Jump to content

Midland Funding in Ohio


Recommended Posts

Hello again. I really do appreciate all of the help that is provided to me on this forum, and I have used the help from all of those on this forum to help others in my life.

With that being said, I have ran into another pickle. I am being sued by midland funding (this is the third time just different accounts). I am very familiar in how to get these things dismissed pretty quick and even send these JDB running back home. I have gotten 2 DWOP knowing little to nothing, and my last encounter I got a DWP when I faced off against them, This time I ran into something that I don't know how to answer that was in their complaint (fyi I was served correct). 

Here is a copy of the complaint that I got

Complaint

1.      Plaintiff MIDLAND FUNDING LLC DOING BUSINESS IN OHIO AS MIDLAND FUNDING DE LLC (“Plaintiff”) is a limited liability company qualified to do business in Ohio

2.      This court is the proper court because the Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant, XXX’s, (hereafter “Defendant”), residence lies within the jurisdiction of this court.

Facts

3.      Defendant opened and account with CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A. or its predecessor in interest. A copy of the account statement is attached as Exhibit “A”.

4.      Plaintiff has purchased Defendant’s debt, and is entitled to all rights as owner thereof

Midland's efforts to resolve the underlying obligations

5.      MIDLAND FUNDING LLC DOING BUSINESS IN OHIO AS MIDLAND FUNDING DE LLC owns portfolios of consumer receivables, which it attempts to collect. When working with individual consumers, MIDLAND FUNDING LLC DOING BUSINESS IN OHIO AS MIDLAND FUNDING DE LLC and its affiliates (collectively, “Midland”) generally attempt to contact consumers like Defendant through several means, all in an effort to establish contact and resolve the underlying obligation. In doing so, Midland attempts to assess each consumer’s willingness to pay, through phone calls, letters or other means. Midland attempts to exclude consumers from its collection efforts, where Midland believes those consumers are facing extenuating circumstances or hardships that would prevent them from making any payments.

6.      When Midland contacts consumers, it strives to treat consumers with respect, compassion and integrity. Midland works with consumers in an effort to find mutually-beneficial solutions, often offering discounts, hardship plans, and payment options. Midland’s efforts are aimed at working with the consumers to repay their obligations and to attain financial recovery. Midland strives to engage in dialogue that is honorable and constructive, and to play a positive role in consumers' lives.

7.      Despite Midland’s efforts to reach consumers and resolve the consumer’s obligations, only a percentage of consumers choose to engage with Midland. Those who do are often offered discounts or payment plans that are intended to suit their needs. Midland would prefer to work with consumers to establish voluntary payment arrangements resulting in the resolution of any underlying obligations.

8.      However, the majority of Midland’s consumers ignore calls or letters, and some simply refuse to repay their obligations despite an apparent ability to do so. When this happens, Midland must decide then whether to  pursue collection through legal channels, including litigation like the present action against Defendant. Although the account is now in litigation, Plaintiff remains willing to explore a mutually-beneficial solution through voluntary payment arrangements, if possible.

Claim for Relief

9.      There is now due and owing from the Defendant, in the amount of $XXX.

10.  Plaintiff has made demand on Defendant for repayment of the account but Defendant has failed and refused to pay the balance due.

My question to you guys is how should I answer 5-8, also one other thing that I find quite odd is that attached to the complaint was a single statement, however it was not labeled as exhibit "i" or anything.  This just seems so odd to me because I have never seen anything like this middle section in this complaint. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, thefinz said:

My question to you guys is how should I answer 5-8

A general denial is all that is needed.  This is nothing more than verbal posturing attempting to make themselves look upstanding and legitimate and NOT the sleezy junk debt buyer with no records that they really are.  This is likely in the wake of their settlement with the CFPB over the fact they frequently sue consumers who do not owe money, have no records in support of their case, and attorneys spend less than 60 seconds reviewing a case before robo-signing affidavits and filing suit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of had a feeling that was more along what it actually was, but this is the first time I have seen in since my last case in 2013. Back then I was facing Javitch, Block & Rathbone suing for Midland. Today I am facing the same attorney, just now they work directly for Midland since JB&R dissolved into two different firms and half of the collection attorneys went to Midland. 

All I can say is the company hasn't changed much in the past five years that I have been dealing with them. They are still bottom feeders that don't have a chance in the world in collecting, because they can't prove anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said they included an account statement? What does it show? They're required to include one with account activity, not just a chargeoff balance- go to page 34 of the CFPB order

A certified or otherwise properly authenticated copy of each bill of sale or other document evidencing the transfer of ownership of the Debt at the time of Charge-off to each successive owner, including Encore. Each of the documents evidencing the transfer of ownership of the Debt must include a specific reference to the particular Debt being collected upon; and A document signed by the Consumer evidencing the opening of the account forming the basis for the Debt; or 2. Original Account-Level Documentation reflecting a purchase, payment, or other actual use of the account by the Consumer.

 

Comb through the CFPB order to see if they've met it. http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201509_cfpb_consent-order-encore-capital-group.pdf

File a complaint with the CFPB if Midland hasn't followed it to the letter-

http://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually this is a direct violation of this order. All that midland included was the charge-off statement. There was no copy of sale or anything else attached to it at all. Just a complaint and the chargeoff statement. The last time this happened to me I went through the discovery process and just forced them to caugh up the random crap that they had then they gave up. I thought this was business as usual for that craptastic JDB. So what will happen with filing complaint with CFPB anyway. This will be a first time for me to file with CFPB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BV80 then consider it contested when CFPB contacts Midland and if not then when the answer and discovery occur. If Midland is going to spend time attaching a statement how hard is it to attach the correct one? Less time than it takes for the printer to cough up paragraphs 5 through 8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can motion to compel contractual arbitration as the OC was CreditOne (scumbag bottom feeders) I know they have JAMS and AAA as arbitration choices in the cardmember agreement.... I am just not sure if it applies to my card. I have to look it up because all of CreditOne's cards have their own agreements. 

Would this be the best motion to file or should I file a MTD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BV80 said:

The lawsuit is not contested until an answer denying the allegations is filed. 

There is no allowance for them to initiate a lawsuit unless they have those documents in hand, contested or not. Paragraph 131 is clear they are to have those docs if they initiate a lawsuit. If you want to give Midland wiggle room when you get sued as far as what they attached you can but there is no leeway for them to say they'll need to contact the OC for that detail now that you're contesting the lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, CCRP626 said:

@BV80 then consider it contested when CFPB contacts Midland and if not then when the answer and discovery occur. If Midland is going to spend time attaching a statement how hard is it to attach the correct one? Less time than it takes for the printer to cough up paragraphs 5 through 8.

How is the charge-off statement not the correct statement?  The Order says "Original Account-Level Documentation reflecting, at a minimum, the Consumer's name, the last four digits of the account number associated with the Debt at the time of Charge-off, the claimed amount, excluding any post Charge-off payments...".

The charge-off statement would show each one of those details.

 

33 minutes ago, CCRP626 said:

There is no allowance for them to initiate a lawsuit unless they have those documents in hand, contested or not. Paragraph 131 is clear they are to have those docs if they initiate a lawsuit. If you want to give Midland wiggle room when you get sued as far as what they attached you can but there is no leeway for them to say they'll need to contact the OC for that detail now that you're contesting the lawsuit.

If Midland answers discovery requests with a statement that they have to get the docs from the OC, then bring up the Order.   However, right now, we don't know what they have or don't have in their possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, thefinz said:

This is very true as well, however.... anyone who has experience with Midland knows what happens the good old friend of discovery comes along.

If they screw up in discovery, use it against them.   My point was to read the Order carefully and use it to your advantage.   You don't want to make claims that are not in the Order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you have option of responding via motion, you have to decide how to respond: answer v. motion.

If planning on using private arbitration, then respond with MTC.

If not using arbitration card, then do you have any defenses?

All of this discussion about discovery implies either MTD based on lack of standing, or answer with lack of standing as affirmative defense.

In general, it's better to avoid the answer and respond to law suit via motion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Happybluesky said:

All of this discussion about discovery implies either MTD based on lack of standing, or answer with lack of standing as affirmative defense.

Lack of standing is not the only purpose of discovery.  Discovery is also about admissible evidence proving other allegations such as the amount of the debt and the liability of the defendant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BV80 said:

Lack of standing is not the only purpose of discovery.  Discovery is also about admissible evidence proving other allegations such as the amount of the debt and the liability of the defendant.

Obviously.

But think about the elements for standing to sue:

Injury

Traceability to defendant

Likelihood of redress of injury

Those elements are reflected in the kind of discovery being discussed so far in this thread.

At this juncture, can you think of any valid defenses other than lack of standing or possibly private contractual arbitration?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Happybluesky said:

Obviously.

But think about the elements for standing to sue:

Injury

Traceability to defendant

Likelihood of remediation

Those elements are reflected in the kind of discovery being discussed so far in this thread.

At this juncture, can you think of any valid defenses other than lack of standing or possibly private contractual arbitration?  

Gee, I don't see where the OP has claimed that the only documentation he would request in discovery is proof of a valid assignment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Happybluesky said:

So what.

You said " All of this discussion about discovery implies either MTD based on lack of standing, or answer with lack of standing as affirmative defense."

The OP has not indicated that his requests for discovery would only pertain to the issue of standing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BV80 said:

You said " All of this discussion about discovery implies either MTD based on lack of standing, or answer with lack of standing as affirmative defense."

The OP has not indicated that his requests for discovery would only pertain to the issue of standing.

Get a life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP:

You mentioned filing a simple answer today.

Usually responding via motion is preferable.

But if you're going to respond to law suit via answer, definitely file answer with any counterclaims and affirmative defenses. Without affirmative defenses you'll be a lot more vulnerable to losing via plaintiff MSJ.

 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.