I just settled with CA. They admitted they were wrong and was willing to pay a settlement. Since I have agreed to the settlement amount, should I still appear at small claims on the assigned court date? The CA is the defendent and they will not be showing up.. If I should appear, should I just tell the judge that we have reached a settlement? //
You dont want to dismiss the case unless you have certified funds from the CA. If you dont have them by your court date, then you should appear and take judgment against them.
Thank you, because my court date is tomorrow. And supposedly ,the check will not get here til Wednesday(next day). I will be making my appearance on tomorrow. BTW, this was my first time in filing suit against a CA. Out of all the charges(6) I had against them, only one of them they could contest. You guys have been a big help thank you so much ..
Can you give more details about your suit? Did they show up? Did you get $1000 per violation? Congratulations!
Violation of what? This was a problem before because the posted material wasn't clear what the actual claims were. If you are talking about the FDCPA, I wouldn't expect "$1000 per violation" even though that would probably make the litigant happy.
Can you think of any possible reason not to show up? All I can think of is that you have to work that day. But this court case is about way more than you can earn in a day so I find that reason not to show pretty poor. He or she is going to ask who is there for the action. If just you are there, you get to explain it. That's good.
Last Friday, Harvard Rep called and said that all of my charges(5 total) against them were true except not being bonded in the state of FL. Charges: 1. failed to VOD( after being sent letter telling them the CA before them could not VOD either) 2. Continued to report to CRA's false information 3. Continued to collect on a debt that was disputed 4. Continued to collect on a debt that was SOL 5. Not bonded in the state of FL to collect debts. Went to court yesterday. The only thing I had to show was the document showing that they had been served. The judge defaulted the case. Now, here is where I think I might have messed up. I only sued for $1k, instead of $1k per violation. But it was a learning experience. Could I really have sued for $1k per violation???
Are you saying if I had sued for $1k per violation, I would not get $1k for each, but what the judge thought was fair. Now is that even if the defendants don't show???
Remember in some states the judge can lower the fine,I thought the wording (could) be finded 1k per but i think the court has some leeway
I think that is where I shot myself in the foot. I should have went for the max and let the judge decide the amount. I think I will do that next time. Small Claims just amended their pricing to $300 for suits $2501-$5000. I will cost $175 for $500-$2500 suits. Plus you have to pay serving charges for the sheriff department serving the papers( Chicago charged me $60 to serve).
IIRC for FDCPA claims it is up to $1k statutory damages per action, not per violation ... however, that does not preclude pleading and proving actual damages. Meaning if you bring a case where you don't have actual damages but you do have lots and lots of violations, the judge is still limited to awarding $1k, but of course she can award less if she so chooses. If there are actual damages and you plead them and prove them, the court should award them. To the penny.
flacorps doe's that mean damage's to your credit rating even if it's a small part of your credit problem's or would that be inmaterial to the present case.
If what happened to your credit rating is a small part of your credit problems, then there is probably a negligible amount of damages you could be awarded for that harm. If they put a gash below the waterline in an otherwise sterling credit rating and start a snowball effect of ratejacking and ultimately default, then the damages are massive.
