Recommended Posts

Discover wouldn't be covered by FDCPA since it's an original creditor but their attorney would be. You can find an attorney to consult with at http://www.consumeradvocates.org/find-an-attorney

TILA, TCPA and FCRA would be areas you could see if there are violations from Discover and also complain to the CFPB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply CCRP626 I did contact just about every attorney in NACA in my local area to help me with this case whilst I was fighting Discover Bank sadly I was not impressed with any of the answers these attorneys gave me and their positions on my case and their fees. I also see that most of them advertise that they list violations such as abusive language and calling during wrong hours and such before a lawsuit is started.

My case involves legal violations of rules of law and frivolous behavior during a long drawn out lawsuit which I reiterate was dismissed with prejudice finally. I will try NACA again though, also I will add that this site helped me a lot in my intense struggle which devoured precious time much, family relationships, and lost income.

Many thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that looks like really good information that I have not seen yet, many thanks for that !!

I have become exhausted from the fight and want a professional to join me on this quest now or take the reins on contingency.

I think I have a very interesting case, how it was fought, the methods I used, and also noticed Discover Bank is not often challenged, hence their arrogance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, presentispeace said:

My case involves legal violations of rules of law

Then your recourse is a complaint to the State Bar that governs the attorney's behavior.  Your case was dismissed with prejudice so from a legal perspective you haven't suffered harm regardless of how emotional you feel about it.  The chances of prevailing in a lawsuit on this are slim to  none.  Had you lost the suit and could prove financial damages AND violations of law then you would have a case against the attorney.

10 hours ago, presentispeace said:

frivolous behavior during a long drawn out lawsuit

NOTHING prohibits frivolous behavior designed to get an opposing party to surrender.  It is a known effective strategy and if it becomes excessive you could have asked the court for sanctions but if you didn't then you are out of luck now.

10 hours ago, presentispeace said:

my intense struggle which devoured precious time much, family relationships, and lost income.

Unfortunately NONE of that is compensable to you (even after a dismissal with prejudice) it is merely the consequences of defending yourself.  The attorney will argue you could have hired counsel to deal with it.  

I am in the middle of a pro-se suit I filed against a collection agency and spent 3 hours yesterday typing a Motion for Summary Judgement.  While I can claim expenses for the paper, ink, and filing fees I cannot get compensated for my time as I am not a lawyer nor did I hire one. 

14 hours ago, presentispeace said:

I am looking perhaps for an attorney to bring FDCPA and other actions as there were many violations.

As was said before you aren't finding a lawyer to go after them because the FDCPA does not apply to an original creditor so I suspect that much of what you believe to be a violation isn't. 

What violations are you alleging took place?

10 hours ago, presentispeace said:

I have become exhausted from the fight and want a professional to join me on this quest now or take the reins on contingency.

If you file your own suit now you will finish it.  Rarely if ever will you find a lawyer who will step in and take over a pro-se's case.  They don't want to have to clean up the mess many pro-se litigants make nor do they want the responsibility for the case errors already made.  

Whether  you can find someone who will take it on contingency depends heavily on what actually happened and whether it is illegal or not.  The stronger your case the more likely a firm will take it on contingency.  If you interview lawyers and none will you have your answer:  there is no case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would recommend at the very least you should file a detailed complaint of the FDCPA violations  with CFPB.   Banks are scared of CFPB because CFPB can actually hold them accountable for FDCPA violations whereas consumers cannot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy,

I'm going to disagree with clydesmom about how there is no case if attorneys do not want to take it.  In my own experience, attorneys down this way will only take a case if there is enough money in it for them, and if they feel they can win.  To say "there is no case" is not at all true.  As example, I spoke to an attorney not too many weeks ago about the possibility of a TCPA case against a debt collector that has hounded my cell phone for over 1 year.  They call, leave messages, and they are looking for someone with a similar name.  I have told them too many times that they are not looking for me.  I have sent them a letter demanding that they stop calling.  They still call.  So I started shopping for an attorney.  Since they call my cell phone, using a computer dialing system and prerecorded messages, all intentionally, and all without my consent, this should be a slam dunk TCPA claim, as well as FDCPA since they ignored my cease communication demands.  The only attorney I could find that would agree to do an initial consultation with me declined to take on the case, unless I was willing to agree to cover all costs.  He did not even know what TCPA was, and he is a consumer law attorney who has been practicing law for over a decade.  So, I checked with 11 attorneys, none of whom wanted the case.  But when you look at what is happening with TCPA claims, they are going through the roof.  Penalties for TCPA violations are $500 each, unless you can show that the offender acted intentionally, and then it jumps up to $1500 per violation.  I have more than 100 individual calls, and most of those appear to contain multiple violations.  But I could not find a lawyer willing to consult more than a couple of minutes over the phone, and when I finally did, he did not want the case.  I'd like to be able to tell you that attorneys will have your best interest in mind, but as a friend likes to say, they only have their own interests at heart.  So what does this all mean?  Well, you might have a case.  And you might not.  The existence of a case is not determined by what attorneys tell you.  If you need further proof of this, just look at the foreclosure mess.  A good friend is about to lose her home of 19 years.  The party that is trying to foreclose does not own her loan.  They have even admitted that they do not own or service her loan, in writing!  the court did not care.  She's tried to get attorney representation since the start.  Every attorney she spoke with was only interested in one thing, trying to get a loan modification settlement from the same company that admits it has no legal authority to modify the loan to start with.

The real measure of your case is in the details.  If you intend to pursue Discover using FDCPA, you will lose because FDCPA only applies to third parties.  Discover is an original creditor.  So, you could pursue their attorney, but any violations would have had to be actions taken by that attorney, not by Discover.  If you have evidence that the attorney acted illegally or unethically, you can also file a bar complaint in your state against him.

Wheels up,

Stick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt collection attorneys for original creditors are considered debt collectors under FDCPA plus maybe they bought the debt from Discover Bank, I tried to  get answers on that but of course this lawyer was so evasive he never even answered my discovery.

I won the case with a sanctions motion which struck the complaint but the robe denied compensation for rule and FDCPA violations.

Many false statements in the lawsuit took place and a lot of deception is recorded this is part of the reason plus the lawsuit being frivolous by not having the proof needed before filing the action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

saying they had a signed contract to start the action which they never provided,

saying I never denied the debt, which I am on record doing.

robo signed affidavit with wrong index #

unsigned complaint starting the action with out proper inquiry to support facts

letterhead with expired debt collectors license 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Stick and everyone else. I have seen cases similar to mine where certain judges in my local area do pass money sanctions on debt collectors and that lawyers are eager to take on these cases because they are easy to win or settle and the lawyer will collect fees too. This is why I am throwing my case into the arena.

I understand the pushback also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@presentispeace

Their claim of a signed contract without providing it is not a violation.  Did you motion to compel the provision of a signed contract?

Affidavit:   The wrong index number could be a clerical and is not a violation

Was the affidavit signed by a representative of Discover Bank?

Complaint:  Are complaints required to be signed?  

What would be a "proper inquiry" and can you prove one was not made?

Letterhead:  How would an expired debt collector's license number on a letterhead be an FDCPA violation?   Not all false statements are actionable under the FDCPA.

Which section of the FDCPA would you apply to any false statements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their claim of a signed contract without providing it is not a violation.  Did you motion to compel the provision of a signed contract?

 

here are the rules in new york, I did not motion to compel as I am the defendant and its up to plaintiff to prove his / her case I did however mention it on the record many times and the rule is that once the lawyer is put on notice he / she is supposed to amend

Rules - N.Y. State Courts - Unified Court System

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwipjfTDj4fLAhWIFj4KHXtLAkAQFggcMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nycourts.gov%2Frules%2Fchiefadmin%2F130.shtml&usg=AFQjCNGlBl-Lh6-mV3AyEGSwK0MBcI19jw

Affidavit:   The wrong index number could be a clerical and is not a violation---- not if the 'litigation specialist' is 'aware of the case' 

Was the affidavit signed by a representative of Discover Bank? -- from Discover Products Inc which is an affiliate -- not the Bank itself

Complaint:  Are complaints required to be signed?  Yes as can be seen by the rules, I think most courts require complaints be signed, is shows that the case was reviewed.

What would be a "proper inquiry" and can you prove one was not made? ---proper inquiry would have the signed contract on hand to prove the case before action is brought, and the witness from the Discover bank, not DPI as Discover Bank is the plaintiff on the caption not DPI

 

 

Letterhead:  How would an expired debt collector's license number on a letterhead be an FDCPA violation?   Not all false statements are actionable under the FDCPA.

Which section of the FDCPA would you apply to any false statements? ---- *Deceptive*- I understand maybe is hard to convince a judge but deception is the reason for FDCPA as I understand it.

I am far from an expert on this even though I learned a lot, that is why I seek the expert

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@presentispeace

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

I did not motion to compel as I am the defendant and its up to plaintiff to prove his / her case I did however mention it on the record many times and the rule is that once the lawyer is put on notice he / she is supposed to amend

Unless a contract is required by the rules, if you want it, you have to request it through a request for production of documents.  If they don't provide it in response to your request, then you have to motion to compel its production.  That's why rules include motions to compel.

 

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

Affidavit:   The wrong index number could be a clerical and is not a violation---- not if the 'litigation specialist' is 'aware of the case' 

Again, it can be a clerical error.   And the affidavit was provided by Discover, not the attorney.

 

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

Was the affidavit signed by a representative of Discover Bank? -- from Discover Products Inc which is an affiliate -- not the Bank itself

It was not signed by the attorney therefore, he's not liable.  He's merely offering the evidence provided by his client.

 

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

Complaint:  Are complaints required to be signed?  Yes as can be seen by the rules, I think most courts require complaints be signed, is shows that the case was reviewed.

Again, how is that deceptive or misleading?   The lack of a signature is not proof that the case was not reviewed.   It simply means the attorney forgot to sign it.

 

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

What would be a "proper inquiry" and can you prove one was not made? ---proper inquiry would have the signed contract on hand to prove the case before action is brought, and the witness from the Discover bank, not DPI as Discover Bank is the plaintiff on the caption not DPI

The attorney is not the one who must prove the allegations.  It's the plaintiff's responsibility to prove its case.  The plaintiff is not a debt collector.  Even if the plaintiff were a debt collector, it's not always required that it must have the immediate means to prove its claims before the lawsuit is filed.

Hasbrouck v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, ND New York, 2011

Defendant argues, "[t]o the extent that plaintiff is suggesting that Arrow violated the FDCPA because it did not have sufficient documentation to prove that she owed the debt, she is mistaken". The Court agrees.

The majority of district and appellate courts have routinely held that, "the filing of a collection lawsuit without the immediate means of proving the debt does not violate the FDCPA".

In regard to the witness, DPI is a subsidiary of Discover Bank.  If DPI issues the credit card statements and performs other servicing duties, then a witness from DPI would be the appropriate witness to testify as to credit card statements and cardmember agreements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the issues you stated would be best argued at that trial.  But since it appears that that trial is over now, the time for arguing them is over, and since you came out on top, there's no point in trying to argue them now, really.  As example, the signed contract claim, but none was produced.  That would provide you an argument against the plaintiff's claim that you owe them the money more than it would be a violation of FDCPA.  The affidavit from Discover Products could have been an issue in your favor in that case.  Courts have routinely held that the corporate veil cannot be so easily pierced, that one company, even thought affiliated with another, is still wholly separated.  So, it could be that Discover Products did not have any real business creating that affidavit.  We do not know because we do not know the relationship that DPI has with Discover.  They may or may not have the ability to provide a witness to testify properly for Discover.  But again that would be more useful at trial for the case that you already are done with.  Out of the things you mentioned, I do not see anything that the attorney as a debt collector can be held liable for under FDCPA.  Sounds like you won the case they tried to pursue against you.  I'd call that a victory and move on, really.

One other thing I noticed.  you said that the judge declined to award you $$ for the FDCPA issues.  If that judge issued any kind of ruling at all pertaining to your FDCPA claim, then you would be wasting your time trying to put a new lawsuit together.  Did you make a counter claim in that case?  If you made a counter claim and the judge issued a ruling on it, then it's done.  You might be able to appeal, depending on how long ago that all was.  But my personal opinion as a non-attorney type that I am, is that you would be spinning your wheels.

Wheels up,

Stick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, BV80 said:

Unless a contract is required by the rules, if you want it, you have to request it through a request for production of documents.  If they don't provide it in response to your request, then you have to motion to compel its production.  That's why rules include motions to compel.

contracts are required when that is the cause of action in the complaint, I motioned to preclude at trial or dismiss the complaint altogether which started the downfall of the lawsuit. Why should a defendant have to compel. Asking for discovery was enough, if plaintiff cant provide papers they claim they have in an unsigned complaint and expect to separate a consumer from life liberty and property they need to prove it. 

 

38 minutes ago, BV80 said:

Again, it can be a clerical error.   And how would the wrong index number have misled you in any way?  How would it have been deceptive?

 

the affient from DPI swears to have knowledge of the document and says it is true, how can this be so when the index # of the case in incorrect, but I get what you are saying, it is a clerical error, but it is still important like they are suing for a balance of a debt, all the information and balance totals can not be off by any amount or the alligations are false. so by that theory everything on the document must be scrutinized and make sense, if it does not the case closed. might call a technicality. 

 

50 minutes ago, BV80 said:

The attorney is not the one who must prove the allegations.  It's the plaintiff's responsibility to prove its case.  The plaintiff is not a debt collector.  Even if the plaintiff were a debt collector, it's not always required that it must have the immediate means to prove its claims before the lawsuit is filed.

Hasbrouck v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, ND New York, 2011

Defendant argues, "[t]o the extent that plaintiff is suggesting that Arrow violated the FDCPA because it did not have sufficient documentation to prove that she owed the debt, she is mistaken". The Court agrees.

The majority of district and appellate courts have routinely held that, "the filing of a collection lawsuit without the immediate means of proving the debt does not violate the FDCPA".

In regard to the witness, DPI is a subsidiary of Discover Bank.  If DPI issues the credit card statements and performs other servicing duties, then a witness from DPI would be the appropriate witness to testify as to credit card statements and cardmember agreements.

on this maybe not FDCPA violations but still violates local rules as demonstrated above. also falls under the act of frivolous which should be punished.

overall you make great points and i get it. Glad to be tossing this around, although Discover Bank can be beat in court, against popular belief, when they are not they are winning against laws that are put in place and rarely challenged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, stick&rudder said:

One other thing I noticed.  you said that the judge declined to award you $$ for the FDCPA issues.  If that judge issued any kind of ruling at all pertaining to your FDCPA claim, then you would be wasting your time trying to put a new lawsuit together.  Did you make a counter claim in that case?  If you made a counter claim and the judge issued a ruling on it, then it's done.  You might be able to appeal, depending on how long ago that all was.  But my personal opinion as a non-attorney type that I am, is that you would be spinning your wheels.

 

Yes judge declined to award FDCPA and also local rules for sanctions. I purposely did not respond in my answer with a counter claim so that branch could be left to a legal expert as they can collect legal fees where I as a pro se can not and would be more likely to get a settlement. this is what i am looking to do now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@presentispeace

35 minutes ago, presentispeace said:

contracts are required when that is the cause of action in the complaint, I motioned to preclude at trial or dismiss the complaint altogether which started the downfall of the lawsuit. Why should a defendant have to compel. Asking for discovery was enough, if plaintiff cant provide papers they claim they have in an unsigned complaint and expect to separate a consumer from life liberty and property they need to prove it. 

You're misunderstanding my point.  I was not referring to the requirement of a contract to prove a breach of contract claim.  You said that a false statement was made when it was stated that they had a signed contract.  I said that the failure to provide a contract was not an FDCPA violation.   The reason I mentioned the motion to compel was to determine if they had a contract at all.

 

35 minutes ago, presentispeace said:

the affient from DPI swears to have knowledge of the document and says it is true, how can this be so when the index # of the case in incorrect, but I get what you are saying, it is a clerical error, but it is still important like they are suing for a balance of a debt, all the information and balance totals can not be off by any amount or the alligations are false. so by that theory everything on the document must be scrutinized and make sense, if it does not the case closed. might call a technicality. 

Again, it's not the attorney's affidavit.   Unless your federal court ruled that DPI is a debt collector, you'd have no FDCPA claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

on this maybe not FDCPA violations but still violates local rules as demonstrated above. also falls under the act of frivolous which should be punished.

No.  Not only is it not an FDCPA violation but if it violates the rules of evidence then it means their case is weak and they don't prevail; hence your dismissal with prejudice.  It isn't even frivolous.  Chances of you getting the attorney punished for this:  ZERO.

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

Why should a defendant have to compel. Asking for discovery was enough, if plaintiff cant provide papers they claim they have in an unsigned complaint and expect to separate a consumer from life liberty and property they need to prove it. 

A defendant has to compel in a civil trial because those are the rules.  Unlike a criminal trial where the State is required by law to give copies of all evidence they intend to use at trial for their defense, in a civil trial the Defendant has to demand it or do without.  

Now you are being ridiculous because a suit over a defaulted credit card does not separate a consumer from their liberty or their life.  In some states the judgement creditor can seize property but that is after they win their case and get a court order to do so.

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

the affient from DPI swears to have knowledge of the document and says it is true, how can this be so when the index # of the case in incorrect, but I get what you are saying, it is a clerical error, but it is still important like they are suing for a balance of a debt, all the information and balance totals can not be off by any amount or the alligations are false.


Even the FDCPA allows for bonafide error and the court will take leave to allow them to amend the complaint if need be for basic clerical errors.

5 hours ago, presentispeace said:

Debt collection attorneys for original creditors are considered debt collectors under FDCPA

SOMETIMES.  If Discover hired the lawyer to simply represent them in court then NO he is not a debt collector.  If he sent a collection letter on their behalf first then YES, he is a debt collector.  Did he send correspondence first i.e. a dunning letter or simply file the suit?

1 hour ago, presentispeace said:

Yes judge declined to award FDCPA and also local rules for sanctions.

This effectively kills any case you think you have.  The court has already ruled you did not have violations or anything to sanction Discover or their lawyer.  They can claim res judicata:  the court already decided this issue and sue you for filing a frivolous case.  

FYI the definition of a frivolous lawsuit is this:

Frivolous Lawsuit Law & Legal Definition. Frivolous lawsuits are those filed by a party or attorney who is aware they are without merit, because of a lack of supporting legal argument or factual basis for the claims.

If you had a Discover card and defaulted then their suit is not frivolous.  While they may have come to court unprepared the basic fact set that they gave you credit, you used the account and defaulted means that the suit was not frivolous.  Their factual basis for the claim is that you had the card and defaulted.  Their supporting legal argument:  breach of contract or account stated.  This means the case was not frivolous by the legal definition.  Their losing does not automatically make the case frivolous.  Sometimes you just lose.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Clydesmom said:

This effectively kills any case you think you have.  The court has already ruled you did not have violations or anything to sanction Discover or their lawyer.  They can claim res judicata:  the court already decided this issue and sue you for filing a frivolous case.  

FYI the definition of a frivolous lawsuit is this:

Frivolous Lawsuit Law & Legal Definition. Frivolous lawsuits are those filed by a party or attorney who is aware they are without merit, because of a lack of supporting legal argument or factual basis for the claims.

If you had a Discover card and defaulted then their suit is not frivolous.  While they may have come to court unprepared the basic fact set that they gave you credit, you used the account and defaulted means that the suit was not frivolous.  Their factual basis for the claim is that you had the card and defaulted.  Their supporting legal argument:  breach of contract or account stated.  This means the case was not frivolous by the legal definition.  Their losing does not automatically make the case frivolous.  Sometimes you just lose.  

Maybe it does and maybe it does not kill any case I think I have, The law is still the law, I simply added the cost sanctions to improve my case, not as a counter claim. If they are aware or not is up to them when they sue a consumer and try to separate this consumer from their funds using the legal system. If they are not aware and filed then that is bad practice or mal practice, any lawyer who does this should be sanctioned for costs to the person they sue for wasting resources and time. If they are aware of the law that they need to have supporting documents and know that they do not have them which is what most of these cases are - unsupported- we can only know how unsupported they are when we push them to task and place the burden of proof on them.

Weather I had a Discover card or not is not the issue - they say i had a Discover card then prove it. If they come to court unprepared, then they should not have filed the complaint in the first place and should be sanction for costs to the defendant and wasting the courts time. There is no basic fact i was give credit. plus what about proving terms -- a plaintiff would need a contract to do that. many folk owe me money, i don't sue them, why because i do not have papers to prove it. 

15 hours ago, Clydesmom said:

SOMETIMES.  If Discover hired the lawyer to simply represent them in court then NO he is not a debt collector.  If he sent a collection letter on their behalf first then YES, he is a debt collector.  Did he send correspondence first i.e. a dunning letter or simply file the suit?

He is a debt collector because it says so on his letter head and he is trying to collect a debt, I do not remember any dunning letter. lawyers who work to collect debts  for original creditors are considered debt collectors under the FDCPA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, presentispeace said:

He is a debt collector because it says so on his letter head and he is trying to collect a debt, I do not remember any dunning letter. lawyers who work to collect debts  for original creditors are considered debt collectors under the FDCPA.

While he may engage in debt collecting as well as litigating if he did not dun you and simply filed the suit then for the purposes related strictly to your case he is not engaging in debt collection and therefore would not be subject to the FDCPA.  You can argue all you want but he can differentiate between the two.

3 hours ago, presentispeace said:

I simply added the cost sanctions to improve my case, not as a counter claim.

WHY you added it isn't the point.  The court ruled against you which effectively negates your filing another claim on the same issue without the court's ruling it frivolous.

3 hours ago, presentispeace said:

If they are not aware and filed then that is bad practice or mal practice, any lawyer who does this should be sanctioned for costs to the person they sue for wasting resources and time.

You have no way of proving what the attorney was aware of and the fact that the court decided against you already on sanctions shows that you were unable to convince the court that their case was  filed with malice and frivolity.  ANY communication between the lawyer and Discover is privileged and you will not be allowed to access it in discovery.  

Court is about what you can prove and whether they can prove their case or not is determined by the court not you.  I highly suggest you get a lawyer to take this case if you are going to pursue it because based on what you have posted so far I don't see a viable claim and if you do this pro-se you are going to end up getting nailed with thousands of dollars in their attorney fees and costs for defending your frivolous lawsuit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@presentispeace

3 hours ago, presentispeace said:

There is no basic fact i was give credit. plus what about proving terms -- a plaintiff would need a contract to do that. many folk owe me money, i don't sue them, why because i do not have papers to prove it. 

Just an FYI for future reference:  A copy of a contract is not always needed in order to prove the existence of a contract between parties.  A contract can be implied-in-fact which means that the actions between the parties can prove its existence.   For instance, using a credit card can show one has an agreement (contract) with a credit card company. 

It has long been recognized that, even in the absence of written or otherwise overt expression, a true, valid and enforceable implied-in-fact contract may be inferred from the conduct of the parties. Parsa v. State of New York, 64 NY2d 143, 148 (1984).

In your case, if they said they had a written contract, they should have provided it.   But, again, for future reference (hopefully, you won't need it), note that a written contract is not always necessary to prove the existence of a contract.

Also note that what WE as consumers might believe is illegal or frivolous is not always the same as what the law deems to be illegal or frivolous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks you both for the time a patience to explain your thoughts to me, really does make sense all that you say. Of course you do not know all the details but still it seems to me very good points you make. I would not go forward as a plaintiff unless I had a confident attorney working and believing in the case. Also wanted to add this Alabama case which I think is interesting. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjp95SGz4vLAhWhsIMKHWviAjMQFghJMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alabamaconsumer.com%2F2014%2F01%2Ffcra-lawsuit-discover-bank-equifax-experian-transunion-related-collection-lawsuit%2F&usg=AFQjCNGsQ63p6svY1bgz5R1hkRE4l4NWmA&sig2=8FSwUy3XtUi-ac9-gm73tg

This in a way sums up a lot of what I went through minus the FCRA claims.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presentispeace,

I am wondering why you would state a claim for monetary relief in your prayer to the court on a matter that was never brought before that court.  You did not file any FDCPA counter claim, but you asked the court to award you money damages for FDCPA violations?  FDCPA claim needs to be brought before the court long before you start asking the court to order the other party to pay you damages for it.  Courts do not have absolute jurisdiction over everything under the sun.  In order for that court and that judge to have subject matter jurisdiction over any FDCPA claim, you would have had to bring a counter claim suing the debt collector for FDCPA violations.  You cannot just throw it into the mix later on and hope it would stick.  It also did not do anything to strengthen your case, if anything, it made you look as though you do not know what you are doing in that arena. 

You got a dismissal with prejudice.  It's time to be thankful for your win and move on in life, really.  Most consumers do not end up with a "with prejudice" win like that, so you seriously have good reason to be happy, but it's time to put this down.  If you tried to move forward and you lose, which at this point looks to be pretty much a certainty, you would possibly end up having to pay the other side's attorney's and court fees/costs. 

Wheels up,

Stick

  • Like 1

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.