Okiemom 0 Posted January 31, 2020 Report Share Posted January 31, 2020 Would love your advice on this thought … since Midland is the assignee of the Synchrony account and Midland is the one suing, should the MTC arbitration mention that Midland is the assignee of Synchrony? I ask, because when referring to asking the court to compel binding arbitration based on plaintiff's credit card agreement in my motion, since the plaintiff is Midland and the arbitration agreement is with Synchrony, do you have to connect the dots for the judge that the arbitration agreement is passed on to Midland as Synchrony's assignee? I am sure the judge can figure that all out by going back and looking at the Petition to see exhibits showing the assignment, but I guess really my question is, would it be beneficial to state it in the MTC to save the judge time and hopefully get the motion moved along and approved faster? I don't want to make my motion too wordy, so if there is no benefit to listing the assignment out for the judge then I won't bother. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Harry Seaward 1,356 Posted January 31, 2020 Report Share Posted January 31, 2020 You don't need to connect the dots in your MTC. Midland has already done that for you by suing you on a debt they bought from Synchrony. It wouldn't hurt to point out the part of the agreement that states that any assignees or future owners inherit all rights and responsibilities as the original creditor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
