Jump to content

Being sued in Virginia by LVNV


Recommended Posts

Just served a warrant in debt in general district court in Virginia plaintiff being LVNV. Says first date is oct 21, 2022. I have done so much research and yet I’m still so confused as to what I’m suppose to do. Debt is for 7,742.36 says /Plaintiffs claim is for Breach of Contract, Account Stated and/or Open Account. The claim arises from
a Visa Credit Card Account entered into by Defendant(s) with Citibank, N.A., Account No. ending in
0031 (the Account). Plaintiff is the assignee and holder of the Account. Plaintiff claims damages of
$7.742.36, all of which is principal.Original creditor was citi bank N.A.. Scott & associates Maegen McDonald is representing them. There are a bunch of papers attached 

bill of sale and assignment:  citi bank to resurgent aquasitions

Transfer and assignment: resurgent to LVNV

Two pages of citi bank statements

And then lots of pages of redacted info with a file name bulk. 
 

please help, I’m unsure what to say as far as what to ask the judge for when it comes to them proving everything. Or anything else I need to do to fight this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look up your agreement at this website use the one in effect when you defaulted. 

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/credit-cards/agreements/

IIRC citibank has an arbitration clause it has a small claims restriction but doesn't apply perse in VA. 

It is with AAA not JAMS. 

It very easy to file an MTC and @shadow99 has been very successful with MTC and I used it twice I got a great settlement on my first try and a case dismissed on second. 

It is important you file it before your first court date and show up on time on that date. 

Read above arbitration thread get understanding what all is required get your contract verify arbitration clause.   

check Statute of limitations it is 3 years in VA.  

If filed in time then arbitration is best bet. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I looked to see if I had anything with LVNV, but I didn't.

I have used arbitration to either get the plaintiff to just dismiss the case or to settle for less than they may have settled for otherwise.

Not too long ago, I had one where the same attorney that you have for your case took my offer for 30% of the total.  They came back with that plus a couple more monthly payments.  I just said I wasn't interested in ongoing payments and they took the 30%. My total debt on that one was more than yours.

I'm nearing the end of my journey with debt settlement.  To start, I was fearless.  I was broke and felt I didn't have much to lose.  I could always just file bankruptcy on it all. I got a lot of very low settlements then. 

As I got back on my feet, had more money to settle with, and kind of got tired of the whole process, my goal became more to get things settled for 30% or less.  So far, that's worked for all but one Junk Debt Buyer (JDB) that's notorious here for taking all debts, no matter how small, all the way through arbitration

My experience with Virginia Courts is that it's easy here to either get a Motion to Compel (MTC) Arbitration granted - or have the opposing attorney tell the court they agree to it.  Then, you can start negotiations if you want.  Just make sure you actually file with JAMS or AAA if you don't settle prior to the next court date.

My paperwork is very simple compared to what they use on this board for states outside of Virginia, but firsthardcheese's master arbitration thread is invaluable.

I'd suggest you read that, then if you want to see what I file when I go to court, I'll be happy to show you a redacted copy.  I'm sure it's already posted in one of my responses to someone else on the site.

I also have a really long post on here that details most of my experiences with my first arbitration case - it was a wild ride, but turned out OK.  It's been smoother since then.   I think it's titled something like "Arguments against my arbitration" or something like that.  You shouldn't have too much problem finding it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 9/27/2022 at 5:53 PM, Bulldoger said:

Look up your agreement at this website use the one in effect when you defaulted. 

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/credit-cards/agreements/

 

I don't think that is accurate. The agreement changes overtime, periodically with most credit card issuers. OP wouldn't be able to just magically say a previous version of the agreement applies to his debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, alwayswinning36 said:

I don't think that is accurate. The agreement changes overtime, periodically with most credit card issuers. OP wouldn't be able to just magically say a previous version of the agreement applies to his debt.

The agreement in effect at the time a consumer defaults is usually also the last agreement that was in effect the last time the consumer used the card.  For instance, if you last used the card in 2019 and defaulted later that year, chances are that no new agreement would have been issued between the last use and default.  The agreement that was in effect in 2019 would be the agreement to rely upon.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BV80 said:

The agreement in effect at the time a consumer defaults is usually also the last agreement that was in effect the last time the consumer used the card.  For instance, if you last used the card in 2019 and defaulted later that year, chances are that no new agreement would have been issued between the last use and default.  The agreement that was in effect in 2019 would be the agreement to rely upon.  

That could be, but if it had changed, in 2022 for arguments sake, the 2022 agreement would apply?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alwayswinning36 said:

That could be, but if it had changed, in 2022 for arguments sake, the 2022 agreement would apply?

Why would a 2022 agreement apply to an account that defaulted and was closed in 2019? (by the example given)  The agreements ususally say that if you continue to use the card, then you agree to the changes to the terms.  If the card is no longer in use, then you haven't agreed to new terms.

You asked how a debtor could claim a "previous" version of the agreement.  But a question for you would be: How a JDB could use a newer version of the agreement to which the alleged debtor had never operated under?  I don't think anyone is saying that you can choose ANY previous agreement that you want.  What people are saying is that a debtor and a creditor are locked into the latest agreement that was in force when the account was still active.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alwayswinning36 said:

That could be, but if it had changed, in 2022 for arguments sake, the 2022 agreement would apply?

No, because the consumer didn’t agree to the terms in the 2022 agreement.  Credit card agreements state that use of the card constitutes the consumer’s acceptance of the terms and conditions.  If the consumer stops using the account for whatever reason (such as default, closure and charge off) in a previous year, such as 2019 for example, he is not accepting the terms of subsequent agreements.  He especially can’t agree to the terms of later agreements that would come out after charge off.

For instance, let’s say a consumer defaulted in 2019, and the account was closed and charged off the same year.  In 2020, a new agreement is issued that contains extra fees that were not in previous agreements.  The creditor cannot add those fees to the consumer’s charged off account because the consumer never used the card after that agreement was issued.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BV80 said:

No, because the consumer didn’t agree to the terms in the 2022 agreement.  Credit card agreements state that use of the card constitutes the consumer’s acceptance of the terms and conditions.  If the consumer stops using the account for whatever reason (such as default, closure and charge off) in a previous year, such as 2019 for example, he is not accepting the terms of subsequent agreements.  He especially can’t agree to the terms of later agreements that would come out after charge off.

For instance, let’s say a consumer defaulted in 2019, and the account was closed and charged off the same year.  In 2020, a new agreement is issued that contains extra fees that were not in previous agreements.  The creditor cannot add those fees to the consumer’s charged off account because the consumer never used the card after that agreement was issued.   

Hmmm, good to know. I could swear when I had issues with being sued someone told me the agreement in effect at time of suit was applicable. But maybe it was at default.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general it is the agreement at the time of default. 
 

There are a few exceptions to the rule. 
 

I allegedly ;-) defaulted on a lot of debt right when the arbitration strategy first became viable.  So it sometimes took a few years for creditors to go after me. 
 

In one situation the arbitration agreement became more favorable to the consumer AFTER I defaulted.  So I sent in a letter to the OC, CMRRR, saying I accepted all changes to the card holders agreement.  They didn’t contest that.  Which meant I effectively had that choice of either the agreement at the time of default or the later agreement.  
 

I can’t remember what happened, except that I never paid them anything 

Edited by BackFromTheDebt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BackFromTheDebt said:

In one situation the arbitration agreement became more favorable to the consumer AFTER I defaulted.  So I sent in a letter to the OC, CMRRR, saying I accepted all changes to the card holders agreement.  They didn’t contest that.  Which meant I effectively had that choice of either the agreement at the time of default or the later agreement.

The only risk with what you did is that you may have admitted that the account was yours. If a consumer is willing to make that admission, it’s fine.  But if they don’t want to admit to the account, it’s definitely a risk.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BV80 said:

The only risk with what you did is that you may have admitted that the account was yours. If a consumer is willing to make that admission, it’s fine.  But if they don’t want to admit to the account, it’s definitely a risk.  

I did that to get a more favorable arbitration agreement.  It worked out well for me. 

  • Like 1
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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.