Recommended Posts

Need assistance since this is the first time i got a citation from a collection company called Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC. It was handed in person by an officer.

Currently unemployed and about to move out of state to be closer to my family.

I wanted to know what would be my best option.  I read two options such as submit a Waiver of Citation or an Answer (General Denial); but I am trying to avoid going to court.

Attached are images of the documents.

Victoria_citation.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MidnightAngel said:

Currently unemployed and about to move out of state to be closer to my family.

Texas has some of the most consumer friendly laws in the country including not being able to garnish wages for civil debts.  If there is any way to avoid moving until you clear this up I would find it.

8 hours ago, MidnightAngel said:

 I read two options such as submit a Waiver of Citation or an Answer (General Denial); but I am trying to avoid going to court.

Short of paying it or getting it into arbitration you are going to court.  They have already served you properly so the court has jurisdiction over the case.  You would need to have resided in the other state with family for at least 6 months to a year establishing residency or at least several months PRIOR to PRA filing the suit to be able to claim they filed in the wrong court.

The waiver of citation is the last thing you want to file.  It only says you are submitting to the jurisdiction of the court.  It does NOT keep you from having to go to court on the matter.

Your best bet is to answer with a denial and motion to compel arbitration under they Synchrony card agreement.  If you can get that motion approved PRA will likely run in the opposite direction and drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's more available to you in TX, depending on the circumstances.  Did you ever have any contact with the plaintiff before they sued?  Did you ever dispute the debt with them in writing?  Might be a good idea to check out the Texas Finance Code.....TX law is stronger than FDCPA is.  If I recall right, if you disputed in writing with them and they never provided validation, they cannot sue or take any other means to collect.  While FDCPA allows no time limit, I believe that TFC only gives them 30 days to validate, and if they do not, they cannot collect.  Depending on how this all unfolded, you might be able to shut them down quickly like that.

Share this post


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

If I recall right, if you disputed in writing with them and they never provided validation, they cannot sue or take any other means to collect.  While FDCPA allows no time limit, I believe that TFC only gives them 30 days to validate, and if they do not, they cannot collect.  Depending on how this all unfolded, you might be able to shut them down quickly like that.

No.  

Texas Finance Code 392 mirrors the FDCPA with one exception:  it gives TX residents the right to dispute at ANY time as long as they invoke the TX FC392 when they request validation.  The FDCPA limits to the DV to the 30 days after initial contact from the creditor to the debtor.  TX Finance Code also does not mean that if they do not validate in 30 days they cannot collect.  It mirrors the FDCPA in stating that they must cease collection efforts until they do validate.  

Now that the lawsuit has been filed it is WAY too late to dispute the debt as the TFC 392 has little impact on litigation.

Share this post


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

No.

Sorry, but yes. Wrong again....this is becoming all too common with you, and more disturbing each time too.  Who exactly are you here to help, if the people you're posting to keep getting incorrect info from you?

1 hour ago, Clydesmom said:

Texas Finance Code 392 mirrors the FDCPA with one exception:  it gives TX residents the right to dispute at ANY time as long as they invoke the TX FC392 when they request validation.

This is quoted directly from the law in question:

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/FI/htm/FI.392.htm

Quote

Sec. 392.202. CORRECTION OF THIRD-PARTY DEBT COLLECTOR'S OR CREDIT BUREAU'S FILES. (a) An individual who disputes the accuracy of an item that is in a third-party debt collector's or credit bureau's file on the individual and that relates to a debt being collected by the third-party debt collector may notify in writing the third-party debt collector of the inaccuracy. The third-party debt collector shall make a written record of the dispute. If the third-party debt collector does not report information related to the dispute to a credit bureau, the third-party debt collector shall cease collection efforts until an investigation of the dispute described by Subsections (b)-(e) determines the accurate amount of the debt, if any. 

So, if a consumer sends written notice of dispute, they MUST investigate.  Next:

Quote

(b)

Not later than the 30th day after the date a notice of inaccuracy is received, a third-party debt collector who initiates an investigation shall send a written statement to the individual:

(1) denying the inaccuracy;

(2) admitting the inaccuracy; or

(3) stating that the third-party debt collector has not had sufficient time to complete an investigation of the inaccuracy.

(c) If the third-party debt collector admits that the item is inaccurate under Subsection (b), the third-party debt collector shall:

(1) not later than the fifth business day after the date of the admission, correct the item in the relevant file; and

(2) immediately cease collection efforts related to the portion of the debt that was found to be inaccurate and on correction of the item send, to each person who has previously received a report from the third-party debt collector containing the inaccurate information, notice of the inaccuracy and a copy of an accurate report.

(d) If the third-party debt collector states that there has not been sufficient time to complete an investigation, the third-party debt collector shall immediately:

(1) change the item in the relevant file as requested by the individual;

(2) send to each person who previously received the report containing the information a notice that is equivalent to a notice under Subsection (c) and a copy of the changed report; and

(3) cease collection efforts.[/QUOTE]

Does FDCPA impose a 30 day time limit on a CA to respond to a DV request?  Sure doesnt look like this mirrors FDCPA...

1 hour ago, Clydesmom said:

 TX Finance Code also does not mean that if they do not validate in 30 days they cannot collect.  It mirrors the FDCPA in stating that they must cease collection efforts until they do validate.  


Why does TFC contain a requirement that a CA must respond to a consumer within 30 days of getting their dispute letter then?  Does FDCPA now have this same provision, and all of the rest of us are just unaware?  Not only does it say that they must respond, but it even says that in the event that they could not complete the investigation in time, they still must respond and inform the consumer.  There's a requirement within TFC 392 that clearly states they must respond within 30 days, no matter what.  This is not optional. I quoted it above for you.  Obviously TFC 392 does not mirror FDCPA as you claim it does, and clearly there's more than just the one difference.  Indeed, TFC 392 has other differences as well....392.303 discusses the legality of a creditor charging reasonable reinstatement fees pertaining to loans for real property.  FDCPA says nothing of the sort.  TFC 392 has portions that are binding upon creditors and debt collectors, which by TFC's definition are NOT third party debt collectors.  FDCPA ONLY applies to third party debt collectors.  392.306 places automatic liability on the CREDITOR if they choose to use a third party debt collector that they know violates the TFC in its actions.  FDCPA does not automatically extend that liability to a creditor in the same fashion.  Also, 392.402 shows that TFC carries CRIMINAL as well as civil penalties...FDPCA does not, does it?
1 hour ago, Clydesmom said:

Now that the lawsuit has been filed it is WAY too late to dispute the debt as the TFC 392 has little impact on litigation.

Please note that I never asked OP to dispute now, did I?  I asked if it was already done prior to this point.  So again, why are you trying to complicate such a simple post like this?  Here--read what I said one more time:

 

2 hours ago, kraftykrab said:

....if you disputed in writing with them and they never provided validation, they cannot sue or take any other means to collect.

Stop working overtime to try to find fault in my posts already.  You are wrong....again....plain and simple.  

 

 

Share this post


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

Sorry, but yes. Wrong again.

Nope.  I have SUCCESSFULLY litigated a case PRO-SE in Texas using the TCPA and TFC 392 until you can claim that step down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Clydesmom said:

Nope.  I have SUCCESSFULLY litigated a case PRO-SE in Texas using the TCPA and TFC 392 until you can claim that step down.

That proves nothing--literally. 

 

There are a ton of different points covered by TFC 392....the point(s) you dealt with very easily could have nothing to do with this one.  Plus, we've seen you on more than one occasion be dishonest here in the spirit of attacking others and feeding your ego, so forgive me if I dont suddenly roll over and whistle dixie because you claimed something on this forum.

 

Also, did I just post the law itself, yes or no?  And did the word for word quotes from that law prove you wrong?  Why yes, they sure did.  You claimed there was only ONE difference between 392 and FDCPA.  Wrong.  You claimed there was no such 30 day requirement in 392.  Wrong.  I dont care what you litigated...I've litigated successfully against more than one high powered debt collector and creditor and have never lost...and have been PRO SE in all of them.  I've even forced an international bank to drop its claim for foreclosure and run away with its tail between its legs...again, pro se....people with attorneys rarely can even accomplish that.  That and a dollar will buy me a cup of coffee.  You won your case, so you say...congratulations.  In the meantime, stop pretending that you can thump your chest all over this forum because winning one case does not mean anything--especially when the law itself shows you are simply wrong.  You dont have to like it, but it's the simple truth.  It's beyond high time for you to be mature enough on this forum that you can admit you make mistakes---just like everyone else does.

 

And who exactly are you to tell someone to step down?  Especially when they just showed that the law itself is not what you claimed it was???  Better rethink yourself there...

Share this post


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

There are a ton of different points covered by TFC 392....the point(s) you dealt with very easily could have nothing to do with this one. 

Yes there are and you have not had to use ONE of them in Louisiana but I have successfully used them in court and against 3 debt collectors.  ONE of your friends has already been banned for your antics and you are WELL on your way.  You have attacked me, Jimmy E and the Moderators.  Keep it up we are all looking forward to the inevitable end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2017 at 5:47 PM, Clydesmom said:

Yes there are

And you were quite wrong about what that law does and does not say.  Nothing else about you stoking your ego matters here.  You made claims that are simply false.  Now, stop using this forum for your personal ego building and start paying attention to the value of correct information.

 

On 4/15/2017 at 5:47 PM, Clydesmom said:

ve not had to use ONE of them in Louisiana

Irrelevant, 100%.  I can clearly read and understand the law...obviously better than you did.  Why is it this hard for you to simply admit you made a mistake and move on like everyone else does??

On 4/15/2017 at 5:47 PM, Clydesmom said:

have successfully used them in court and against 3 debt collectors.

Now I know you're lying.....before, you claimed you won A case as a pro-se...now all of a sudden that one turns into THREE?  wow, you really need to get your lies straight better than this.

You dont get the right to tell me or anyone else what to do or not to do on this or any other forum.  I will say this, however, you and I both know who's got the record for being banned from forums, don't we?  Now, when you're ready to discuss the ISSUES raised by posters, you let us know.  Until then, stop wasting our time with your ego.  Someone with as many warnings on this forum as you have received should spend more time minding your own behavior and checking your own ego, thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, kraftykrab said:

And you were quite wrong about what that law does and does not say.  Nothing else about you stoking your ego matters here.  You made claims that are simply false.  Now, stop using this forum for your personal ego building and start paying attention to the value of correct information.

 

Irrelevant, 100%.  I can clearly read and understand the law...obviously better than you did.  Why is it this hard for you to simply admit you made a mistake and move on like everyone else does??

Now I know you're lying.....before, you claimed you won A case as a pro-se...now all of a sudden that one turns into THREE?  wow, you really need to get your lies straight better than this.

You dont get the right to tell me or anyone else what to do or not to do on this or any other forum.  I will say this, however, you and I both know who's got the record for being banned from forums, don't we?  Now, when you're ready to discuss the ISSUES raised by posters, you let us know.  Until then, stop wasting our time with your ego.  Someone with as many warnings on this forum as you have received should spend more time minding your own behavior and checking your own ego, thanks.

 

That was completely unnecessary.    Stop instigating and flaming.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, BV, what's unnecessary is that I make a very simple post, that has no insults or anything of the kind, and this is what CM does with it.   Didnt you just try to lecture me about telling someone not to post in these threads?  And yet, you're going to sit there and act like CM did not do the same thing, so you can point at me again?  You're going to have to do a lot better than that...the rules here are NOT applied to CM and there's not one good reason why you try to enforce them with anyone and everyone else.  

 

TRUTH....CM made claims about this law that are simply wrong.  TRUTH.....everyone else in the world makes mistakes and is expected to be mature enough to handle it when they do.  No one here benefits from CM playing make believe like this....first it was her winning a case as a pro se...then, suddenly that turned into three.....??  sorry, that's crap. It's also just plain ridiculous to see you claim that others cannot tell someone to stop posting, but then your pal CM makes threats that someone's going to get BANNED.....I was not aware that CM is a moderator now.  

 

So....when can we expect the rules here to be enforced regarding CM's abusive posting that always seems to show up without one word from you about it?  When can we as members here expect that moderation applies to ALL the people here, and is not selectively applied like it's being done now?  Remember last year when you mentioned that CM has many warnings against her already?  How effective were those, if the problem of CM abusing people because she doesnt like being challenged over false information still occurs here?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2017 at 5:47 PM, Clydesmom said:

ONE of your friends has already been banned for your antics and you are WELL on your way.  You have attacked me, Jimmy E and the Moderators.  Keep it up we are all looking forward to the inevitable end.

THAT is what's completely unnecessary, BV.....the members here are fully entitled to have you address THAT.  It's far from the first time and I'm far from the first person that CM has attacked like this.  We as members are entitled to see that THAT problem gets addressed....so why do we see NO comment from you when CM posts like that, but you jump right onto anyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kraftykrab

No insults?  In the very first sentence of your first comment to CM, you stated:

On 4/15/2017 at 5:05 PM, kraftykrab said:

Sorry, but yes. Wrong again....this is becoming all too common with you, and more disturbing each time too.  Who exactly are you here to help, if the people you're posting to keep getting incorrect info from you?

CM did not tell you that you couldn't post in this thread.   Nor did she start an argument.   In this thread and others, you have instigated arguments and then engaged in flaming.  Then when the  posters (not just Clydesmom) to whom your comments were directed respond in any way that displeases you, you can't handle it.

If you can't disagree in a civil manner, then do not respond to those posts which you believe contain incorrect information.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BV80 said:

CM did not tell you that you couldn't post in this thread.

Sure about that?  Try again...

On 4/15/2017 at 4:39 PM, Clydesmom said:

Nope.  I have SUCCESSFULLY litigated a case PRO-SE in Texas using the TCPA and TFC 392 until you can claim that step down.

Telling someone to "step down" unless they have litigated a claim?  Sure looks like telling someone to stop posting...why do you constantly make excuses for CM on this forum?  What you claimed is not even true, and yet you still claim it.  We all deserve as members here to know why CM gets such special treatment....this is ridiculous!

12 hours ago, BV80 said:

Nor did she start an argument.

Sorry, that's wrong too.  I posted truth, and used the law itself to support my position.  Then I get told to "step down", and then we all get lied to about how her one case magically turned into three.  I'm not going to stop confronting false posts, as you yourself confront them all the time as well.  We ALL have a stake in the accuracy of the info posted here.

 

12 hours ago, BV80 said:

is thread and others, you have instigated arguments and then engaged in flaming.

Again, why do you give CM a pass every single time like this?  Have you seen the posts?  Or is this just another instance of CM getting a pass for anything she does?  I've even had a MODERATOR tell me that they are disappointed in this same issue....enough's enough.

 

12 hours ago, BV80 said:

Then when the  posters (not just Clydesmom) to whom your comments were directed respond in any way that displeases you, you can't handle it.

I respectfully suggest you take a good look at the events that have happened in this forum because you are either intentionally ignoring a LOT of things that have happened, or you have selective memory.  People on this forum have actually posted that they are LEAVING because of CM's abuse....and while you have no shortage of ability to lecture me, even when your lecture is not accurate sometimes as this time shows, you say NOTHING and do NOTHING about those threads.  Why is that?  Is CM a personal friend of yours or something?  This is ridiculous and there's NO good reason for you always showing her preferential treatment like that.  CM's antics have chased people away from this forum....why do you ignore that?

I think ALL the members here deserve to know.  If you're going to hold everyone else to a set of rules, why do you look the other way when CM abuses everyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kraftykrab

Most people understand that "step down" means to back off.  It doesn't mean to stop posting.  

Your insults and arguing have been directed at not only CM, but at others, as well.  What actions have been taken against CM in regard to some of her posts are none of your business just as any action(s) that might be taken against your continued insults and arguments are none of her business.

You have no difficulty pointing out problems with others but cannot seem to recognize the problems with your own words.   BTW, I don't lecture; I warn, then take action, if necessary.   Please take heed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BV80 said:

@kraftykrab

Most people understand that "step down" means to back off.  It doesn't mean to stop posting.  

Your insults and arguing have been directed at not only CM, but at others, as well.  What actions have been taken against CM in regard to some of her posts are none of your business just as any action(s) that might be taken against your continued insults and arguments are none of her business.

You have no difficulty pointing out problems with others but cannot seem to recognize the problems with your own words.   BTW, I don't lecture; I warn, then take action, if necessary.   Please take heed.

 

Then why was my friend banned without so much as one warning, when you've already admitted yourself that CM's gotten many warnings and nothing else?  What did he do that was so bad that you required a ban to be done, when CM's done so much worse, and so much more often?  Dont pee on my shoes and tell me it's raining, BV....

And come on, stop splitting hairs....telling someone to "back off" in this thread is no different than telling them not to post on the matter.  And what business does CM have talking about people getting banned now?

I dont claim to be perfect, but I also know I have not chased anyone off of this forum before.  CM's been doing this to people long before I came along, and has done the same to others as well.  Strange how you focus solely on me in public.  If it's really no one else's business, and if we are to expect that you speak to CM privately, so that it is not everyone's business, why give me the business publicly?  Shouldnt the same standard apply to all? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kraftykrab

I have never said that CM has received many warnings.   I do not know the identity of your "friend".

You're proving my point about arguing.   Time to move on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BV80 said:

I have never said that CM has received many warnings. 

You did state publicly that she had multiple warnings.  Others were not even afforded ONE.

Points, as in plural, would show that multiple warnings were handed down.  But others get banned after they wind up in her crosshairs without so much as a single one?  How exactly does one arrive at the thought that this is not selective moderating?

My friend's name was stick & rudder....he told me that without any warnings, any messages, any emails, nothing at all, all of a sudden he was locked out.  We've seen TONS of people on this forum complain about clydesmom and her lousy attitude towards them.  And you give her "warning points".  But when she targets someone, they got banned without so much as a single word why? 

1 hour ago, BV80 said:

You're proving my point about arguing.

The only point being proven here is that favorites are getting played.  One notable example,  Clydesmom calls someone a deadbeat.  Others speak out against the insults.  Your comments are ONLY pointed towards those other people in most cases.  There's no good reason for that.

1 hour ago, BV80 said:

Time to move on.

Yes it is....my apologies to the OP.  Shame on us for actually expecting fair and unbiased moderation.  Good day to you, BV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kraftykrab

It's clear that multiple warnings mean nothing to you. 

After a bit of checking, I see that your friend had the same penchant for arguing and insulting as you do.  Perhaps that's why he was banned.   However, I'm not the one who banned him.

Take your games elsewhere.

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.