Can a ca sue if.....

can't you ask the judge for an extension?

get the extension to cover you until at least the 30 days is up...

 

Rats. That would've been another violation.

I was just reading about overshadowing at www.edcombs.com. It seemed like a demand for payment "now" overshadowed the consumers right to 30 days to request validation. I'd think a summons would have the same effect.



Radi8

 

I'm not trying to give a definite opinion here either way but here are some thoughts:

1) If I were the attorney for the CA, I'd argue that the legislative intent of the FDCPA was to protect consumers prior to the start of litigation. The consumer's rights after litigation has started are fully covered by the Due Process Clause. In effect, her trial IS her validation of the debt.

2) I'm assuming that your friend is being sued in the lowest level court (general district court), these are often called "courts not of record". If I were in her situation, I would file a counterclaim, alleging the sun the moon and stars, asking for a high award for whatever violation you can come up. Then, I'd file a motion to remove the case to the next higher court (Circuit Court) where your friend will have the full benefits of the discovery process. I'd then file motions seeking to depose the OC, the CA, the CA's wife, kid, grandmother and dog. I'd file a very lengthy list of interrogatories. I'd file for a "subpoena duces tecum" which is basically the court ordering them to produce all of the documents you are asking for. Failure to do so will mean at the least, they could be held in contempt and at the best, they will choose to dismiss the case. If you want me to list more things that'll cause discovery to really really suck for the CA, I can, but that's a start.

 

Oh, and if she really owes the debt, at some point I'd offer 25 cents on the dollar to settle it once it hit the discovery phase.

 

its without the extra period (.).

so its www.edcombs.com

 

Did you read BumbleBee's thread yet, your answers are there.

I'm picking up my wounded frosh, then I'll search the link up for you.

Your friend needs to respond to the deadlines of the court; usually an answer to the complaint is required, wasn't that within 20 days?

Yes/No., whatever, when she appears she needs to tell the judge, and in the answer, that validation of the debt has been requested and not provided.

In the answer is where you raise counter-claims and affirmative defenses.

Has the 20-days come and gone, is this why you are concerned about a default judgement?

It doesn't matter that you don't know what the amount due is, who the OC or CA is, underlying services and all the rest, nor what or how it's being reported -- that's the point of validation.

You have to do both though and the Plaintiff, once you requested validation should have postponed, requested a continuance, until it was provided.

Provide it before you get to court or provide it in court, either way.

Sassy

 

If the CA is suing her, then they must have been SOLD the debt, as opposed to assigned. (Otherwise, they'd have no standing to bring the suit). One idea might be to call the billing dept of the hospital and see if they'll accept a payment directly. If so, then the debt has only been assigned to the CA, who therefore has NO standing to bring the suit in the first place.

Assuming the bill has been properly sold, I see no reason why the CA couldn't sue for both amounts Vickie owes them in one action and then she needs to start thinking about attacking back as I described above. IMO.

 

Try this one:

http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...threadid=34590&perpage=50&pgnum=&pagenumber=1

 

Thanks Waalian, that's the one!

My search is reallyyyyyyyy slow to non-existant all day as well, I thought it was my computer, glad to know it's not.

My favorite freshman and I had a communication malfunction so I've been sitting at the high school singing jingle bells waiting for her while she's at home waiting for me, LOL, gotta love that -- Anyway, I'm understanding your day, tnobles!

I see what you are getting at now, not knowing whether a specific account has been validated, nodding. You'd think they'd provide the information for all that they intend to take to court, but then that means they'd be thinking ;-) . Could help you that they aren't, likely the judge will be just as confused trying to decipher accounts or my bet, they don't have the information to provide.

Ok., Monday huh? Quick hoop jumping there! As long as she shows up, she'll be able to speak. You can put her together an outline -- it's small claims court and no matter, the judges are supposed to give benefit and guidance to non-attorneys assuring they get a fair day in court.

If you haven't requested validation, request it from the court -- say she's attempted to get information and made requests, as you've relayed here but none of the numbers or information is matching up.

I don't know, your honor, if it's mine or not mine, that is why I requested or am requesting validation.

The judge will make them provide it, hopefully they won't provide it or won't be prepared. If you can give her a validation 101 prior to court (Kristy's a bang-up reading of the process) she'll know what she needs whether orally or in writing.

If you did request validation and it's not been provided, there's a counter-claim for FDCPA violations in waiting.

Don't forget that information has to come from the OC and through the CA to your friend and/or court -- it can't just be their computer records.

I think they are just trying to ram-rod her into submission.

Are they licensed, bonded? Does your state require it?

Do your state laws go further in requiring information be provided when requested?

What is the SOL for enforcement; are they pushing it?

The important thing for your friend to remember is that what she knows or doesn't know or remembers isn't relevant, what they have on paper is!

They've the burden of proof and the burden of establishing they have the right person and that she's obligated or owing them anything.

That they are entitled to the money and not someone else.

And to prove and account for every last penny they are alleging as well -- it reads like they're already having problems with that.

Prove it or remove it (for credit reports)

Prove it or dismiss it (for court rooms)

Sassy