h8spleadingpaper

Sued by Absolute Resolutions / Resurgence Legal

Recommended Posts

1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit?

ABSOLUTE RESOLUTIONS V, LLC

 

2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? (should be listed at the top of the complaint.)

RESURGENCE LEGAL GROUP, PC

 

3. How much are you being sued for?

$3,xxx.00

 

4. Who is the original creditor? (if not the Plaintiff)

CAPITAL ONE BANK (USA), NA

 

5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?)

Summons provided by someone claiming to be a process server

 

6. How were you served? (Mail, In person, Notice on door)

In Person

 

7. Was the service legal as required by your state?

Yes, as far as I can tell

 

8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued?

Nothing

 

9. What state and county do you live in?

Los Angeles, CA

 

10. When is the last time you paid on this account? 

Complaint alleges that the date of default of for this supposed account (while still with OC) was in October 2010.

 

11. What is the SOL on the debt?

4 years in CA (based on the dates provided in the Complaint, if true, it was filed approximately 2 weeks before expiration of SOL)

 

12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed?

Complaint filed, Summons Served.  Answer served on Plaintiff.  Demands for BOP and POD sent and Responses received.  Matter set for Trial in early 2016.

 

13. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?)

No

 

14. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed?

No

 

15. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affidavit? Statements from the OC? Contract? List anything else they attached as exhibits.

The Complaint (signed by JDB attorney), a photocopy of an old alleged CC statement from 2010, a photocopy of the alleged Bill of Sale Agreement for a multi-million dollar bundle of accounts with the sale price blacked out (containing no information germaine to Defendant), a photocopy of an alleged Assignment of Receivables from the CEO/president of the JDB Plaintiff (again, no specific info, just a statement that the Assignor is the owner of receivables) dated to 2014, and a Declaration in Support of Reduced Filing Fee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Results of Discovery so far:

 

Responses to Request for POD:

 

Plaintiff responded with the same documents contained in the Complaint, adding only a POS form and a Verification page.  The affiant on the Verification page does not state his title, but includes CCP 2015.5 language and provides an a address that turns out to be for one of the offices of the JDB in San Diego, CA.  For the most part, my request for documents were objected to by the JDB attorney with the usual, "Request is overly broad, unduly vague, and ambiguous" and "Request seeks privileged and confidential documents that are irrelevant to the subject matter of the litigation" (which is not true) kind of nonsense.

 

Responses to Demand for BOP:

 

Plaintiff responded with the same documents contained in the Complaint, adding only an exemplar CC agreement (no mention of Defendant or the alleged account), an unofficial-looking (i.e. - not on company letterhead or signed by anyone) Statement of Account dated 2014, an equally unofficial Load Data document, a copy of the alleged collection notice purported to have been sent to Defendant by JDB back in 2014, and a POS form.  

 

Note - Unfortunately, I didn't realize that I had the option to send an M & C letter or file an MTC for insufficient discovery responses until several months after I received the Plaintiff's replies.  So I missed the timeframe on these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like you picked up another case. I believe you know what to do, but of course ask any questions you may have.

Good luck.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, thanks Anon.  This case has actually been around for a while.  I had started a thread for it while working on the other one, but had it taken down.  I hope to be able to apply most of my work from the other case here, but wanted to start a thread back up now that Trial is approaching on this one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note - Unfortunately, I didn't realize that I had the option to send an M & C letter or file an MTC for insufficient discovery responses until several months after I received the Plaintiff's replies.  So I missed the timeframe on these.

 

You could always send them set # 2, now that you know.  You can ask for the same things again.You have to send a m&c letter and file the MTC no later than 45 days from their invalid response.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, thanks Anon.  This case has actually been around for a while.  I had started a thread for it while working on the other one, but had it taken down.  I hope to be able to apply most of my work from the other case here, but wanted to start a thread back up now that Trial is approaching on this one.

 

Yah, I remember now. 1 down, 1 to go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could always send them set # 2, now that you know.  You can ask for the same things again.You have to send a m&c letter and file the MTC no later than 45 days from their invalid response.

Funny you should mention this.  I've had a post-it note on my desk for days now, reminding me to review what you said on my other thread about sending rfPOD Set #2.  In reviewing it, I have a few questions, if have time and would be so kind:

 

1.  Can I really ask for exactly the same information again?  I feel like if I send the same request (in order to reset the clock and give me 45 days to initiate an M&C and MTC for their invalid responses), they will be able to cry "foul" or simply respond by stating that they already replied to this request months ago.  Thoughts?

 

2.  In the Set #1 rfPOD I sent out for this case, I gave the Plaintiff 30 days to comply with my request, based on a template that I had found in another thread.  Since that time, I've seen others that only give 10 days.  Is the deadline for Plaintiff to comply different from state-to-state?  If the timeframe is only 10 days in CA, I can definitely get this going in time to follow up with an M&C and an MTC.  If they get 30 days, it's still doable, but might be a lot of work toward the end (since the Trial is just over 2 months away).

 

3.  I know you mentioned adding a request for the Forward Flow Agreement to my fPOD previously.  Wondering what the motive is behind this.  Originally I had thought that the idea was that they wouldn't want to produce it because the Defendant could claim Unjust Enrichment, since the Plaintiff's actual alleged damages would be so little.  But the experience I've picked up so far seems to indicate that a JDB's business model is legally allowable.  Is the idea just to demonstrate to the judge that the Plaintiff is obstructing the legal process by being uncooperative when they don't provide it?

 

4.  Finally, on my other case, I chose to adopt ASTMedic's "Fart in the Wind" approach and didn't ask for anything in between the dfBOP/1st rfPOD and the CCP96 (in part because of time constraints).  I'd like to try the 2nd fPOD/M&C/MTC approach outlined above on this case, but I do wonder if it gives the Plaintiff a heads up to come up with better evidence.  On the other hand my experience last time led me to believe that JDB attorneys put very little time and effort into individual cases, since they make most of their money off of default judgments and settlements.  This case is for half the amount that the other one was, so there may be even less incentive for them to work hard.  I realize that strategic choices are solely my responsibility, but I do wonder if you have an opinion on this?

 

As always, thanks so much for your kind insights.    :)%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 30 days in Cali. So by the time you filed the mtc the actual hearing on that motion would be past the trial date. I was thinking you had more time.

I would just use the fart in the wind method, but make sure to send them the ccp 96 DISC 015 form 45 days prior to trial.

Also, be ready to respond to the ccp98 declaration in lieu of testimony if you receive one about 30 days prior to trial.

It will be a lot less work on you this way as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, folks.

 

So I'm a few weeks out from sending my CCP 96 request and I received a packet of documents in the mail today from Plaintiff's attorney.  Essentially, he/she is telling me they are sending me new documents which the Plaintiff received after my previous rfPOD.  Mostly, the docs consist of under a year's worth of photocopied cc statements (they had previously only sent me one), which are no big deal, as I'll apply the same arguments as in my other case to them.  However, they also included a photocopy of the alleged credit application from the OC, which was not expected.

 

I'm assuming that my argument for this document should be that there is no witness from the OC with personal knowledge to testify as to the application's authenticity and accuracy, and therefore it would be hearsay?  I should note that as yet, I have received no CCP 98 Declaration (though I expect I will soon), nor any Affidavits (with the possible exception of a Verification page from an employee of the Plaintiff, produced as part of the response to my rfPOD).

 

Also, if anyone has a good defense for the "Breach of Contract" or "Indebtedness" Causes of Action cited in this Complaint, I'd be most grateful.  I think I'm covered on the "Account Stated" and "Open Book" causes from my other case.  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone?

 

Also, does anyone know what the deadline is for the Plaintiff to send a CCP98 declaration?  Unlike my other case, I never received one from Absolute / Resurgence during Discovery.  Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you sent an RFP of Documents, I would pursue a motion to compel.

 

If you sent a Request for Admissions, I would pursue a motion to deem admitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you sent an RFP of Documents, I would pursue a motion to compel.

 

I sent a rfPOD and Demand for BOP.  They responded with junk and the usual refusal to provide info based on client-attorney privilege.  Unfortunately, I missed the deadline for doing an MTC.

 

If you sent a Request for Admissions, I would pursue a motion to deem admitted.

 

I never sent an RFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's time to send one if it's not too late...

I had considered sending RFAs and ROGS on my last case, but never did.  I think maybe some of the other members and I decided that they weren't ultimately worth it, but my memory's fuzzy on the matter (I was under a lot of stress at the time).  

 

Not sure what the deadline is on sending these or the strategy behind them, since the Plaintiff will never admit to any wrongdoing or employing criminals.  @calawyer and @Anon Amos, do you happen to have any thoughts on the matter?  To give you an idea of my timeframe, my trial on this case is very early in 2016, so I'll be able to send the CCP96 request in a few weeks time.  Thanks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone?

 

Also, does anyone know what the deadline is for the Plaintiff to send a CCP98 declaration?  Unlike my other case, I never received one from Absolute / Resurgence during Discovery.  Thanks.

You must receive it at least 30 days prior to trial.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had considered sending RFAs and ROGS on my last case, but never did.  I think maybe some of the other members and I decided that they weren't ultimately worth it, but my memory's fuzzy on the matter (I was under a lot of stress at the time).  

 

Not sure what the deadline is on sending these or the strategy behind them, since the Plaintiff will never admit to any wrongdoing or employing criminals.  @calawyer and @Anon Amos, do you happen to have any thoughts on the matter?  To give you an idea of my timeframe, my trial on this case is very early in 2016, so I'll be able to send the CCP96 request in a few weeks time.  Thanks.

 

I personally wouldn't bother sending RFA's or ROGS, even if you had more time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just hard to retain all the info because you have too much to learn in a short time. You have a very good understanding of things, and it will come back to you quickly as you re hash everything. Just like riding a bike.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, folks.

 

....I received a packet of documents in the mail today from Plaintiff's attorney.  Essentially, he/she is telling me they are sending me new documents which the Plaintiff received after my previous rfPOD.  Mostly, the docs consist of under a year's worth of photocopied cc statements (they had previously only sent me one), which are no big deal, as I'll apply the same arguments as in my other case to them.  However, they also included a photocopy of the alleged credit application from the OC, which was not expected.

 

I'm assuming that my argument for this document should be that there is no witness from the OC with personal knowledge to testify as to the application's authenticity and accuracy, and therefore it would be hearsay?  I should note that as yet, I have received no CCP 98 Declaration (though I expect I will soon), nor any Affidavits (with the possible exception of a Verification page from an employee of the Plaintiff, produced as part of the response to my rfPOD).

 

Also, if anyone has a good defense for the "Breach of Contract" or "Indebtedness" Causes of Action cited in this Complaint, I'd be most grateful.  I think I'm covered on the "Account Stated" and "Open Book" causes from my other case.  Thanks!

BUMP

 

@calawyer, @RyanEX, @Anon Amos, @HomelessInCalifornia ?  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I'm only a touch over 30 days out from trial and just read Sammyvill's thread.  Therein, I finally understood the strategy behind going after the forward flow after reading calwayer's input:

 

"...That is why I recommended a single RFP seeking the purchase agreement.  Plaintiff will not want to give that to you  but it will not have a good reason for refusing.  An order from the Court requiring its production might just get the case dismissed."

 

I did very little Discovery in this case, though I've read that it can be ongoing until 30 days from trial.  I'm assuming it would be too late for me to go after the forward flow in this case, since the Discovery request would have to be followed up with an MTC when the Plaintiff refuses to produce it, and there's not enough time left before trial at this point.  Can anyone please verify if I'm correct about this?  If not, I'll send out the request for it tomorrow.  Thanks!

 

 

EDIT - I just re-read Anon's post above.  It's obviously way to late for this.  Apologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you have the objections right. As for the application; it would be as you say, an objection on foundation and authentication, as the jdb can't lay a foundation for it. You could use hearsay as well since it can't meet the exceptions of evidence code 1271.

Argument for any cause of action is simply that plaintiff hasn't met the burden of proof, cannot lay a foundation for anything or authenticate anything as it is relying on hearsay without any witness from the OC with knowledge of any records.

No more discovery as you said, which won't be a problem.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I recently received a CCP 96 Request from Plaintiff.  At this time, I have no evidence or witnesses I plan to present at trial.  I feel like someone had the correct wording to express that in my response (on pleading paper, of course) in another thread, but I can't seem to find it.  Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 

Also included was the CCP 98 Declaration and half-a-dozen exhibits.  According to LinkedIn, the Declarant is the President and COO of Absolute Resolutions in San Diego, though his job title was omitted from the Declaration.  He's not a competent witness anyway (since he's not a custodian of records for the alleged OC), but I feel pretty confident in saying that a President/COO is unlikely to show up at Trial in Los Angeles for a 3-4K case.  Am I wrong?  What I'm also wondering is if having him subpoena'd increases the likelihood of him actually showing up to trial (since a subpoena is something along the lines of a court order)?

 

Note - the CCP 98 Declaration is also a photocopy (probably robo-signed by someone lower on the food chain, I would guess).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Annnnnd a curiosity question I've been wondering about for a while, if anyone knows.  One of the exhibits is an alleged Bill of Sale between Cap. One and Absolute Resolution Corp (for a mass sale of $30 million in alleged accounts, of course).  Then there is an Assignment of Receivables, which purports to transfer assignment of the alleged account from Absolute Resolution Corp to Absolute Resolutions V, LLC.  My other case (Portfolio) followed the same pattern.  Does anyone know why JDBs would buy accounts with one business entity, only to transfer them to another within their corporate family?  Is it to limit liability?  Dodge taxes, perhaps?  lol

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.