janebetts

Need help - TX Portfolio Recovery lawsuit, with a twist

80 posts in this topic

@texasrocker

Here’s the thread.  The debate starts near the bottom of the page.  

https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/321531-received-summons-still-lost-after-reading-info-on-this-site-please-help/?page=2

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Right to Cure" might be a state thing but not a federal thing. I do know that technically a creditor can sue you the day after you default. Most don't because it would most likely raise the ire of the judiciary and possibly the legislature. That said, most JDBs probably send dunning letters mainly as a CYA method. If no response after 30 days, they can sue. If there is a response, they can get their evidence together, send their counter-response, and then sue. There is really no gain or loss by sending out the dunning letter.

Most of my point is still valid though that actions to thwart JDBs that are suing you that worked 10 years ago might not work today (or might only work in certain locations today). The legal system is very fluid and will change as needs and wants from it change.

Share this post


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

Not sure where you got that from, as I lost my home AND stopped paying credit cards. It was during the meltdown, but our fall from grace was our own doing. If I had asked more questions instead of trusting my wife that we could afford a mansion and luxury vehicles, we'd be in a much better place now. We even got a check because our lender was naughty, but it wasn't their fault that we chose to live like kings.

OK, so if our lack of "personal responsibility" is so confounding to you then where did yours go?   If you practice what you preach then you would have applied that check towards paying off your credit cards.

 

14 hours ago, Goody_Ouchless said:

I think our disconnect is our approach to villains. You see lenders as evil and debtors as their righteous victims. I don't see any "clean shirts" (to quote a former boss) in any of this. Some of us help out because it's a fun intellectual exercise, not because we see these folks as victims.

All lenders of course are not evil but the excessive greed of a good share of them is what caused the economic meltdown.  The "victims" had a lot cleaner shirts than they did as it is doubtful that they felt like they were participants in the scam.  When they were approved it was just happiness and glee to finally be able to qualify for a home loan. 

 

5 hours ago, Harry Seaward said:

Why didn't you respond to what I said about them proving they own the debt?

In my opinion I did but let me rephrase it then...  JDB's do not stay in business by proving they own debts, rather they stay in business due to the default judgments of the more than 95% of their lawsuits that go unanswered.

5 hours ago, Harry Seaward said:

This doesn't even make sense. I use your own words when I respond to you. You make stuff up out of whole cloth.

I shouldn't even answer this as you know exactly what I am talking about but maybe other dear readers do not so here goes...

You use a few of my own words and then formulate your reply to make it appear that I said something completely different.  You did it at least twice in this very thread and you have done it virtually every time that you barged into Texas threads to spread your pessimism and misery in the last couple of years.   I have been on to your ways for too long and as I said in a recent thread how pathetic it is that you have to resort to such deceptive schemes in order to win a debate.  All it results in is throwing a thread so much farther off than the debate itself already has thrown it off when I am forced to explain again and again what I had actually said.

For example, when I said that you always try to intimidate Texans from listening to anything I have to say and I jumped to your challenge to look up the definition in a dictionary.  You came back with, "When did you ever feel afraid? And you dish it right back so you can't say you are in a weaker position either" so anyone reading it would see it as I had accused you of trying to intimidate me as opposed to what I actually said and that I felt afraid of you which is pure malarchy.  

Now may the unquestionably true guilty party to "make stuff up out of whole cloth" please step forward...

  

 

Share this post


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

OK, so if our lack of "personal responsibility" is so confounding to you then where did yours go? 

I took personal responsibility for my circumstance and didn't blame my creditors. We've had this debate - I never said I'm a nice guy, but I own the consequences of my actions. If I hadn't beaten them it would be worse, but I'd still own it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, texasrocker said:

In my opinion I did but let me rephrase it then...  JDB's do not stay in business by proving they own debts, rather they stay in business due to the default judgments of the more than 95% of their lawsuits that go unanswered.

This (as was your last response) is a response to what I said about how they stay in business. Why didn't you respond to what I said about them proving they own the debt?

7 hours ago, texasrocker said:

you have to resort to such deceptive schemes in order to win a debate.

What does it say that you did the same, but instead of using my actual words, you made up your own version of what you think I would have said in some alternate universe?

7 hours ago, texasrocker said:

For example, when I said that you always try to intimidate Texans from listening to anything I have to say

I misunderstood. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now