Jump to content

Confirm My Response To Summon, Please?


mddho
 Share

Recommended Posts

Please let me know if my response to summon is correct

 

1. the claim herein has been assigned to Plaintiff for collection,

(answer:  Defendant objects to this request on the ground that the Defendant has no way of knowing if this claim has been assigned to plaintiff for collection.)

2. Plaintiff is a Washington Corporation in good standing, is duly licensed and has satisfied the Bonding requirements of the state of Washington.

(answer:  Defendant objects to this request on the ground that the Defendant has no way of knowing if Plaintiff is a Washington corporation in good standing, is duly licensed and has satisfied all bonding requirements. )

3. During all material times defendants above were and are married and the obligation hereafter pleaded is the community and separate obligation of each.

(answer:  Defendants are subject to the jurisdiction of this court)

4. Defendants are subject to the jurisdiction of this court. 

(answer:  Plaintiff’s complaint is not properly verified and is not grounded in fact because it does not exhibit the alleged contract the debt is based upon, a valid statement of account, nor any valid assignment that gives Plaintiff legal title to the claim. )

5.  Defendants became indebted to NW SURGICAL SPECIALISTS for certain goods or services which assignor is duly licensed to render, upon which there remains a balance of $941.64 which has been demanded without avail plus statutory interest from 7-31-14 to date of judgment.

(answer:  Plaintiff’s complaint is not properly verified and is not grounded in fact because it does not exhibit the alleged contract the debt is based upon, a valid statement of account, nor any valid assignment that gives Plaintiff legal title to the claim. )

6. The reasonable value of the goods or services furnished to the defendant by plaintiff's assignor(s) is $941.64.

(answer:  Plaintiff’s complaint is not properly verified and is not grounded in fact because it does not exhibit the alleged contract the debt is based upon, a valid statement of account, nor any valid assignment that gives Plaintiff legal title to the claim. )

Respectfully Submitted,
 
WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that this Court find judgment for Defendant, deny Plaintiffs’ request for the relief , deny Plaintiffs’ request for interest, deny Plaintiffs’ request for costs, deny Plaintiffs’ request for attorney’s fees and deny Plaintiffs’ request for any relief. Defendant further prays that this Court hold that Defendant is the prevailing party, and dismiss Defendant with prejudice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mddho

They are not "requests" because they are not requesting anything from you.  They're allegations (claims).   You admit, deny, or give a reason why you can't admit or deny.

How is the complaint unverified?

Do WA court rules or statutes require a copy of a contract to be attached to a complaint?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BV80

So should I change the term "request" to "claim"? deny Plaintiffs’ Claim for the relief

If by unverified you mean to my knowledge of its legitimacy... I do not know Rainier Collections, nor have I gained knowledge or seen proof of their legitimacy to this debt. I did have surgery and NW Surgeons were part of the surgical team. However I am fairly confident that I paid this debt, I have been looking for a receipt, but it was years ago. That being said, I just want them to prove that I actually owe Rainier Collections. Rainier collections is filing the complaint and NOT the surgeon. 

I do not know if WA requires that on complaint filing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mddho said:

@BV80

So should I change the term "request" to "claim"? deny Plaintiffs’ Claim for the relief

If by unverified you mean to my knowledge of its legitimacy... I do not know Rainier Collections, nor have I gained knowledge or seen proof of their legitimacy to this debt. I did have surgery and NW Surgeons were part of the surgical team. However I am fairly confident that I paid this debt, I have been looking for a receipt, but it was years ago. That being said, I just want them to prove that I actually owe Rainier Collections. Rainier collections is filing the complaint and NOT the surgeon. 

I do not know if WA requires that on complaint filing. 

You can use claim or allegation.  You need to read your rules of civil procedure (RCPs) to see what is required for your answer.  If your rules allow, for #1 for instance, you might simply state "Defendant denies."   Or, you might state "Defendant has insufficient information to admit or deny and, therefore, denies".   Something like that.

Whether or not the debt is legitimate has nothing to do with whether or not the complaint is verified.   The requirements for a proper complaint will be in your RCPs.  

Did you have insurance at the time?   Did your insurance pay?

The complaint states a date in 2014.   Was that when the surgery occurred?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BV80 said:

@mddho

They are not "requests" because they are not requesting anything from you.  They're allegations (claims).   You admit, deny, or give a reason why you can't admit or deny.

How is the complaint unverified?

Do WA court rules or statutes require a copy of a contract to be attached to a complaint?

The surgery was in 2014. I was insured and covered mostly, except for out of pocket max. 

I do believe you are allow to use the verbiage you posted "Defendant has insufficient information to admit or deny and, therefore, denies" Would this be more recommended than my current answers?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mddho said:

The surgery was in 2014. I was insured and covered mostly, except for out of pocket max. 

I do believe you are allow to use the verbiage you posted "Defendant has insufficient information to admit or deny and, therefore, denies" Would this be more recommended than my current answers?

 

 

That's the answer I would use because your current response might be stating something that's incorrect if the contract is not required to be attached.

If you believe you paid the balance, you need to find the proof. 

As an affirmative defense, you might want to state that the plaintiff is not the real party in interest and does not have standing to sue.  That means the plaintiff hasn't proven ownership of the account or that it has the right to sue for the account.

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...