Bond007 Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Hi I am In Kansas. I have been sued by Portfolio Recovery a$$. I am on Disability. I own my home. Her name is not on the summons. I have denied all the allegations in my answer and have not yet sent it off. I still have a few days. The reason for Denying every paragraph is because the Citi Bank credit card number listed on the summons is not the same as the card number on my card. I found an old card and a few receipts from late 2012. They both have the same number but are different from the number on the summons. The first thing I did was to file a Motion to Strike Affidavit. The Affidavit is from Portfolios CoR. I hope I filed it correctly and not too soon. I wish I had found this site months ago but I guess now is better than never. Any help will be greatfully appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Hi I am In Kansas. I have been sued by Portfolio Recovery a$$. I am on Disability. I own my home which I transferred the title over into my wife's name hoping it will be safe from these bottom feeders. Her name is not on the summons.SSDI? They can't touch it. They can't take it from your bank account either. They CAN get a levy and take pretty much any money of YOURS that isn't from your SSDI, but if you have your SSDI direct deposited into your bank account, then it's better. It can be tricky though because if there are any other amounts deposited (check, direct deposit, etc, it doesn't matter) that are NOT your SSDI, those are potentially not safe from them. I'm not sure about your spouse. It may be that if you can prove that any other deposits made into your account ae hers, they may be safe. I would consult legal if I were you on that. As for your home being transferred to your wife's name, how long ago did you do that? You want to be very careful because doing that right before a lawsuit or bankruptcy and you will have to explain why you did it. I believe there are laws against doing it if they can prove your reason was to protect it from creditors. I have denied all the allegations in my answer and have not yet sent it off. I still have a few days to do so. The reason for Denying every paragraph is because the Citi Bank credit card number listed on the summons is not the same as the card number on my card. I found an old card and a few receipts from late 2012. They both have the same number but are different from the number on the summons. The first thing I did was to file a Motion to Strike Affidavit. The Affidavit is from Portfolios CoR. I hope I filed it correctly and not too soon. They took the time to sue me so I am not going down without a fight, even if that means that I mess it up. I believe I am pretty much judgment proof except for maybe my 2008 Toyota pickup. But im not sure about that either. I wish I had found this site months ago but I guess now is better than never. Any help will be greatfully appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/frozen-bank-accounts.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond007 Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Any thoughts on the card numbers being different? This is the only Citi Bank MasterCard credit card I have ever used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond007 Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 My wife does not work either. so no other money goes in the account. I'm hoping that the differences in the card numbers will get the suit thrown out of court. But I doubt it is going to be that easy. I just don't know how to go about showing that to the court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I'm not sure how that would go over in court if it is a matter of the wrong card number being on the summons. It may be that the contract you originally signed will be what binds you to this debt. I don't have enough experience with debt lawsuits to know if a error like that (assuming all other things are accurate) if it would be enough to get the case tossed. Hopefully someone else will come along who does. Good luck and keep us updated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue198 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I'm hoping that the differences in the card numbers will get the suit thrown out of court. But I doubt it is going to be that easy. I just don't know how to go about showing that to the court. Unfortunately, tissue paper flimsy. Some creditors will change the account number once it charges off, goes into collections or is sold. Are you being sued by Citi or by a JDB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shellieh98 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 Makes it easier to deny the debt if they don't match. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Seaward Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 The devil is in the details.If they allege that you opened an account with #123456789 and you deny that under oath, at some point they will have to provide some sort of documentation proving their claims. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue198 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 Precisely, hence the OC vs JDB question If you're being sued by the OC Citi, then all they'll need is documentation showing Bond007 openned account #123456798 which upon charge off was converted to account #987654321. If it's a JDB suing you, then they'll not only have to establish standing/chain of possesion but that account #987654321 was originally #123456789. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond007 Posted February 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 Thanks for the answers. I guess that's my defense then.Since im being sued by PRA and they are the second JDB that the debt has been sold to, I doubt that they have the documents to support. I guess I object to any and all questions or allegations that point to the wrong account number, and make them prove that I opened an account with that number. Which I honestly did not. I cut up the card I was using a long while ago. But while digging through some boxes and my safe I found the original card with the original card number. It is not the number on the summons. Do you think I should file the card and statements I have with the right number on them as evidence or just make them prove that the number on the summons is correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Seaward Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 Thanks for the answers. I guess that's my defense then.Since im being sued by PRA and they are the second JDB that the debt has been sold to, I doubt that they have the documents to support they own the account.You won't know what they have until disclosure/discovery. You're correct in that the more hands that the debt has passed through reduces the chances of all the required elements being present, but there is also such a thing as "adoptive business records" which means that PRA's employee can possibly be allowed to introduce the OC's records if the records were incorporated into PRA's records and relied on in regular business activities. Below are examples of cases where records were allowed to be admitted under the adoptive business records doctrine. These cases are not binding on Kansas state courts, but may be persuasive in the absence of binding case law specifically addressing the admission of such records. (I did a quick search on Kansas case law and didn't find anything either way, but I'm lazy so you might find something if you spend more than 30 seconds on it. ) Thus, a company in possession of documents prepared by another company may introduce the documents as its own business records, even if the sponsoring witness from the custodian company cannot vouch for the circumstances under which the documents were prepared, provided that the custodian company "has made an independent check of the records, or can establish accuracy by other means." Air Land Forwarders, Inc. v. U.S., 172 F.3d 1338, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 1999) Documents may properly be admitted under this Rule as business records even though they are the records of a business entity other than one of the parties, and even though the foundation for their receipt is laid by a witness who is not an employee of the entity that owns and prepared them. Further, there is no requirement that the person whose first-hand knowledge was the basis of the entry be identified, so long as it was the business entity's regular practice to get information from such a person.Saks Intern, Inc. v. M/V Export Champion, 817 F.2d 1011, 1013 (2d Cir. 1987) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sasha0378 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 I wonder if there are some specific requirements for "incorporation". Otherwise, I can grab a bunch of your billing statements and pronounce them "incorporated" and sue you. Are there any criteria? I would say the full history of account should be one of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BV80 Posted February 14, 2015 Report Share Posted February 14, 2015 @sasha0378 If you look up case law regarding the incorporation of records, it just means that the business who acquired the records made them a part of their own records. The case law usually includes that the business relies upon the information in the records. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond007 Posted February 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 But don't they still have to prove a chain of assignment and that they own the debt in question with evidence of assignment? That seems like it may be hard to do if the debt has been assigned multiple times. They should have to prove that the record keepers of multiple assignments, had knowledge of the business practices of the original creditor at the time that the records were transferred. Sounds like to me at least, the testimony of The CoR is hearsay if she cannot prove that she had knowledge of the OC business practices. She would have to have worked for or at least been trained in the business practices of the OC. It probably depends on how loosely the courts define the Hearsay rule. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shellieh98 Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 @Bond007 exactly 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Seaward Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 I wonder if there are some specific requirements for "incorporation". Otherwise, I can grab a bunch of your billing statements and pronounce them "incorporated" and sue you. Are there any criteria? I would say the full history of account should be one of themIt's not just incorporating them. They must also be relied on in the ordinary course of business. I would say to be able to claim to rely on business records, the records at issue should be of the same type as the business incorporating them.In other words, I don't see how an automotive repair business could truthfully claim to rely on business records from a company that builds kitchen cabinets.If I'm not in the business of buying debts, that's what keeps me from claiming to incorporate and rely on your credit card statements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Seaward Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 But don't they still have to prove a chain of assignment and that they own the debt in question with evidence of assignment? That seems like it may be hard to do if the debt has been assigned multiple times. They should have to prove that the record keepers of multiple assignments, had knowledge of the business practices of the original creditor at the time that the records were transferred. Sounds like to me at least, the testimony of The CoR is hearsay if she cannot prove that she had knowledge of the OC business practices. She would have to have worked for or at least been trained in the business practices of the OC. It probably depends on how loosely the courts define the Hearsay rule.If you read the rulings, they clearly say knowledge of the method of creation is not a requirement.However, you are correct in that in order to show that Company C rightfully owns the debt, they have to show that Company A sold the debt to Company B who in turn sold it to Company C. This can easily be achieved via affidavits, depending on if your court is permitted to allow such affidavits and how much weight your court is allowed give them. 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.