ticklemore

Sued by NDS, LLC (JDB) for $42K - Unlimited Civil case in California

Recommended Posts

Hello,

This forum is great.  I've gotten so many great information from here and also wanted to share my progress.

I am currently in ligation with a junk debt buyer, NDS, LLC. who is suing me for $42K in an unlimited civil case in California.   Here is the timeline of how everything went down:

  • Debt Buyer named NDS, LLC. sent me a letter for the first time on 10/25/2019
    • It said that they are now the owner of the debt.
    • They stated that the account was charged off on 11/21/2018 and that they're charging 10% annual interest since the charge-off date.
    • They gave me two options on paying the total obligation of $42,xxx which I can either pay monthly over 4 years or pay 80% of it at $34,xxx if I can pay in one lump sum.
    • If I disagree, they said that they may file a lawsuit to seek collection.
  • I have responded back to NDS on 11/05/2019 requesting the following:
    • Debt Buyer's right to seek collection
    • Date of default or last payment
    • Full account number
    • Chain of assignment records
  • NDS responded back with a letter on 11/13/2019 and attached
    • Full account number
    • Bill of Sale between the original credit card issuer and JDB named UHG I LLC. dated 02/28/2019
    • Bill of Sale between UHG I LLC and NDS dated 09/30/2019
  • NDS(Plaintiff) filed a complaint (lawsuit) filed for Civil – Unlimited for Other Collections on 11/26/2019
    • First Cause of Action: Breach of Credit Card Agreement
    • Second Cause of Action: Money Had and Received
    • Third Cause of Action: Money Due
  • Court sent a notice of Case Management Conference (CMC) scheduled for 02/06/2020
  • I've filed my Answer to the Complain on 12/31/2019
  • I've filed my Case Management Statement on 01/22/2019
  • Plaintiff’s attorney called me on 1/28/2019 for mandatory ‘meet and confer’ before the Case Management Conference
  • Plaintiff sent me Discovery Requests:
    • Form Interrogatories
    • Special Interrogatories
    • Request for Production of Documents
    • Request for Admission
  • Case Management Conference (CMC) occurred at the court on 02/06/2020
    • Judge set the Mandatory Settlement Conference date for 9/11/2020
    • Judge set the Court trial date for 11/09/2020
  • I've responded to Plaintiff's Discovery Request on 2/19/2020
  • I've prepared my Discovery Requests and sent below to the Plaintiff on 03/02/2020
    • Request for Admission
    • Request for Production of Documents
    • Special Interrogatories
  • Due to COVID-19, the court sent a notice that trial date postponed to 05/03/2021 and Mandatory Settlement Conference set for 02/05/2021
  • Plaintiff filed Motion For Summary Judgment/Adjudication on 07/16/2020 and Hearing was scheduled to 10/15/2020.  The following papers were served to me:
    • Memorandum of Points
    • Separate Statement
    • Declaration of NDS’s employee
    • Declaration of NDS's attorney
    • Exhibits
      • Credit card agreement
      • Charge-off statement
      • 24 months of monthly statement
  • I've responded with Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication on 09/29/2020 (served with overnight delivery)
    • Memorandum of Points
    • Separate Statement
    • Objections to Plaintiff’s Evidences
    • Declaration of the Defendant
    • Exhibits
      • Bill of Sale (which does not have any specific account numbers)
      • Defendant’s Request for Production of Documents (to show that I've requested for evidence but Plaintiff has failed to produce)
  • Plaintiff filed a reply to my Opposition for MSJ/MSA on 10/08/2020
    • Response to Defendant's Additional Material Facts in Dispute
    • Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
  • Court's Tentative Ruling denied Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment/Adjudication
  • Hearing happened on 10/15/2020
    • Plaintiff’s attorney dialed in to challenge Judge’s tentative ruling. 
    • I've dialed into the Hearing as well (due to COVID-19).
    • After hearing arguments from both sides, the Judge took the motion under submission to review the evidences again to make the final ruling
  • Final minutes on 10/19/2020 stated that Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication was denied with the following explanation:
    • Plaintiff did not carry its burden(producing admissible evidence) or an assignment of Defendant's debt to Plaintiff
    • Plaintiff's employee (Declarant) didn't declare having personal knowledge of OC and previous assignor's business records
    • As a result, Plaintiff failed to show the existence of a contract between Plaintiff and Defendant or an indebtedness owed by Defendant to Plaintiff
    • Additionally, Plaintiff failed to show an assignment of Defendant's debt to Plaintiff as the Bill of Sale is devoid of any reference to Defendant's credit accounts
    • Even if Plaintiff shifted the burden to Defendant to create a triable issue of material fact, Defendant has successfully done so.

Now, my plan is to prepare and serve the Plaintiff with DISC-015 FORM(CCP 96) when it's 45 days prior to the trial date.  Plaintiff (JDB) is located in California (within 150 miles from the court) and it seems like Plaintiff and Plaintiff's attorney are one in the same (same exact address).  I am curious whether they will try to put one of their employees as a witness.  If they do, I'll have to object with hearsay.

Is there anything else that I should be prepared for?  I really appreciate your feedback.  Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, you nailed it. I know the gurus here will help you a lot on this. I learnt a lot right now, In my case, i was sued for 30k, the bill of sale has a different amount from what they are suing me for, they are suing for a lower and different amount  from the charge off, I mean suing for less than what they alleged that I am owing. I saw it late because I did not rad through the BOS well. I had opted for arbitration before I saw the discrepancy. I am gong to go the route of 

Texas Finance Code

Sec. 392.304. FRAUDULENT, DECEPTIVE, OR MISLEADING REPRESENTATIONS. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, in debt collection or obtaining information concerning a consumer, a debt collector may not use a fraudulent, deceptive, or misleading representation that employs the following practices:  and FDCPA: sections 1692e and 1692f. SAppx19 (Compl.) ¶ 53. Section 1692e makes it unlawful for a debt collector to “use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt,” including by making a “false representation of …

Pls keep updating ....

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dan001 said:

Man, you nailed it. I know the gurus here will help you a lot on this. I learnt a lot right now, In my case, i was sued for 30k, the bill of sale has a different amount from what they are suing me for, they are suing for a lower and different amount  from the charge off, I mean suing for less than what they alleged that I am owing. I saw it late because I did not rad through the BOS well. I had opted for arbitration before I saw the discrepancy. I am gong to go the route of 

Texas Finance Code

Sec. 392.304. FRAUDULENT, DECEPTIVE, OR MISLEADING REPRESENTATIONS. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, in debt collection or obtaining information concerning a consumer, a debt collector may not use a fraudulent, deceptive, or misleading representation that employs the following practices:  and FDCPA: sections 1692e and 1692f. SAppx19 (Compl.) ¶ 53. Section 1692e makes it unlawful for a debt collector to “use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt,” including by making a “false representation of …

Pls keep updating ....

Thanks for the feedback and good luck on your case!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wondering if I should send a demand for BOP (Bill of Particulars).  During the discovery, the Plaintiff has produced:

  • Credit card agreement that's dated October 2017 which is more than 3 years after the credit card account was opened in April 2014
  • Charge-off statement dated November 2018
  • 24 months of monthly statements which only shows transactions for 30% of the total principal balance
  • 2 Bill of Sale documents (Plaintiff is 3rd owner) which doesn't show any specific account number and is missing Exhibits referred in the Bill of Sale document
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ticklemore said:

I am wondering if I should send a demand for BOP (Bill of Particulars).  During the discovery, the Plaintiff has produced:

  • Credit card agreement that's dated October 2017 which is more than 3 years after the credit card account was opened in April 2014
  • Charge-off statement dated November 2018
  • 24 months of monthly statements which only shows transactions for 30% of the total principal balance
  • 2 Bill of Sale documents (Plaintiff is 3rd owner) which doesn't show any specific account number and is missing Exhibits referred in the Bill of Sale document

What are the differences between the agreement at account opening and the agreement their pushing? Usually they try to go with the agreement that was in effect at the time the account was charged off. Might be something to your advantage, possibly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, alwayswinning36 said:

What are the differences between the agreement at account opening and the agreement their pushing? Usually they try to go with the agreement that was in effect at the time the account was charged off. Might be something to your advantage, possibly.

I see. Thanks for the feedback. I don’t have any other version of the agreement to compare with the one that Plaintiff has produced.  Yes, it seems like it was effective when the charge off happened. 

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.