Sued by Midland Funding King County

[Yikes!]

I received a summons from an attorney in Oregon regarding a debt for $1103.00. I've prepared an answer and affirmative defense, which I've copied below. I would appreciate any suggestions on how to proceed.

FYI: I reached out to settle out of court, but the amount offered is too high for me to pay. 

 

 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

WEST DIVISION – SEATTLE COURTHOUSE

 

 

MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC – Plaintiff

 

vs.                                                                                                         Case No. XXXXXXXXXX

 

XXXXXXXXX – Defendant

 

 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

COMES NOW Defendant XXXXXXXXXX (hereinafter “Defendant”) file his answer and affirmative defense as follows:

ANSWER

1.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the information within paragraph 1 and therefore denies the allegation. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Plaintiff, Midland Funding, LLC, purchased Defendants Citibank credit account and contract and all of the associated rights thereunder, yet have not produced the requested paperwork to prove this assertion including, but not limited to, the signed contract agreement proving who originated the debt the Plaintiff states was purchased.

2.      Complaint states a legal conclusion for which no answer is required for paragraph 2. To the extent that an answer is required, Defendant admits a copy of license was attached to the summons.

3.      Paragraph 3 is admitted in part and denied in part

a.      Defendant admits he resides in King County.

b.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the latter portion in paragraph 3 and therefore denies the allegation. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Defendant entered into a contract with Citibank, N.A./The Home Depot for a credit account, though the original documents with the Defendant’s signature were requested and have not been delivered. The Defendant has experienced an identity theft with accounts opened in the Defendant’s name and the Defendant has a right to be assured that this account was not fraudulently created.

4.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the information within paragraph 4 and therefore denies the allegation. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Defendant entered into a contract with Citibank, N.A./The Home Depot for a credit account, though the original documents with the Defendant’s signature were requested and have not been delivered.

5.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the information within paragraph 5 and therefore denies the allegation. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Defendant entered into a contract with Citibank, N.A./The Home Depot for a credit account, though the original documents with the Defendant’s signature were requested and have not been delivered.

6.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the information within paragraph 6 and therefore denies the allegation.

7.      Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge to confirm or deny the information within paragraph 7 and therefore denies the allegation. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Defendant entered into a contract with Citibank, N.A./The Home Depot for a credit account, though the original documents with the Defendant’s signature were requested and have not been delivered.

8.      Defendant denies allegations within paragraph 8. The complaint contains legal assertion that the Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiff, Midland Funding, LLC and they are entitled to costs, disbursement and interest. Defendant has not entered into an agreement with Midland Funding, LLC and they have not produced the requested paperwork to prove this assertion including, but not limited to, requested original signed documents.

 

As to all remaining allegations of fact in the numbered or unnumbered parts of the complaint not specifically admitted, Defendant denies all such allegations. As to all remaining allegations which call for a legal conclusion, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or expertise to respond to such legal conclusions and, therefore, denies them. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

By and for his Affirmative Defenses, Defendant states: 

First Affirmative Defense

1. 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, nor any valid assignment that gives Plaintiff legal title to the claim. 

 

Second Affirmative Defense
2. Plaintiff in filing this Complaint has not produced a signed copy of the executed agreement it seeks to enforce. The Defendant has experienced an identity theft with accounts opened in the Defendant’s name and the Defendant has a right to be assured that this account was not fraudulently created.

Third Affirmative Defense
3. Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted against defendant.

 

Fourth Affirmative Defense
4. Plaintiff is not the original holder of the alleged debt and therefore is not the real party in interest; this action should be dismissed for lack of standing and supporting documentation.

Fifth Affirmative Defense
5. Defendant reserves the right to plead additional defenses or cross-claims or counterclaims that may be identified during the Defendant's investigation and/or course of discovery.

 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that this Court find judgment for Defendant, deny Plaintiffs’ request for the relief of $1103.00, 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.
 

Respectfully submitted this 10^th day of September 2019,

  

XXXXXXXXXX, pro se

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On September 10, 2019, I caused the foregoing instrument to be served by mailing a copy to all counsel of record in this case as indicated below:

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

By Certified U.S. Mail, Return Receipt Requested By U.S. Mail

 

[Yikes!]

I have NOT submitted my answer and affirmative defense, I have until Friday. I'm thinking instead I should file for arbitration, but I'm not sure which form I should use from the list in this link:

https://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/superior-court/civil/arbitration-forms.aspx

 

Does anyone know how I should proceed?

Thanks!