Let me differ just a bit from Lizzardking on one point. And, I'm not a lawyer either. Just because the other side can't produce the documents you wanted doesn't mean you win by default. It depends on what sort of fight the other side wants to make out of the issue. They can go before the judge and argue that the documents can't be located or were purged or whatever but, they are not relevant to the case. How the judge rules depends on the specific circumstances but, if the other side objects and asks for a hearing it won't be automatic default victory.
I disagree with part of this. If a plaintiff goes to court and then says they can't find any proof or they mistakenly purged it and now have zero proof, they can't possibly win. What's to prevent everybody from saying john doe owes me $5000 but I can't find the proof. But c'mon judge, you believe me anyway don't ya?
LKH, Every case is different. If they believe they can make their case with what they have, you can bet they'll argue relevance. I mean, you have a comptuer printout with names and SSN's and addresses and phone numbers it is not a stretch to say "judge we would like to put this person under oath and ask if they ever had this account. We can prove that the defandant worked at this place that is listed as the work number. We can prove their was {and may still} be a home phone in this name, we can prove this is the defendants SSN# and so forth and so on". Not wishing anyone any ill fortune but, many years ago as a banker I had to go to court an awful lot to represent the bank. The lawyer we used had this theory. We don't have to conince 12 bleeding hearts on a jury. We have to convince 1 55 year old WASP male judge who does nothing but listen to deadbeats all day {his words}. If I can get before the judge and force the defendant to answer questions "yes, but..." I'm gonna win. I dealt with this guy pretty closely for about 2 years before moving on to other things. He never lost a case for us. Just my personal experience.
Lizzardking, I remeber 1 instance where someone claimed it's not mine. We demanded his bank statements and canceled checks for the time period in question. He didn't have them. We then looked at his application and subponeaed the bank that he listed as a reference. They provided the stuff we wanted. The defendant never showed up for court. We got a defaault judgement.
Keepmine- If you remember, what was the amount we are talking about here? Was it a few hundred dollars? 1 Thousand? Few thousand? I would like to know, what amount of money will a company defend themselves in court for? Or will they settle out of court because it's not worth it?
Betacredit, I'd sue for any amount. But, my experience probably is not relevant for many. I got assigned working bad debts for a small bank holding company {18 branvhes when I left} that no longer exist. I got asigned to this job in early 1978 and was in it for the first few months of 1980. Credit card debts were not much of a problem {heck we didn't even offer cards but had a correspond relationship with a larger holding company.} Our loans were auto, bass and ski boats and, real estate. Loans that required the borrower to to liscense the property and pay taxes on the property. It was just way easy to establish a chain of ownership using state and county records. The case I mentioned to Lizzardking was a loan for a bass boat. Well, you have to take a Coast Guard Auxillary test and get a sticker before you can legally operate the boat. The guy had bought a trailer and, you have to buy a tag for the trailer. Finally, you have to have a boat operators liscense. See what I mean? It was like following a trail of breadcrumbs to prove who owned the boat. As a general rule, your chances of being sued are probably proportional to what the CA believes they can reasonably collect. Just be careful about the not me defense. A determined creditor with access to all of the databases out there can blow a hole through that argument if it isn't true.
Sorry Betacredit. I didn't answer your last question. And, I just don't know. I guess every firm has there own threshold and will depend on if they think they can win.
Thanks for answering. Secured property is alot different from cc debt. There is nothing tangible to talk about usually. With real estate, boats, etc. there is something tangible. I thought they would just repossess or foreclose if it was something of that nature. I see both points of view. But I tend to side alot more with Lizardking because due to the amount of identity theft there is not really a threshold that someone has to meet to get credit. Except to qualify for it. I see it as this: fix your credit by any means neccessary. So I tend to have "no recollection of that". It's worked pretty well so far. The ones that I have acknowledged are not going anywhere. Most companies don't respond to the estoppel anyway.
