Timeline- -----1997: opened credit card with Associates - sophomore year in college -----2000: graduated and moved back to my hometown -----March 2002: Associates merged with Citi -----end of 2003: I was a passenger in bad car wreck- broken bones (rods, plates, screws, etc.; plus months in a cast; afterwards months of physical therapy) -----2004: my 700 credit store tanked due to not being able to work, which resulted in me living off credit cards, running up balances -----April 2004: realized I needed help and asked all my credit cards for help, my other cards put me on a hardship plan; citi would not -----October 2004: started missing payments after savings ran out; inquired about hardship plan, declined again -----January 2005: Citi sent account to American Recovery Systems for collections who claimed I owed a little over $6000 which seemed high -----February 2005: sent DV letters CMRRR to ARS and the credit bureaus, never heard back from ARS -----April 2005: Account sent to Gamache and Myers for collections, who claimed I owed a little under $7000 -----June 2005: Sent DV letter to G&M, informing them that they purchased a debt that ARS couldn't validate -----November 2005: Received letter from G&M with copies of all statements from April 2000- June 2005 -----January 2006: Received petition and summons (process server left it with a relative at my house) -----end of January 2006: Filed (and mailed copy to plaintiff's attorney CMRRR) Answer admitting nothing; multiple affirmative defenses and counterclaim of $2000 for FDCPA and FCRA violations and Notice of Appearance and Certificate of Service -----February 2006: went to court and Plaintiff's attorney claimed he didn't know I had defenses and counterclaims, he requested a continuance until end of March which was granted
Affirmative Defenses and Countercla II. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendant other defenses are: 1. I do not owe the money. 2. Improper service from process server. 3. Plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling the Plaintiff to a claim for relief. 4. Plaintiff fails to state a claim under which relief can be granted. 5. Defendant states that Plaintiff is not entitled to attorney fees and costs for the claim as no law exists that allows such an award. 6. Defendant states that Plaintiffâ??s claim is precluded as Plaintiff failed to follow validation procedures as required by FDCPA 15 U.S.C. § 1692g, which include, but are not limited to, obtaining and providing validation of the alleged debt from the original creditor. 7. Defendant states that granting Plaintiffâ??s claim would result in Unjust Enrichment as the Plaintiff would be awarded more money than Plaintiff is entitled to receive. 8. Defendant states that Plaintiffâ??s claim is precluded by the Doctrine of Unclean Hands in that the Plaintiff has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. 9. Defendant states that Plaintiffâ??s claim is precluded by the Doctrine of Unclean Hands in that the Plaintiff has violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 10. Defendant states that Plaintiffâ??s claim is based on bad faith in that the Plaintiffâ??s statements are intentionally misleading, deceitful, or untrue. 11. Defendant affirmatively asserts that the damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff were caused by the sole, concurring, and/or contributory negligence of the Plaintiff. 12. Defendant affirmatively asserts that the Plaintiff assumed the risk of Plaintiffâ??s damages. 13. Assuming negligence or any other wrongdoing on the part of this Defendant, which this Defendant expressly denies, Defendant states that Plaintiffâ??s alleged damages were a result of prior and/or subsequent conditions or occurrences for which this Defendant was not responsible. 14. Defendant reserves the right to amend, add, or allege any and all additional Defenses that may become available to Defendant during the course of these proceedings. III. COUNTERCLAIMS Plaintiff owes defendant $2000 because: of FDCPA and FCRA violations Defendant requests that this lawsuit be dismissed and that a judgment be entered against the plaintiff(s) for any counter-claims, costs, or attorneyâ??s fees.
Thank you for responding. I was hoping I would at least have some options, but I am still glad that someone offered their input.
I challenged a JDB on the Notice Of Assignment issue and they dismissed. The debt was purchased and re- purchased. See if you state has a Notice of Assignment statute. You can read what I'm talking about in the UCC Article 9 Sec. 404-406. If you request proof of the assignment , they are supposed to provide reasonable proof seasonably or you are entitled to pay the OC and not the assignee. I backed them out the door on that. I'm in Oklahoma and it's in our Consumer Credit Code Statutes. Funny thing is when I went to court on my motion, the judge never heard of it but I had a copy and the court reconized it and made them prove it up and they folded. It's worth a try.
