Well, some of you may remember my court case last month where I sued a CA for not removing a debt they were supposed to. 20 days later, I get the judgement today: Defendant does not owe plantiff any money on plantiff's claim. Attached was a notorized copy of the reasons why: The Court finds the following: 1. That on or about October 30, 2000, defendant promised to remove an item from Plantiff's credit report. 2. That on or about October 30, 2000, and again on December 19, 2001, Defendant did not take reasonable attempts to process removal requests to the consumer credit reporting agencies. 3. The item has been removed from the plantif's credit report. Because the defendant took reasonable measures in response to its promises on or about March 20, 2002, and because the item has been removed, judgment for the defendant. --- Basically what the court said was because the item was removed, regardless of when it was removed that while my case was valid, the item has already been resolved and therefore no damages are due. I consider this unfair to a point. I had to file a court case in ORDER to get the item removed. They refused to do it otherwise. I spent a considerable amount of time trying to get them to remove it. But I did win my case in my opinion. I got what I wanted in the end, deletion as promised. The Defendant's only case was that they disputed the validity of the letter. The court's findings ruled in my favor stating that the document that I produced with an electronic signature was VALID and therefore a promise. I lost only because they kept their promise no matter how late it was kept. As I said, I'm extremely happy to have the item removed at this point so the 2k I was asking for would have been just gravy anyway. Atleast I have closure, and if the CA decides to put the item back on my report, I can refile and go back to court with the findings from the court stating that the CA made a promise and I know that this time the judge will give me damages. I hope it doesn't come to that and they just go away for ever. So ends another day, ahh what a rush.
I can't file an appeal, I'm the plantiff. I just thought I would update everyone on the status so that if this should happen to anyone else they can prepare themselves better.
Which court did you file in? - so many lawsuits here I forget details, LOL. These judges are something else. I think they are afraid of the coming consumer "revolution."
Well, you got what you wanted. I agree with your conclusions. Sad that these judges have no more regard than this for consumer's rights, though.
The judge must have done a considerable amount of research into the FCRA. It took over 20 days for him to respond. Also, included in the packet was an entire copy of the FCRA with the sections that the CA violated highlighted in yellow. But also highlighted was a passage that said the CA must take reasonable steps to fix the item. I guess this is what he based the case upon. At any rate, I lost but I won. I know the CA is going to rub it around in my face a bit. The guy I've been dealing with at the CA is a real ahole. I should call him and congratulate him just to rub it in that I really won. I think he knows that already, but I bet their happy they don't have to cough up any money at this point. We'll see. I plan to keep my eye on this for quite sometime. The 7 years expires next year anyway, so........
Yeah, right, it's reasonable that you had to take them to court to get them to obey the law. I can see that, LOL. Better not do anything! Let them have their thoughts whatever they may be - you got what you wanted.
Wait a minute...if the judge may an error of law, why can't you appeal? Sounds to me like a case could be made that the judge erred. I'm confused...are things different in CA? L
Usually, small claims decisions can be appealed to the next higher court. In Arizona, a small claims or Justice of the Peace court decision would and can be appealed to the Superior court. Also, I don't know about elsewhere, but in Az. justice court (small claims) judges are elected rather than assigned, and, they don't have to be lawyers to be assigned. Half of the small claims judges here know nothing. I know more than they do.
California small claims only allow appeals for the defendant UNLESS there were mitigating and severe circumstances that may have been over looked. Since I was the plantiff and the judge was a pro-temp judge or something like that (a lawyer acting as a judge because our court systems are too full), his decision is semi-final. I could appeal the case and have a judge look it over to see if the first judge errored, but why? I didn't get the 2k I wanted but I did get it removed. I don't have to wait seven years to harass them. The ruling says that they fulfilled their promise. If they go back on their promise at all (7 year SOL or not) they can be resued in court and this time there would be damages. I was thinking of calling him tomorrow and congratulating him, but then I have to hear the cock ahole laugh. He knows I basically won, I got what I wanted, no matter how much time effort or money it cost me.
Ohhhh...that's right! When my husband sued a former landlord in small claims, he had the option of having his case heard by the judge or getting through faster by having it heard by a lawyer who was acting as "judge for a day". If he had it heard by the lawyer, he lost his right to appeal. I know next to nothing about small claims. Thanks for explaining it. L
I wasn't suggesting that you appeal. I agree with you - you got the deletion and that is what you wanted. I was just pointing out for whomever, that in some cases, an appeal from the plaintiffs side can be done. Congrats on the judgment. Lawyers acting as judges are called Judge pro-tempore, or , pro-tem.
In most states, any small claims cases can be appealed/taken to the District Court level. I know here in NJ and in MN thats the way it works.
I just checked the website where hubby sued: The Trial The case is heard by a judge, or, if all parties consent, by an arbitrator, who is a lawyer. If you choose an arbitrator, your case will be heard much sooner than with a judge and in an informal setting, rather than in a courtroom. You must understand that an arbitrator's decision is binding and may not be appealed. Proceedings are simple, each side having the opportunity to explain its position, produce witnesses and documentation.
From what I saw, there wasn't any difference. The courtroom opened into another room where the lawyer heard cases and the back door between the rooms were open. I couldn't see any difference in how things were handled. As I recall, the reason he went with the lawyer was because we drove six hours to be there and they said if they didn't get through with everyone, some people might have to come back. He didn't want to take the chance of having to appear again. Soooo...that's my long winded way of saying if you want to be able to appeal, go with the judge...lol. L
