Jump to content

Velocity Investments LLC/Avant Webbank


bk85
 Share

Recommended Posts

Date of loan: June 16th, 2016

Date served: December 27th, 2019

Amount :  $4275.00

Original creditor: Avant Webbank

JDB: Velocity Investments LLC

Law firm: Berndt & Associates P.C

SOL: 6 years

Looking for any help with this case. I have 21 days to file an answer. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I have included everything they provided me at time of service. Redacted ofcourse.

Velocityredacted.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is attach in the complaint and provided (velocityredacted.PF) above.

6 minutes ago, Harry Seaward said:

Do you have a copy of the original contract? Arbitration is going to be your best bet if it's available in the original agreement. 

https://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/329436-arbitration-overview-and-strategy-2018-most-up-to-date-info/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The arbitration clause starts at paragraph 20 on the agreement, and it's a sweetheart deal. It covers all claims, including applicability/validity of the clause itself, and affirmatively limits your cost exposure to what you have had/will have to pay in court.

Read through the first few posts in the link i provided above to get info on how to use arbitration to leverage Velocity to dismiss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Just an update. An Attorney hired by the Attorney representing Velocity Investment appeared at pretrial. The Judge openly admitted that he has never sent a case to arbitration and didn't know how to proceed. I ended up walking out of there with a motion to stay. The judge agreeing to 60 days to file the arbitration. Velocity investment agreeing on the record to pay all arbitration fees including advancing the filing fee. Plus once the arbitration starts the Judge agreed to dismiss the case with prejudice. So to work i go on filing the arb. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I just received an email today to myself and to the Jams person that the Plaintiff does not want to pay the filing fees. Jams requested 1750 and from them. How should i proceed? 

On 1/19/2020 at 10:42 PM, Harry Seaward said:

I would bring your own MTC to the pretrial just in case, but it doesn't look like you'll need it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2020 at 7:43 PM, Harry Seaward said:

Wait for JAMS to respond, then file in your court a motion to dismiss with prejudice on the ground that plaintiff has declined to exercise their right to prosecute their alleged claims against you.

I just received the strike list today. I guess they figured it wasn't going to work out at court on friday. So i assume they paid it. How does this whole strike list work. Do i strike the lowest wage one first or the highest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nobk4me said:

You need to research the arbitrators.  You want someone who is pro-consumer.  A background in Legal Aid, public interest law, etc.  Avoid someone who is pro-business, background in banking, creditors' rights, etc.

The most expensive one is all of those. Do i list them 1st,2nd,3rd, 4th? and strike the least favorable? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, bk85 said:

The most expensive one is all of those. Do i list them 1st,2nd,3rd, 4th? and strike the least favorable? 

Did they give you instructions?

IIRC, when I did my lists for JAMS, they asked me to strike X number of names, and rank the others in order.  So yes, 1,2,3...

In theory, at least JAMS would try to find the arbitrator most acceptable to the participants.  But they won't give you an arbitrator you struck.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Any advice on fighting these assignments of debt in arbitration. 

Proper chain of title should be:

Webbank -> Avant -> Velocity Investments LLC

The certificate of loan sale document between webbank and avant is dated 90 days after the initial bill of sale from Avant to Velocity Investments.

Velocity.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bk85 said:

Any advice on fighting these assignments of debt in arbitration. 

Proper chain of title should be:

Webbank -> Avant -> Velocity Investments LLC

The certificate of loan sale document between webbank and avant is dated 90 days after the initial bill of sale from Avant to Velocity Investments.

Velocity.pdf 958.51 kB · 0 downloads

Have you heard anything else from JAMS?  Did Velocity pay the filing fee?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BV80 said:

Have you heard anything else from JAMS?  Did Velocity pay the filing fee?

They did pay the initial filing fee. I am unsure if jams have sent the retainer bill yet. Our hearing is set for the 22nd of sept. To my understanding they are suppose to get hit with a second fee i thought by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Velocity Investments Attorney submitted blank templates of the assignments as an exhibit in there motion. 

They are exact copies minus the signatures and dates.

I think they were trying to give an example of a supposed agreement they never produced. Then accidentally attached everything.

I personally think they F up. I'm thinking i should go the, "having the means to produce fake documents" route. 

Other than that the assignment don't mention myself or the account number.

On 8/14/2020 at 9:10 AM, BV80 said:

Have you heard anything else from JAMS?  Did Velocity pay the filing fee?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bk85 said:

Velocity Investments Attorney submitted blank templates of the assignments as an exhibit in there motion. 

They are exact copies minus the signatures and dates.

I think they were trying to give an example of a supposed agreement they never produced. Then accidentally attached everything.

I personally think they F up. I'm thinking i should go the, "having the means to produce fake documents" route. 

Other than that the assignment don't mention myself or the account number.

 

What do you mean by “having the means to produce fake documents”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, BV80 said:

What do you mean by “having the means to produce fake documents”?

They actual have produced non endorsed versions of the sales documents they submitted as evidence. (Bill of Sale, Certificate of Loan Sale)

They match the endorsed copies and all someone at Velocity would have had to do is sign them. 

Are blank unendorsed sales documents standard business practice when selling debt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bk85 said:

They actual have produced non endorsed versions of the sales documents they submitted as evidence. (Bill of Sale, Certificate of Loan Sale)

They match the endorsed copies and all someone at Velocity would have had to do is sign them. 

Are blank unendorsed sales documents standard business practice when selling debt?

The lack of endorsement does not automatically indicate a document to be fake.  All it means is that it’s not endorsed and doesn’t provide proof of anything.  

Look at the checks in your checkbook (for those who still use checks).  The fact that they are not yet filled out does not make them fake.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BV80 said:

The lack of endorsement does not automatically indicate a document to be fake.  All it means is that it’s not endorsed and doesn’t provide proof of anything.  

Look at the checks in your checkbook (for those who still use checks).  The fact that they are not yet filled out does not make them fake.  

Let me clarify,

They had already produced an endorsed version when initiating the claim. (Bill of Sale signed by AVANT President)( Certificate of Loan Sale signed by Webbank VP- Finance)

Then recently in there motion produced unendorsed versions of both. 

Why would the debt collector be in possession of the original unendorsed versions that previously were provided and were endorsed by the WEBBANK VP-Finance and AVANT President?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bk85 said:

Let me clarify,

They had already produced an endorsed version when initiating the claim. (Bill of Sale signed by AVANT President)( Certificate of Loan Sale signed by Webbank VP- Finance)

Then recently in there motion produced unendorsed versions of both. 

Why would the debt collector be in possession of the original unendorsed versions that previously were provided and were endorsed by the WEBBANK VP-Finance and AVANT President?

 

It’s possible that they provide the documentation to be signed by banks.  Velocity will need to show that the signed documents are genuine.  If you claim documents are fake, it’s on you to provide the proof.  The fact that Velocity has unendorsed copies is not much proof.

Could you post redacted copies of both the endorsed and unendorsed docs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BV80 said:

It’s possible that they provide the documentation to be signed by banks.  Velocity will need to show that the signed documents are genuine.  If you claim documents are fake, it’s on you to provide the proof.  The fact that Velocity has unendorsed copies is not much proof.

Could you post redacted copies of both the endorsed and unendorsed docs?

This Case is in Arbitration with Jams.

The Arbitrator has decided to hear the case by submissions only. I was not given a choice.

I have already admitted to having a loan with Webbank. I have challenged based on Lack of Standing as to the assignments of debt.

Velocity's Motion for Summary DispositionVelocity Motion.pdf

(Exhibit A) is loan agreement. Which is the actual agreement.

(Exhibit B ) is the spreadsheet of the account. Looks Accurate

The Date and title lines on the (Bill of Sale) look edited on the signed version in (Exhibit C) page one.Exhibit C.pdf

My main concern is the (Certificate of Loan Sale) in (Exhibit C) page two, that was dated months after the (Bill of Sale).

Also for the (Schedule 1) in (Exhibit C) on page three, which only consists of a one line document with only an account number. They had refused to produce the entire document.

Under (Blank Exhibit)( Exhibit D) it is page 2 and page 16. I just wanted to give you all of (Exhibit D) that was submitted with the motion.Blank Exhibit.pdf

They are also trying in Section 3 (Argument) paragraph 3 in the (Velocity Motion) to say that Avant, LLC had Attorney of Fact rights to Sign on Webbanks behalf. (No such agreement has been produced). In there actual motion they were trying to insinuate an example of such an agreement. Hence where this (Exhibit D) came from.

As of right now i was sideswiped when the Arbitrator moved for submissions only. I was going to request to strike (Exhibit C) and have a hearing on that once they were submitted for the main hearing. Now i have to attack them in an opposition to their motion.

I appreciate your insight into my case. Let me know what you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bk85 said:

This Case is in Arbitration with Jams.

The Arbitrator has decided to hear the case by submissions only. I was not given a choice.

I have already admitted to having a loan with Webbank. I have challenged based on Lack of Standing as to the assignments of debt.

Velocity's Motion for Summary DispositionVelocity Motion.pdf

(Exhibit A) is loan agreement. Which is the actual agreement.

(Exhibit B ) is the spreadsheet of the account. Looks Accurate

The Date and title lines on the (Bill of Sale) look edited on the signed version in (Exhibit C) page one.Exhibit C.pdf

My main concern is the (Certificate of Loan Sale) in (Exhibit C) page two, that was dated months after the (Bill of Sale).

Also for the (Schedule 1) in (Exhibit C) on page three, which only consists of a one line document with only an account number. They had refused to produce the entire document.

Under (Blank Exhibit)( Exhibit D) it is page 2 and page 16. I just wanted to give you all of (Exhibit D) that was submitted with the motion.Blank Exhibit.pdf

They are also trying in Section 3 (Argument) paragraph 3 in the (Velocity Motion) to say that Avant, LLC had Attorney of Fact rights to Sign on Webbanks behalf. (No such agreement has been produced). In there actual motion they were trying to insinuate an example of such an agreement. Hence where this (Exhibit D) came from.

As of right now i was sideswiped when the Arbitrator moved for submissions only. I was going to request to strike (Exhibit C) and have a hearing on that once they were submitted for the main hearing. Now i have to attack them in an opposition to their motion.

I appreciate your insight into my case. Let me know what you think.

Did Velocity provide any affidavits at all?  If so, from which company(s)?

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...