Recommended Posts

I have been served with the exact same lawsuit and request for discovery as the user "sol" in 2015. This one is from Portfolio Recovery Services also but it is a Citibank Sears Credit Card, not a Walmart card. It is within the statute of limitations; however, I am uncertain that the amount $3000 is accurate. I don't have documents proving this. I attempted to contact Citibank/Sears about it, but the only thing they were able to tell me is the date the account was sold and who it was sold to, which is Portfolio Recovery so it hasn't been sold again. Do I send the same affirmative response as "sol" of outside statute of limitations like I don't know anything and hope they don't want to work to provide proof? or on the basis of lack of standing? I did have a pay for delete letter ready to send for 50% of the total amount on the credit report. I guess that's a moot point now? I don't know if they are willing to settle now that the suit is already served. Or I hope that I get a return Nonsuit without prejudice and then send the pay for delete letter with a hopeful approval?

I really don't know the first thing about any of this legal jargon, other than what I have researched. The due date to file an answer is January 17th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nobk4me said:

The best way to beat a JDB is with arbitration.

Does Citi allow arbitration for small claims?  Is this in small claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BackFromTheDebt said:

Does Citi allow arbitration for small claims?  Is this in small claims?

Citi has a carve out for claims filed in small claims court.

The most important thing to know is what state this suit is filed in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The suit is in Texas..and it may be considered small claims..when I contacted an attorney's office here in my moderate-sized town, the office told me they don't deal with small claims or they might have said civil claims..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do I do arbitration? Is that just an agreement between 2 parties? Or paying a 3rd party to review? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, blg said:

How do I do arbitration?

Read the first few posts from this thread:

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

I've seen conflicting reports regarding attorneys being permitted in TX smal claims courts. If they aren't allowed there, you're in luck because PRA always uses attorneys and therefore can't legally sue you in small claims court.

If they are allowed there, then you might want to look into using texasrocker's discovery method. It's about your only other shot if arbitration is off the table. 

Share this post


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

Read the first few posts from this thread:

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

I've seen conflicting reports regarding attorneys being permitted in TX smal claims courts. If they aren't allowed there, you're in luck because PRA always uses attorneys and therefore can't legally sue you in small claims court.

If they are allowed there, then you might want to look into using texasrocker's discovery method. It's about your only other shot if arbitration is off the table. 

 

As of 2013, (thanks to HB 79/2011), Texas no longer has a small claims court.  All small claims are done in Justice Court.  Since other matters, such as evictions and traffic case can be and are heard in Justice Court, I think it can be argued that the small claims carve out does not apply when seeking arbitration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Impress said:

I think it can be argued that the small claims carve out does not apply when seeking arbitration.

This argument has failed on more than one case.  While it may not specifically state "SMALL CLAIMS" on the forms or over the door that does not mean that the Judges in Justice Courts in multiple states do not view it as small claims court.  There have been multiple rulings by judges that state by being in their court for small claims that the carve out applies.  There are those who do vehemently argue that because those two words are not on all court forms or over the door to the court room that there is no small claims court but the Judges have a unique way of deciding for themselves.

A defendant has nothing to lose but the motion by trying but you cannot bank on the court being so rigid as to state it doesn't apply simply because those two words are not specifically used.  

Share this post


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

There are those who do vehemently argue that because those two words are not on all court forms or over the door to the court room that there is no small claims court

No there aren't. Each situation is different, but in jurisdictions where there *is* is a small claims court, it doesn't make sense for judges not in those courts to rule that theirs is a small claims court. 

There's also the equivalency test that some card issuers put in to their agreements, but that doesn't appear to be what your talking about here. 

As you said, there's no loss in trying the argument in other jurisdictions that don't use the "small claims" nomenclature because it has worked, which is all I've ever known anyone around here to promote. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent notice of intent to sue (on a citi card) got me wondering about this carve out again.  I wonder if the nature of the debt itself can be used as an argument against the carve out.  In Texas assignees, such as PRA, have to file a debt claim case not a small claim case.  Though the amounts caps are the same, the Rules of Civil Procedure separate the two and there is an additional rule that applies to debt claim cases that doesn't apply to small claim cases.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Impress said:

In Texas assignees, such as PRA, have to file a debt claim case not a small claim case.

The agreements with the small claims exceptions say "small claims court"; not "small claims case".  It's worth a shot to make the argument, but If the "debt claim" is still filed in a "small claims court", I'm certain the court would find that that the agreement precludes arbitration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Harry Seaward said:

The agreements with the small claims exceptions say "small claims court"; not "small claims case".  It's worth a shot to make the argument, but If the "debt claim" is still filed in a "small claims court", I'm certain the court would find that that the agreement precludes arbitration.

Hmmm.  I see your point.  The funny thing is, if Texas still had small claims courts, the JDB's wouldn't be able to file there as assignees couldn't file in small claims court.  I guess it's up to the judge how they want to interpret it.  Assuming the other side brings up the clause of course. 

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.