Received a "Plaintiff's First Demand For Discovery And Inspection" from Rubin and Rothman regarding LVNV Funding's purchase of a Best Buy credit debt. It asks for Legal name, address, DOB, SS# and then to "set forth" whether I acknowledge using a best but credit card, receiving monthly bills, making payments, or signing any agreement or promissory. It also requests that I attach any billing statements I have. I assume that this is an attempt to get me to acknowledge the best buy credit account so that they can claim they purchased a valid acct and as a result i owe them. I had previously sent them a discovery demand and they sent me a packet containing statements....no original agreement. I assume this discovery demand needs to be answered timely for the same reasons that the original subpeona and interrogaties have to be answered. What I am wondering is if they sent me a half-assed reply yo my demand, how much do I need to give them here? I acknowledge the best buy acct. I want them to show their purchase of it and for how much and they refuse.....should I make a second demand with my response? Is acknowledging the best buy acct cutting my throat?
While they may have to show that they either bought or were assigned the account, they probably will not have to reveal how much they paid for it. That will be considered proprietary information and is irrelevant to whether or not you owe the debt.
They have provided nothing other than best buy statements....no original agreement, no info on the acqisition of the debt. I am not entitled to the amount they paid for it even if my argument was to establish that while I owe the OC the balance, I should only owe the 3rd party what they own the debt for? I'm not saying that is a winning argument, I am merely stating that if that is the argument I want to present, shouldn't I be entitled to the discovery in order to make it?
1.If as Hedwig stated it has nothing to do with your case,you can make that defense in court. 2.Went you go to court they will have that info if not then that can't prove ownership. 3.Now having said that it still doesn't mean you will win. 4.If they have the statements everytime you made a purchase you reaffirmed you were the owner of that card,so the charges were you. 5.Would you offer tnem a settlement if as you say they didn't pay very much,don't offer them much.
Ultimately that is why I am looking for figures.....i would offer but I don't want to offer a percentage of the full nut. I would prefer to base an offer on their outlay. I just looked at my CR and they (the 3rd party owner) have increased the balance on fees and/or interest......I thought once the debt was sold, no interest or fees could be added.
First of all, they don't have to provide a contract. As jj said, you used the card. Your use constitutes the acceptance of their offer and forms a legally binding contract. Secondly, you owe the debt you had with the original creditor plus any interest and fees allowed by law and/or the OC's cardholder agreement. If you settle for less, the difference is considered taxable income to you. What a debt buyer pays for a debt does not change the amount you owe. You are not a party to that contract, which is between the OC and the debt buyer. The debt buyer now has the right to collect the full amount that you owe. If they make a profit, so be it. If you bought a car for $100 but it was worth $5000, don't you think you should be able to get $5000 for it?
You will have to give that to them in your answers. There is no reason not to because they already have that information. I'd object to those two because the answers have no bearing on the outcome of the case nor could the answers provide any reasonable information that could be used at trial. I'm afraid there isn't any reasonable way that you can object to those questions so will probably have to admit to them which means that you just lost the case right there. Sorry but that is about the way it is. On the other hand how you might answer depends on exactly, word for word how they asked the questions and you haven't given us that information I'd deny having any How did you ever guess? (LOL) Did they answer each and every demand fully and completely and with specificity? If not you should move to have those they did not fully answer deemed admitted. That's about the size of it. All of it that you can't figure out how to get around without them filing motion to deem admitted on you Of course they refuse. having that information is not likely to have any bearing on the outcome of the case nor is it likely to lead to information that would change the outcome of the case. Yes, but what choice do you have?
