Just as with the bill of sale posted by LawKitty, one date is for the purchase and sale agreement (shows the terms and conditions), and the other is for the bill of sale (finalizes the terms and conditions in the agreement).  The dates are not that far apart, so I don't think there's a problem.   If those dates were far apart, I'd get suspicious. 

 

It's not unusual for a contract to be created on one date, sent to the other party to review, and then, along with some extra documentation, finalized and signed on another date

 

I just noticed that you have your information in another thread.   It would be best to keep your questions in your thread so that they don't become confused with the information provided by the creator of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also in Florida and I just received a summons for pretrial conference on a Citibank deal sold to Midland Funding LLC.  The "Bill of Sale" is something that I could have generated on my computer and has no official letter head or logo on it.  I was suspicious because I have recently had fraudulent activity on my bank account which was thankfully caught by my bank.  I seriously wonder about the validity of their ownership of this debt.  Anyone who can pull a credit report could obtain the information they have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have a generic Bill of Sale from Patricia Hall. I wanted to post here as there were already PDF's of the B.O.S posted. Signature looks the same but smeared on mine and the name and title are hand written in....... BOS is 8 months after the "Purchase and Sale Agreement" Nothing about amount rec'd for the sale, conditions of the "P & S Agreement", acct number, nor notarized.......

Also, the bottom left is the JBD's date.docx which is the same as the contract ID and the P & S Agreement date. I noticted this the same for the PDF's posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @Dotheyeverstop? and all, I'm filing a compel for arb on a Citi cc debt that was sold to the Plaintiff, a collections company in So. Cal. I see a same Bill of Sale and Assignment signed by Patricia Hall as well, with no explicit reference to my debt.

Also, the bill of sale references 'as described in Exhibit 1" although no exhibits were included with the original response from Plaintiff's attorney in response to my request for a validation of debt back in December 2015. They sent the bill of sale, a few of my cc statements from Citi and and a Chain of Title report referencing my acct, Citi and the Plaintiff.

Now in the suite documents, the Plaintiff included the bill of sale again but on the CC statements, looks like there is a stamp at the bottom for EXHIBIT________________________________ and handwritten is "1 page x of x" on that blank line on every page with sequential numbering.

Any thoughts as to whether I can have this dismissed based on lack of the exhibits from the 12/15 validation of debt letter? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know I suggest asking in general forum .  That would be part of the new law requiring them to show proof at time of filing, and my case was before that law went into effect.

 

Share this post


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.