breturbo

Loss against PRA in Dallas County

Recommended Posts

Alright so I had a judgement entered against me today. I went in confident and hoping that I was gonna walk out a winner but that didn't happen.  The PRA attorney asked to speak with me before hand.  He took me into a room and said he was going to settle with me.  I stated I was not interested in settling and was going to ask for a motion to compel private contractual arbitration.  We went in front of the Judge and I asked for the arbitration per my credit card agreement.  Showed him my copy of the agreement but he didn't even look at it.  Judge looks at me confused and asked me if I knew who owned the debt.  I stated that PRA apparently owned the debt but I have never signed any documents with PRA stating that I would pay them for the said debt and could not validate that it was even mine.  Judge asked the PRA Attorney to give me a copy of the bill of sale and they made me a copy of it.

Now that I come to think of it, at the time my account was opened it was GE Money, that is who I signed the contract with.  Synchrony bank took over in June of 2015 but I never resigned any documentation with them so how would that documentation be valid.  

 

The PRA Attorney has statements, bill of sale showing they owned it.

 

Judge said that my card member agreement was no longer eligible because Synchrony bank does not own the debt but PRA does and entered a Judgment against me.  Then the Attorney still states to me he is willing to settle.  Weird if I just had the judgement against me in his favor.  Judge said I could file an appeal.  I am lost and confuse at this point on what to do. 

 

:shock::confused::(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the agreement was no longer eligible??  WOW, that's the first time I ever heard that kind of nonsense.  The agreement is binding on all parties.  The judge does not have the authority to rewrite any agreement between the parties.  I'd bet that somewhere in that agreement, there is probably something stating that it can be sold or assigned....but when it is sold or assigned, the conditions fall to the new owner.  They do not get to pick and choose which sections of the agreement they will use and which ones they will toss aside.  Generally speaking, when an account is sold, the new owner "steps into the shoes of" the original creditor, and has the same rights and responsibilities as that original creditor.  If you have a credit agreement that's valid for this account and contains an arbitration clause, then I would think that's grounds for appeal.  I'm not an attorney but this is my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, kraftykrab said:

the agreement was no longer eligible??  WOW, that's the first time I ever heard that kind of nonsense.  The agreement is binding on all parties.  The judge does not have the authority to rewrite any agreement between the parties.  I'd bet that somewhere in that agreement, there is probably something stating that it can be sold or assigned....but when it is sold or assigned, the conditions fall to the new owner.  They do not get to pick and choose which sections of the agreement they will use and which ones they will toss aside.  Generally speaking, when an account is sold, the new owner "steps into the shoes of" the original creditor, and has the same rights and responsibilities as that original creditor.  If you have a credit agreement that's valid for this account and contains an arbitration clause, then I would think that's grounds for appeal.  I'm not an attorney but this is my opinion.

Judge did say I can file an appeal.  Here is what I received from PRA and the Judge and also the area of my card member agreement which the Judge didn't even read.  He read my General Denial also while he was reading it he was smirking like it was funny or something.  Perhaps he already had his mind made up, half the people didn't show up and I was the only one that didn't make an agreement with the Attorney.

new_doc_3020161107113000031.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is absurd.  An $1,100 lawsuit is not worth appealing but this judge is totally wrong.   Everything kraftykrab said is correct.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @texasrocker.  I followed most of the guidelines that you set out, used your general denial and such but still got hosed in the end.  Guess my only option is to see what type  agreement  PRA still wants to offer me even though they won the Judgement. Not sure if its even worth my time or effort to file an Appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@breturbo

As others have stated, the judge was wrong when he ruled that the agreement no longer applied due to PRA's purchase of the account.   PRA (assignee) is bound by the OC's agreement. 

In regard to Synchrony, you did not have to sign an agreement with that company.  If the account had still been in good standing when Synchrony took over, you'd be bound to that company's terms.  If the account was already in default when Synchrony took over and was never again brought to a current status, the original OC's terms would still apply.

Anyway, when you offered to MTC arbitration, what company's agreement did you include?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I included the Synchrony bank card agreement because that is what I had.  I did not have the GE Money one.  Account was still in good standing as well when Synchrony bank took over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, kraftykrab said:

the agreement was no longer eligible??  WOW, that's the first time I ever heard that kind of nonsense.  The agreement is binding on all parties.  The judge does not have the authority to rewrite any agreement between the parties.  I'd bet that somewhere in that agreement, there is probably something stating that it can be sold or assigned....but when it is sold or assigned, the conditions fall to the new owner.  They do not get to pick and choose which sections of the agreement they will use and which ones they will toss aside.  Generally speaking, when an account is sold, the new owner "steps into the shoes of" the original creditor, and has the same rights and responsibilities as that original creditor.  If you have a credit agreement that's valid for this account and contains an arbitration clause, then I would think that's grounds for appeal.  I'm not an attorney but this is my opinion.

ALL of this is correct and the Judge was 100% wrong but you made one critical error:

1 hour ago, breturbo said:

Judge looks at me confused and asked me if I knew who owned the debt.  I stated that PRA apparently owned the debt

THIS was the biggest mistake and often made by pro-se litigants.  In essence what the Judge got you to do was admit the account/debt was yours and that PRA was legally entitled to collect.  When they handed over a bill of sale you were not prepared to argue it as hearsay since it was a pool of accounts and yours was not specifically listed.

While the Judge was unbelievably wrong about that card agreement not applying once you admitted to the debt and their ownership it was an easy coast to the judgment for them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I said PRA owned the debt I had first stated that Synchrony bank had owned the debt.  When I said that he asked me if I understood how debt buying worked and he state that PRA has a bill of sale showing they own the debt, and so he asked me again and that is when I answered that PRA apparently owns the debt.  But I never stated that the debt was mine unless asking for arbitration was my admission. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, breturbo said:

Before I said PRA owned the debt I had first stated that Synchrony bank had owned the debt.  When I said that he asked me if I understood how debt buying worked and he state that PRA has a bill of sale showing they own the debt, and so he asked me again and that is when I answered that PRA apparently owns the debt.  But I never stated that the debt was mine unless asking for arbitration was my admission. 

Perhaps @texasrocker could provide some insight here.   It appears you didn't file your MTC arbitration and only offered it the day of the trial.   I don't know if such a motion can be made without first filing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at the courthouse early, I asked the clerk if I could file the MTC Arbitration and she said I could not do so that I had to wait to go in front of the Judge and present it to him at that time.  If he accepts it then it would be put on record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, breturbo said:

I was at the courthouse early, I asked the clerk if I could file the MTC Arbitration and she said I could not do so that I had to wait to go in front of the Judge and present it to him at that time.  If he accepts it then it would be put on record.

If the clerk is correct, you have a right to an appeal of the judge's denial of your MTC.   Just know that PRA would probably claim you waived your right to compel arbitration due to the fact that you didn't include it in your answer to the complaint and never indicated before trial that you chose to arbitrate.   Whether or not that holds water would depend on TX court rulings on waiver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to appeal because I think the Judgement was unfair and possibly the Judge already had his mind made up but then I am not sure if it is worth it in the end for $1100 dollars.  

Any guess why the Attorney would say he was still willing to settle even though he won the Judgement?  What was kind of weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, breturbo said:

I want to appeal because I think the Judgement was unfair and possibly the Judge already had his mind made up but then I am not sure if it is worth it in the end for $1100 dollars.  

Any guess why the Attorney would say he was still willing to settle even though he won the Judgement?  What was kind of weird.

The attorney was still willing to settle because PRA doesn't really want to fool with a judgment.   If TX doesn't allow wage garnishment or you have no wages to garnish, a judgment really isn't worth their time.  They want the issue settled and over.

Only you can decide if you are willing or have the time to engage in an appeal.

Share this post


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

The attorney was still willing to settle because PRA doesn't really want to fool with a judgment.   If TX doesn't allow wage garnishment or you have no wages to garnish, a judgment really isn't worth their time.  They want the issue settled and over.

Only you can decide if you are willing or have the time to engage in an appeal.

 

Yeah I think they would be stuck on that issue because I am a 1099 Contractor so, they would have very little luck garnishing my wages. :lol:

Share this post


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

Perhaps @texasrocker could provide some insight here.   It appears you didn't file your MTC arbitration and only offered it the day of the trial.   I don't know if such a motion can be made without first filing it.

I would suggest asking someone in the arbitration section.  As far as I know the only restriction on when arbitration can be initiated is if one has already begun discovery.   

Edit: Breturbo, you should keep your whole case in one thread so we can see everything that has transpired since the beginning without having to seek out other threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, texasrocker said:

I would suggest asking someone in the arbitration section.  As far as I know the only restriction on when arbitration can be initiated is if one has already begun discovery.   

Thank you @texasrocker I will definitely find out in the arbitration section. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, breturbo said:

 

Yeah I think they would be stuck on that issue because I am a 1099 Contractor so, they would have very little luck garnishing my wages. :lol:

Actually they are stuck because Texas does not allow creditors like PRA to garnish anyone's wages.

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.