Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> Here's my suggestion, to both of ya; Go buy this manual; http://www.consumerlaw.org/publications/manuals/fair_debt_collection.shtml
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> You know what Butch, I specifically said I was posting that for discussion only and for no other reason. I tried to have a discussion with no agenda. That is exactly why I said what I did. You are the one who seems to have the attitude. I have a suggestion, don't post things like "we can discuss this" if you don't mean it. Again Butch, I had no motives. I was only trying to open a discussion. I never trashed you nor did I question your sincerity. You have confirmed that you are holding grudges with your comment to reopen your CB account. I had actually been tossing that around.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> But of course, I, all by myself, once again, screwed it all up ?!?! lol Thanx, you guys are hilarious.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> Umm, no, I didn't say any such thing. You are putting words in my mouth. A decision hasn't been reached amongst everyone. You need to calm down a bit. You are assuming and over reacting to things that aren't there. I am trying to be civil to you Butch. Trying to forget all the old stuff. Can you try as well please?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> ok I missed something somewhere, what is the issue again between the cases? I read mahon and I read that you said the diamond case is unavailabe via the internet, so is it possible that I can go pull it from the law library copy & paste it for others to see ? Butch help me out here, I thought the post was great and informative if there is more I will galdy help research it. let me know fun
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> LKH, All anyone has to do is read your post LKH. It's perfectly obvious, in response to my rejoining CB comment, what you said and what you meant. No confusion here. I certainly, absolutely, profusely appreciate your & Sassy's [newfound] civility. I really do. But every time I buy into it, it turns out to be a trap. So what do I do now? hmmm?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> Thanks FUN. Absolutely you should be able to go get it at a law library. In fact if you'll go we need some other cases too, mostly which have to do with Chaudhry. I merely posted this thread (complete with specifically flagged speculation) to try and help ya'll (twang) see that even after 30 days we have not lost our right to dispute an alleged debt. The issue then, disputing after 30 days. Or more importantly atty's who tell you that you CAN'T. A vioaltion in my opinion. Earlier I articulated (somewhat) some of what is necessary for your adversary to prove, demonstrate his position in court. It does require FAR more than just a statement that thery did send a letter. In your reading of Mahon, did you not see all the stuff that the CA had to convince the court about their specific systems of operation? Doesn't that sound like an extraordinary pain in the butt, for THEM? .
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> Sassy: Any information from the Federal Trade Commission, even public information which has not been made available on the internet directly by the Federal Trade Commission; are available for any consumer to request under the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. If you go to the FTC web site, type "freedom of information act" in the search box, within a few clicks you'll get a FOIA document request form; which you can use to access a virtually endless amount of documentation, EVEN SPECIFIC COMPLAINTS about companys which were received by the commission; which is always good for "KYE" -- Know Your Enemies -- research... Under the FOIA most information is free to individuals, unless your request takes an unusually large amount of research. (I think you can get 2 hours of free research per request, then an hourly charge after that.)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> Thanks jam!!!!!!!!!! I'll do that for the staff opinion letter. Sassy
Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> nevermind. found this: "It is sufficient that the collector send the notice; nonreceipt does not amount to a violation if it was sent." on this page: http://www.edcombs.com/CM/News/news7.asp not fair.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> The FTC has a pdf file that'll tell you basically almost everything that you can request as part of a FOIA request.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical UPDATE -> ok butch are ya around iv'e been waiting for your response so I can pull some cases at the law library you mentioned Chaundry is that right ? let me know thx
Critical Update -- New Thread? When you start the new thread can you link it here please, so some of us lurkers can find the end to this story? I'm here to learn. Thanks all.
Critical Update -- New Thread? Fun... if you dont mind...pull this: Kimber v. Federal Financial Corp. (M.D. Ala. 1987) 668 F Supp. 1480. I've searched everywhere online and all i can find is reference to it in other cases. I just cant find the actual case, and I think it would come in real handy for a lot of us dealing with creditors trying to collect on time barred debts. It deals with misrepresentation. <hijack over>
Critical Update -- New Thread? Yes, I'm really sorry gang. Got called up to Chicago yesterday. Man, I'll never drive that one agian. Was up for 29 hours. Too old for this crap. Anyway. OK, Let's start a thread; Cases We Need!
