And the Race is On! CACH vs. Me

[saytar]

Have done some calling today. Seems that My Affidavit signer is in Minnesota according to the Affidavit and is a Synchrony Bank "Affidavit Document Specialist" (ie a robo signer-CACH employee)......According to the FDIC Synchrony has no Branch Offices in Minnesota, therefore I seriously doubt that this individual works for Synchrony (GE Capt Retail Bank).

 

In order to do service on an out of state corporation or entity according to the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency, you can serve ANY officer at ANY Branch in the U.S.. So if you have a branch in your state you use your Civil Procedures rules for service and serve them there.....if there is no branch in your state you then Use your state Civil Procedures on Subpoena of out of state corporations and entities.

 

This being the case, I may just subpoena this Brian Sewall with service at a Synchrony Bank........if he is not an employee and service fails to be completed because he is NOT an employee......and him claiming to be an employee of said bank..... then I have a very good hammer to use on the Affidavit. A FRAUD upon the court hammer. If he is an employee then he gets the service and then the circus starts.

 

Thoughts?

 

By the way....the alleged date of sale to CACH was April of 2013......date of Affidavit Oct of 2014.  That is not on or about the time of the sale of the account and therefore he does not have direct knowledge of the account and only reviewed the information...2nd hand knowledge.....Does not meet business rule exception.....heresay.

[Coffee_before_tea]

@saytar

 

Does the OK Rules of Civil Procedure contain disclosure rules?  And was Sewall disclosed in those disclosures?

[saytar]

Don't know about Disclosure Rules per se, but he's the name on the Affidavit I have in hand.

 

And I now have (ain't the internet handy) his work address (service address), home address, work numbers.......................I'll check those disclosure rules...discovery rules.

 

He works & lives in SW area of Minneapolis Metro..............and CACH offices are East of St. Paul...... just across the river in Wisconsin.

 

And his work location should have the FF agreement if I decide to go after that.........Just starting to line up ducks right now, in case their needed. Will try to get my initial discovery filed next week. This information will be asked for as well......see if they cough it up.

 

Win, lose or draw.......this is going to cost them....  I was told many years ago, if person's going to file BK or in this case, if everything went South, get a Judgment against them,....does it matter if its $10,000 or 100,000,000??? Which gives you worse credit?            Answer: Both

 

Most (including me) couldn't afford to pay either amount.

[saytar]

Question for the esteemed posters

 

Since CACH has responded to my Answer and Motion to Dismiss and Kinda of coughed up their usual bogus documentation and are arguing their "evidence" in their opposition to the Motion to Dismiss and I assume the new hearing in January is on the Motion to Dismiss.............

 

Now I pretty well have my initial discovery request ready to file and now need to work on my strategy for the Motion Hearing......Should I go ahead and File this Discovery (which I'm sure would most likely get a another reset on the hearing or just make another necessary) and send it out or would the better strategy be to Prepare the arguments on the Information I have now and Pound at them on the defects in the Affients Affidavit, the Bills of Sale (that don't show ANYONE's accounts on them) and his statements in his Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, and the computer generated "account record" for the Hearing while pointing out that by not including the items he coughed up with the original complaint (he obviously had them) the HE is/was attempting to use the court as a Bully to intimidate the defendant into a payment stipulation by slipping their form in trying to get a payment and /or bank information pre-judgment. In otherwords trying to get the court to do his dirty work.

 

OR

 

File a Motion to withdraw Dismiss Motion request (and kind of pull the wind out of their sails-like maybe waiting until day of court to file it and serve it to attorney in person, after he drives 140 mi over here to be at court) and at same time hand him the Discovery request also and see if I can either drag up more things to possibly attack or drag up nothing else...............then based on the discovery reply send him the IROGs, RFA........and then Attack the above items, IROGs, and RFA;s at one time??

 

Looking at his Opposition Brief it Kinda of looks like he's upset and somewhat Crying to the Court that the Defendant is an Ole Meanie. Nothing in Particular says that, just the tone of the reply........it obviously has him upset.

 

 

Thoughts? Good or bad...Naughty or Nice I've got a thick skin

 

CACH_ReplytoAnswer-Redacted.pdf

[saytar]

My RFD's draft

 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

The Defendant, Broke Debtor Pro Se, respectfully requests the Production of the following discovery
requests in accordance with the requirements and definitions of  Title 12 O.S. §2011, §3226,
§3234

 

1. Identify all documents in your possession that may relate to this action and Account, and attach copies of such documents. State the names and addresses of all Persons who have knowledge of any facts relating to the case and documents.

 

2. Set forth a particular statement of the items of the claim, their amounts and dates, a calculation in figures of the amount of interest, the payments or credits, if any, and the net amount due.  Dates those interest rates changed and list the various rates that were charged during this alleged debt and the exact method of amortization should also be included

 

3. If the Account was assigned by the Original Creditor, set forth the date and a description sufficient to identify each Record which reflects or memorializes each assignment beginning with the Original Creditor and ending with you. Including the date alleged Account went into default,  the total full claimed face value of all accounts purchased in the same lot as the account claimed in this action and wholesale amount actually paid for all accounts purchased in this same lot

 

[Note that defendant anticipates that you will identify such things as forward flow agreements, purchase and sale agreements, bills of sale, and schedules of accounts with date of default;]

 

4. Provide proof of the Defendant’s alleged debt to Plaintiff, or to any Original Creditor including specifically the signed contract, between the Plaintiff, Original Creditor and Defendant or any other instrument constructed solely for the purpose of creating a loan agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant bearing Defendant’s signature and  produce the contract that legally requires the Defendant to pay the amount entered into complaint.

[HelpingGreg]

The only thing standing out strongly to me is how very compounded these requests are.

May they be denied as compound?

Even above that, have you filed these already?

I ask because of on-site guidance here,

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/285059-dont-post-personal-information/

Not saying this has your name on it.

Just seems to me the hand isn't usually tipped until after Plaintiff's been served.

Have you read this, yet?

CLICK!

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/296640-protect-your-privacy-on-this-board/

Warmly,

[saytar]

Thanks @HelpingGreg for the heads up. Usually keep 2 copies of documents...1 Redacted and 1 Not.......Seems I didn't Redact everything

 

OK have RE-Redacted and fixed links....back in stealth mode again.

[HelpingGreg]

Can I just drive you nuts a moment?

I only ask to because I sense your dedicated determination to always do your very best.

"-)

Up above, in #20, I think it is, I noticed the italicized text reading, "...the Defendant...", and the following / closing paragraph to read, ".....defendant...".

Here is my easy-peasy tip for keeping it straight, "'the' rhymes with 'wee', as in the lowercase 'd' of defendant following it, see?", and, for Defendant, just remember your name, in your case, as Defendant. You don't write your name without uppercasing the first letter, ever, and, you never preceed your name with "the", as though you are royalty, or a megalomaniacle wannabe superstar... "-)

And, as is often repeated on the topic on-site, pick a pattern and stick with it.

So,

In this matter, Defendant / Plaintiff wishes Plaintiff / Defendant glad tidings.

In this matter, the defendant / the plaintiff wishes the plaintiff / the defendant glad tidings.

In this matter, Defendant, better-Better-BETTER, wishes Plaintiff, vile-Vile-VILE, glad tidings.

In this matter, the defendant, better-Better-BETTER, wishes the plaintiff, vile-Vile-VILE, glad tidings.

Honestly, it is noticed by some, but won't make or break anything in pro per, from my perspective.

Still, as I opened with, I only mention this hear because I can tell you aim to do your very best, and, [brace for it - you've earned it!], I don't see any other room for improvement at this point.

Woot-Woot!

Warmly,

[saytar]

The only thing standing out strongly to me is how very compounded these requests are.

May they be denied as compound?

Even above that, have you filed these already?

I ask because of on-site guidance here,

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/285059-dont-post-personal-information/

Not saying this has your name on it.

Just seems to me the hand isn't usually tipped until after Plaintiff's been served.

Have you read this, yet?

CLICK!

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/296640-protect-your-privacy-on-this-board/

Warmly,

 

Maybe a little, but not way out in left field too far.

 

I am looking for them to come back and say that 90% of what is requested is "privileged" "a burden" "already sent"...etc. This sets it up for admissions and rogs...if they say they don't have or its burdensome that would allow me to prevent them bringing in any "new" later....in otherwords I could get anything not already submitted excluded.

 

Actually looking over the reply I can see at least 4 or 5 of their statements and references and citations, that using only what they submitted (the rope they threw out) that I stand a good chance of  impeaching every document they submitted.......using their own statements....

 

Will be examining their citations and going thru OK evidence and Civil Code for the "legal" basis.

 

Question for the Crowd:

 

@Seadragon

@racecar

@BV40

@Anon Amos

@.........?

 

1.Go for documents exclusion now and Dismissal?

 

2.Wait act dumb, do discovery (he lets them continue), then impeach evidence?

 

In otherwords....go for Dismiss Now or Retract Dismissal Motion, do Discovery, Play them awhile longer hoping to get more "documents".??

 

I'm up for either option.....as I know these issue's will keep coming up dangerously for another couple of years or so....then not so bad after the SOL's have run on everything.

 

Thanks again for the Heads Up on my Goof.

[Anon Amos]

I wouldn't try to preclude or strike any evidence now (correct me if I'm wrong) because I don't think they have tried to enter it into evidence yet.

 

Unless you have already done so, I would do discovery. A simple set of RFP's.

 

I wouldn't try a motion to dismiss now, because that is usually for procedural errors in the beginning stages and usually just ends with a re filled complaint with the errors fixed. A judge is going to allow them their day in trial to present evidence rather than dismissing it early in litigation simply because they didn't attach proof to the complaint.

[Seadragon]

I agree don't trigger the claymore yet, prepare for trial and let them think it is a cakewalk.

[saytar]

I wouldn't try to preclude or strike any evidence now (correct me if I'm wrong) because I don't think they have tried to enter it into evidence yet.

 

Unless you have already done so, I would do discovery. A simple set of RFP's.

 

I wouldn't try a motion to dismiss now, because that is usually for procedural errors in the beginning stages and usually just ends with a re filled complaint with the errors fixed. A judge is going to allow them their day in trial to present evidence rather than dismissing it early in litigation simply because they didn't attach proof to the complaint.

Thanks Amos and I do appreciate the reply..............that was the way I was leaning in thinking. That's why I did up the RFP. Doing this to me will shorten the time they have to get any additional (or show it) from the OC.

 

I like your thinking!

[saytar]

I agree don't trigger the claymore yet, prepare for trial and let them think it is a cakewalk.

Roger on the Cakewalk......Beside's a Claymore works better the closer it is to its target.

 

In my RFD's I am asking for the FF agreement also...doubt if THEY will submit it. I do have the Affient's work address if needed for a subpoena...not sure if going there in this particular case would help though. I know you are a proponent of getting this......I sure wish someone had a copy of some recent one's....

 

Have any idea's where a person could call and with a little (ok maybe a lot) gile and sweet talking get at least a blank one for examination?......it would have the specific language in it, I think, that we need to know

 

Consumer Debt Recyclement Agency   really needs to have one to have our lawyer's (Seadragon Legal Services) look over and see if we want to enter the JDB industry, we've just come into some real money and looking to invest in more lucrative endevor's......just everybody we talk to is really talking it up ........you know just how much can we expect to bring in?????

[BV80]

@saytar

 

1 - 3 are worded more like interrogatories instead of document requests.   When you say "identify all documents in your possession", they can just write a list of the names of the documents.   "State the names" means that they write down names.  "Set forth" means that they could just state what they have.

 

If you want documents provided, you need to state that they "provide" or "produce" certain documents.

[HelpingGreg]

Wasn't the site just uploaded to, yesterday, with this info.? I am 10:1 on this, leaning toward me having the web address on this machine...

We leave for SATs in a nearby city at 6a.m., breakfast prior being a ritual. The elder sibling and her gaggle of gal pals have all been there, done that, and were sweet enough to have taken over a new Mexican joint with awesome vegetarian offerings, from 6p.m. until moments ago. This free WiFi at eateries turns anywhere into a no-need-to-consume-data, leisurely enjoyed study hall with endless grilled green onions, banana peppers and freshly infused waters. HOLLA!

The timed practice tests were projected onto a screen with modernday magic and furitive scribbles to work the math while answers were called out for the English portions...

A grand time was had by all!

The princess plans to study Math.

Now, I turn from that to this gaggle of gorgeous gainers of expertise in the consumer law field!

AWESOME!

Due to the SAT madness around here, I have not had time to peruse with obsessive attention to detail,

yet. Emphasis on the, "yet".

"-)

BUT, I ___do___ have the link filed under, "Consumer Debt Purchase and Sale Agreements, A Growing Compilation in Connecticut, by Dalie Jimenez"

and, share it with you now:

CLICK!

http://dalie.org/contracts

Please, while we open a new Ozone Hole sending such intense collective positive vibes her way while in testing, then, close down Fuddruckers by consuming all produce & teas within reach, and, as we then take over AMC, enjoying H&HSFH, peruse the heck out of the exemplars listed at that link!

I look forward to returning earlier than today, tomorrow.

Warmly,

Roger on the Cakewalk......Beside's a Claymore works better the closer it is to its target.

 

In my RFD's I am asking for the FF agreement also...doubt if THEY will submit it. I do have the Affient's work address if needed for a subpoena...not sure if going there in this particular case would help though. I know you are a proponent of getting this......I sure wish someone had a copy of some recent one's....

 

Have any idea's where a person could call and with a little (ok maybe a lot) gile and sweet talking get at least a blank one for examination?......it would have the specific language in it, I think, that we need to know

 

Consumer Debt Recyclement Agency   really needs to have one to have our lawyer's (Seadragon Legal Services) look over and see if we want to enter the JDB industry, we've just come into some real money and looking to invest in more lucrative endevor's......just everybody we talk to is really talking it up ........you know just how much can we expect to bring in?????

[HelpingGreg]

@BV80 is spot-on, as always. <8^D

In this madness over here, I noticed, then failed to comment, as to your compound requests, and (I think it was your first one, but I am now too tired & sleepy to check....), wasn't it your first one of (I think there are 3, or was it 4? I am certain it is not as many as five...),

Anyway!

I recall, when reading BV80's excellent observations, that your were writing in a manner so as to invite any ol' photocopy, or, "whatever" - and, believe us all when we say "whatever" is what our carefully constructed Demands for BOP, and further on, Discovery, seem to receive.

A week ago, or so, I was reading something about Original Documents, Original Signatures on documents, and, as we are all familiar in CACH/Mandarich complaints/summons, original creditor's employee with signature upon BOS / Affidavit /FFlow, etc needing to be both in-state for _personal service_ of subpoena for 20 days of the pre-trial window, and, to physically appear as subpoenaed, but, that the plaintiffs are now responding with telephonic testimony as their M.O. (((sigh)))...

I think I also read it can be agreed to go the phone route, (depends on Judge), _but_ that Defendant's right to have Plaintiff's witness present in court at trial trumps all?

Of course, it, like all else, rests on the codicil that Defendant objects to the telephone, and, gives proper grounds for the objection.

And, that goes back to the EXCELLENT BINDER, @Homelessinca walks us through on his 23+-paged thread on-site.

Oh! In case you missed it, @Seadragon just started a magnificent thread, sure to become a very popular pinned forum, yesterday! It is a collections of objections & corresponding case law! I am so excited about it!

Just go to Forums, Scroll a bit, and look for Seadragon, you should see it right there.

But yes, totally revisit the sentence structure / specific wording of the proven winners' Demands & Requests on-site.

Remember, it is not-at-all about YOU, your syntax, vocabulary, or grammar; it is about giving you the very best words to form the sentences to use as the very best, as you call them, ropes.

On this site, we are all rowing forward to the same coxswain calls, right?

@saytar

 

1 - 3 are worded more like interrogatories instead of document requests.   When you say "identify all documents in your possession", they can just write a list of the names of the documents.   "State the names" means that they write down names.  "Set forth" means that they could just state what they have.

 

If you want documents provided, you need to state that they "provide" or "produce" certain documents.

[HelpingGreg]

OK!

Here is the magnificent addition @Seadragon uploaded, yesterday, I think it was..... sleep is gaining on me!

CLICK!

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/325088-found-this-trial-objections-awhile-back-it-might-be-useful/

Warmly,

[HelpingGreg]

You may wish to begin at post #61 of this on-site thread, opening/saving the hyperlinks as you go,

CLICK!

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/325050-how-do-we-as-defendants-get-the-forward-flow-purchase-agreement-between-the-oc-and-the-assignees/page-4

Warmly,

[saytar]

@saytar

 

1 - 3 are worded more like interrogatories instead of document requests.   When you say "identify all documents in your possession", they can just write a list of the names of the documents.   "State the names" means that they write down names.  "Set forth" means that they could just state what they have.

 

If you want documents provided, you need to state that they "provide" or "produce" certain documents.

 

Duely Noted........I agree, the addition of some language to reduce "wiggle room" would be more than appropriate, thanks!

 

Been Working on my Legal Pleading Templates tonight.......Hopefully this will allow more time going forward to spend more time writing, researching, rewriting, reformatting, etc.

 

I see this particular bottom feeder is quite verbose....the quickness with which he responded and amount of citation citing (If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with Bravo Sierra........) he did tells me that he has a certain set of "scripts"..........

 

Will also do some thinking about how his train might be taken off the tracks.........

 

Nite all

[saytar]

You may wish to begin at post #61 of this on-site thread, opening/saving the hyperlinks as you go,

CLICK!

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/325050-how-do-we-as-defendants-get-the-forward-flow-purchase-agreement-between-the-oc-and-the-assignees/page-4

Warmly,

 

Thanks....noted and bookmarked

[HelpingGreg]

LOL!

Right you are on the "Script" observation!

My carefully constructed Demand for BOP, sent out 11.04, was responded to, according to both POS & postmark, 72 hours later, 11.07.

The envelope, constructed of plain brown paper, a pre-printed long envelope, and copious office tape - the shiny cheap stuff / not 3M by a long shot, contained well over 100 individual sheets of paper.

15 pages were marginally worth setting aside;

33% of the remainder were copies of the same routine cc statement insert:

33% of the remainder, I kid you naught, were blank sheets with one tiny square of black ink, only;

34% of the remainder were the final 3 years of some random alleged account up to the final statement following charge-off, showing zero balance.

So, maybe 91% of all those papers were construed to distract, I suppose.

Not that it worked! "-)

Remember, they do this like the deli slaps together sandwiches, on the daily.

For us, it used to be like re-invent7ng the wheel to go in pro per.

With the advent of Internet, and this pro-consumer site, the access to experienced litigators' in pro per experiences begins to greatly level the playing field.

Now, to address the legislation!

Anyway, you're spot-on, it was just the usual SOS*, stuffed into the envelope by some under-paid & over-worked Joe, or, Jane paralegal, likely from the stockroom, where copies are piled on shelves, each stack with a tidy label. Getting boxes full of each page professionally printed is far less costly than our costs to home-print, page-by-page. Dagnabbit!

But, then again, look at the thousands of churned through accounts they go through. Yep! Just like a catfish sifting the bottom of the muddy Mississippi River, hoping for that rare bit o' something "worth it".

Dang bottom feeders!

*SOS: Sack o' $#*+

"-)

Warmly,

[saytar]

LOL!

Anyway, you're spot-on, it was just the usual SOS*, stuffed into the envelope by some under-paid & over-worked Joe, or, Jane paralegal, likely from the stockroom, where copies are piled on shelves, each stack with a tidy label. Getting boxes full of each page professionally printed is far less costly than our costs to home-print, page-by-page. Dagnabbit!

But, then again, look at the thousands of churned through accounts they go through. Yep! Just like a catfish sifting the bottom of the muddy Mississippi River, hoping for that rare bit o' something "worth it".

Dang bottom feeders!

*SOS: Sack o' $#*+

"-)

Warmly,

Don't really know the "cost" as I invested in a CISS system and decent printer a few years ago while helping a step-daughter with her CPS case. I know it has reduced my ink cost over 80% on a per page basis. For the court paper, I buy the cheapest (softest also, never know what it may be needed for someday....   )...personal stuff gets the best.

 

Made up a Motion to Amend my answer and withdraw the Motion to Dismiss...for now. Posting my draft for RFD's below, will try and finish both up this week and file the Amendment and send off the RFD to the Attorney............then back to work studing up on Civil Rules and look for Case Citations on the various types of "evidence" favorable for finding material issue's and stomping the Affidavit and the OK rules on Bill of Sales as to content required. Did work up an "Example of the ease of Robo-Documenting" to demonstrate the ease with which such documents can be "manufactured and used" by the catfish lawyer's. I will hold that one in reserve for use with oral arguments    and objection's    at a pre-trial.

 

 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

 

The Defendant, Pro Se, respectfully requests the Production of the following discovery

requests in accordance with the requirements and definitions of  Title 12 O.S. §2011, §3226,

§3234

1. Identify all documents in your possession that may relate to this action and Account, and attach copies of such documents. State the names and addresses of all Persons who have knowledge of any facts relating to the case and documents.

 

2. Produce documents showing the following:

A statement of the items of the claim,  indicating their amounts and dates, a calculation in figures of the amount of interest, the payments or credits, if any, and the net amount due.  Documents showing the dates those interest rates changed and list the various rates that were charged during the time of this alleged debt, the exact method of amortization should also be included

3. If the Account was assigned by the Original Creditor, produce all documents setting forth the date and a description sufficient to identify each Record, produce all documents which reflects or memorializes each assignment beginning with the Original Creditor and ending with you. Produce all documents pertaining to and including the date alleged Account went into default,  showing the total full claimed face value of all accounts purchased and included in the same lot as the account that is the subject of this action and showing the wholesale/discounted dollar amounts actually paid by the Plaintiff for all the accounts purchased in the same lot as Defendants alleged account.

 

[Note 1. Any foreign accounts shown along with defendants may be redacted only? as to account number/card number, name, personal details and SSAN for privacy]

 

[Note 2. That defendant anticipates that you will identify such things as forward flow agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements,UCC-9 forms, purchase and sale agreements, bills of sale, and schedules of accounts with date of default;]

 

4. Produce all documents in your possession of the Defendant’s alleged debt to Plaintiff, or to any Original Creditor including specifically the signed contract, between the Plaintiff, Original Creditor and Defendant or any other instrument constructed solely for the purpose of creating a loan agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant bearing Defendant’s signature and  produce the contract that legally requires the Defendant to pay the amount entered into complaint.

 

Pursuant to Title 12 O.S. §2011, §3234, the Plaintiff must provide a written response to this request within  thirty (30) days. Said response shall be sent to Defendant at the address below.

 

Anybody see anything to either include or exclude in the above?

 

 

MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S SUMMONS

 

COMES NOW Defendant, Broke Debtor, pro se and request that this Court allow the defendant to amend our answer to the Plaintiff's original summons filed with this court November 20, 2014 as follows:

 

1. On November 20, 2014 defendant filed an answer to the court on plaintiff's summons.

 

2. On or about December 3, 2014 plaintiff filed a response to defendant's motion to dismiss, included in that answer.

 

3. Plaintiff has objected to defendant's motion to dismiss and as presented to the court Argument's and Authorities  in opposition to this motion.

 

4. Defendant is in disagreement with much of  plaintiff's interpretations of citations included in this response. Plaintiff states: "According to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, ""[a] motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted will not be sustained unless (emphasis defendants) it should appear without doubt than the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim for relief."" A-Plus janitorial & Carpet Cleaning v. Emp'r Workers' Compensation a&#036;&#036; 'n, 1997 OK 37, ¶ 9, 936 P.2d 916, 922 (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41)

 

5. Defendant fails' to see any information so far submitted "for expediency"  by the plaintiff that rise's without doubt to the standards applied by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, quoted by the Plaintiff, and more particularly of Oklahoma Civil Procedures Title 12.

 

6. Plaintiff  states (Pg 4, Paragraph 2) "In the case at bar, discovery is still in its infancy. Dismissal at this early stage, before Plaintiff has had proper opportunity to conduct and make use of the discovery device, would be premature, prejudicial, and in direct contradiction to the fundamental aims of the American pleading system."

 

7. Far be it for Defendant to prejudice the Plaintiff or contradict the fundamental aims of the American pleading system. Upon further reflection and study, Defendant believes that it is in his best interest to avail himself of the discovery process. Although the Defendant himself has nothing further to produce that would benefit the Plaintiff claims, before proceeding further Defendant wants to determine and receive any further information in physical possession of the Plaintiffs that supports their claims against the Defendant and could provide the Defendant with more, efficiency and clarity.

 

WHEREFORE, the Defendant having fully considered the Plaintiffs pleadings and concerns, respectfully request that the court withdraw, without prejudice, the Defendants Motion to Dismiss at this time and to issue any other orders or relief at it sees fit.

 

Note...need to attach Order for Judge signature.

 

Is this more direct in directing the production of documents?  Too much.....leave anything usefule out? Ask for too much?

[Anon Amos]

Is this more direct in directing the production of documents?  Too much.....leave anything usefule out? Ask for too much?

I would look at the items requested in ASTmedics thread and the language used. It's not from your state, but the requested info is the same. I believe these were written by Calawyer, but if not, they are still Calawyer approved.

They are very simple and don't contain a lot of words, making them harder to form valid objections to.

[saytar]

I would look at the items requested in ASTmedics thread and the language used. It's not from your state, but the requested info is the same. I believe these were written by Calawyer, but if not, they are still Calawyer approved.

They are very simple and don't contain a lot of words, making them harder to form valid objections to.

Sounds like a plan, tks.........I did some bkmarking and such late last nite on the thread....just hadn't gone back over the info yet.

[saytar]

OK, now the horns are locked...amended my answer to complaint and sent CACH discovery. Ask for FF agreements, a complete accounting of account interest and how derived, signed contract with GE, signed contracts (or Privity) with CACH, Bills of Sale with my name on it, monies actually tendered to GE Bank (%) according to FF agreement, card agreement, etc. CACH has yet failed to answer Discovery (due 13 Feb).

 

But.....They did send a "Discovery" their MJ...... and submitted the exact same bogus documents as they did earlier only thing added was 24 months of CC statements (which only says I had an account at one time with GE....not with CACH), nothing else, except 12 pages of various Citations, Cites on how the court should grant MJ from OK Rule 13 for District Courts (SJ Rule), nothing in dispute (yea like how come I sent discovery ), we got everything there we need, have to give the SJ.....basically repeating thru arguments and points over and over that their "entitled". A little early yet to Compel, but have to respond to the MJ points within 15 days according to Rule 13 (I read Rule, CACH sure didn't mention that part in it ) or the court can accept their "points" and give judgment based on "their" Bravo Searra. Does look like they are really trying hard to "avoid" or go around having to provide any further documents.

 

I have been corresponding with an Attorney in T Town that does Consumer Defense pretty much against all the Bottom Feeders Midland, CACH, etc (he was up front that as far away as he was....175mi, that it would cost me too much to actually retain him..he would if he had a FDCPA claim which he loves to do). He did give me some insight though...........he said that most of time that he invokes arbitration with CACH they either start calling him real quick for settlement or just fade away and not answer as  they must usually pay ALL the cost with arbitration, which I knew, but appreciated his real time experiences with it..

 

He said I could motion them to arbitrate (if I don't file any more other motions, gotta do it early in the process, this has been discussed in forum before) as the judges he has dealt with love to see these things shuffled out of their court. As even if they went all the way thru arb and won they would still have to spend to file the award in Court. I agree with his opinion, an arb lose is no worse than a MJ...but more steps and money to get there.Or just continue on as he said it appeared I was heading the right way otherwise. He said if I was Collection Proof basically their barking up a dead tree.....and the coon done jumped to another tree. Is JAMS still the "preferred" arbitration forum?

 

I can do either.....have some pretty good arguments on their affiant (even through he claims to be GE bank "document specialist") and a "sample affidavit" that will at the least lend support to the "robo document" argument (which is only one argument against it). The Bills of Sale without my name or any type account information on them prove nothing except they bought a bunch of crappy accounts, and the spreadsheet line (yep, just one line and one account...ever see a spreadsheet with just one line on it? and nothing indicating what or who created it...can we say not a verified business record. A Motion to Strike as an answer to their MJ their evidence and points and go to court...or....Motion Invoking Arbitration, neither a problem.

 

Would love to have several chime in with any ideas or opinions on these plans of attack..Haven't heard anyone doing the arbitration thing lately....seem to remember some poster's a few months back not real up on the arb attack idea.

 

Edited to add:

Summary Judgment Motion Redacted