I received a summons on Wednesday but the contents were different from others I received. This is my third summons, the first one I settled, the second one the CA couldn't prove the debt was mine and now this one. But what is different from this one is that an envelope and letter was in with the summons asking for payment. The others there wasn't any letters, request for payments or return envelopes AND I was served in person, by certified mail (which I never signed for) and by regular mail. This CA's attorney just sent it by regular mail with the summons, an envelope and a letter stating: "Enclosed please find an additional copy of the summons pursuant to [my state] law. If you owe the money and would like to arrange to pay this debt, please call our office now. We are confident that we can resolve this matter without appearing in court." I will try to go and answer the summons next week, even though there isn't an index number. But my question is why would the CA ask for payment if they already filed suit? And should I send out a DV letter also? With the word "if" I'm wondering if the CA has any proof of the debt. I get the feeling that the summons hasn't been filed yet. Thanks in advance!
They may or may not have actually filed suit. Check records at your courthouse. Is the "summons" your first contact from them? If so, did the letter include notice of your right to dispute the debt?
I may have received one or two letters from them over the summer but I was being called about 1-2 daily, every day. I was preparing a DV letter when I got the summons. The calls stopped for a couple of weeks after they sent out the summons but they have started back at about 1-2 a week. I sent out a DV letter but haven't received the card back yet. Should I check at the clerk's office to see if the summons has been filed?
Did the letters you received earlier include notice of your right to dispute the debt? Did any letters, either earlier, or with the summons, include notice that if you did not dispute within 30 days, the debt would be assumed valid? In other words, did they notify you of your dispute rights as required by FDCPA, or did they fail to do so? In this case the lawyer's partial notice, in the absence of any prior FDCPA required notice in the first contact letter, possibly overshadowed by including a "summons" (which you still need to determine has been filed), may be an FDCPA violation on several counts.
If they have filed suit, you will have to respond. You will still want them to prove the amount claimed owed is correct.
I believe on the first notice it did have the paragraph giving me 30 days to dispute. The second letter came less than 30 days after the first so I wasn't given ample time to dispute. I was responding to the second letter when I got the summons. Either way, I'll go to the county clerk and check to see if any lawsuits have been filed. I'm also able to check online in my state's court system to see if any lawsuits have my name listed as a defendant/respondent. Thanks for advice!
If you need legal help directly from attorneys for less than 1.00/day, please call me at 877-223-8921 for more info.
try creditinfocenter.com. I had a summons from Direct Merchants Bank. After I sighted all their violations they now put a levy against my checking account. You don't need a lawyer to respond but you do need to appear and state your case. My defense was they failed to prove validity of the debt per Section 809 of the FDCPA. Which states that the debtor MUST tell you whether he/she is assigned the debt copy of ALL Statements (you do NOT have to pay for these) and proof OTHER than computer generated print-outs. I did all the things it said on creditinfocenter.com but keep records of whom you talked to and all correspondence you send.
creditinfocenter Your summons doesn't sound legal. when you look on that website it will tell you some people use lawyers letterhead when they are not lawyers so be very careful how you respond.
creditinfocenter I know all about that website. In fact, I learned about this one from that one! As for whether is it legal, I don't know. I received one exactly like it from another CA attorney and it was legit so I'm not taking any chances. Even if it gets to court, I'm hoping that the OC, which is Providian, would not have any info since they merged with WaMu.
creditinfocenter It is good you know about the website, I saw a my Lawyer last night. He even knew about the website. As for legal. If they will put it in writing that they are ACTING or ATTEMPTING to collect a debt, they are bound by the rules of the FDCPA. They MUST provide you with Do they own or where assigned the debt COMPLETE STATEMENTS AND HISTORY PAYMENT (not just computer generated printouts). And SIGNED ORIGINAL Contract. If they have not they must immediately VACATE the Motion !!!! Good Luck.
