I need help ASAP! I need to have my response by Friday to reply to the COC! I recieved a civil summons for a HSBC credit card in Sept 2009. I answered the summons with a request to validate debt etc with the help of CMS in Sept 2009. Now in May 2010, I recieved a Plaintiff's response for Production of Documents. I got an email today stating that CMS is no longer able to help me. The owner of CMS was told by the courts in his state that he is no longer to help his clients with court documents. I do not know what I need to do now. I cannot afford to hire a lawyer to help me. Please help me! This is what they sent me: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF UNION MAIN STREET ACQUISITION CORP., Plaintiff vs. IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION 09CvD3594 Defendant PLAINTIFF'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS To: NOW COMES the plaintiff herein, Main Street Acquisition Corp., and pursuant to the provisions of G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 34, herewith serves upon you the following Request for Production of Documents. You are requested to respond to, for the purposes of this action only, the following within thirty (30) days after service hereof. 1. Any and all copies of documents or correspondence from the Defendant to Plaintiffs predecessors) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. 2. Any and all copies of documents or correspondence from Plaintiffs predecessor(s) in interest to the Defendant regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. 3. Any and all copies of documents or correspondence from the Defendant to the Plaintiff regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. 4. Any and all copies of documents or correspondence from the Plaintiff to the Defendant regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. 5. Copies of all payments made by the Defendant to Plaintiffs predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. 6. Copies of all payments made by the Defendant to Plaintiff regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3 810. 7. Copies of all monthly account statements, cancelled checks, certificates of payment and debit transactions for any and all financial and lending institutions with which the Defendant had a checking account from December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. 8. Copies of all monthly account statements, cancelled checks, certificates of payment and debit transactions for any and all financial and lending institutions with which the Defendant had a savings account from December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. 9. A copy of the Defendant's credit report dated no earlier than September 16, 2009, from one of the three leading credit-reporting agencies: TransUnion, Equifax, or Experian. This the 4th day of May, 2010. By: SESSOMS & ROGERS, P.A. Pedro^Zabala, II Attorney for Plaintiff 3326 Durham-Chapel Hill Blvd., Suite A-200 P.O. Box 52508 Durham, North Carolina 27717 Telephone: (919)688-1000 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that, pursuant to Rule 5(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, the foregoing Plaintiffs Request for Production of Documents was this day served upon the defendant in this action by mailing a copy thereof, postage prepaid, to the defendant, as follows: Cynthia D. Baker 500 North Main Street, Suite 3 OB Monroe, North Carolina 28112 This the 7 day of rfffa// , 2010. r SESSOMS & ROGERS, P.A. By:_ Pedro J. Zabala, II Attorney for Plaintiff 3326 Durham-Chapel Hill Blvd., Suite A-200 P.O. Box 52508 Durham, North Carolina 27717 This is my response! Does it look correct??? STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE COUNTY OF UNION DISTRICT COURT DIVISION 09 CvD 3594 MAIN STREET ACQUISITION CORP., Plaintiff DEFENDANTâ??S RESPONSE vs. TO PLANTIFFS REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS To: NOW COMES the Plaintiff and responds to the Defendantâ??s first Request for Production of Documents: 1. Any and all copies or correspondence from the Defendant to the Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 2. Any and all copies or correspondence from the Defendant to the Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 3. Any and all copies or correspondence from the Defendant to the Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 4. Any and all copies or correspondence from the Defendant to the Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four(4) digits of XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 5. Copies of all payments made by the Defendant to Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 6. Copies of all payments made by the Defendant to Plaintiffâ??s predecessor(s) in interest regarding the HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. charge account bearing the account number ending in the last four (4) digits XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-3810. Response: Defendant is unaware of any such documents. Defendant will seasonably supplement this response. 7. Copies of all monthly account statements, cancelled checks, certificates of payment and debit transactions for any and all financial and lending institutions with which the Defendant had a checking account from December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. Response: This is irrelevant and burdensome. 8. Copies of all monthly account statements, cancelled checks, certificates of payment and debit transactions for any and all financial and lending institutions with which the Defendant had a checking account from December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. Response: This is irrelevant and burdensome. 9. A copy of the Defendantâ??s credit report dated no earlier than September 16, 2009, from one of the three leading credit-reporting agencies: TransUnion, Equifax, or Experian. Response: This is irrelevant and burdensome. This the 2nd day of June, 2010. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that, pursuant to Rule 5(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, the foregoing Plaintiffs Answer to Defendantâ??s First Request for Production of Documents was served upon the Defendant in this action by mailing a copy thereof, postage prepaid, to the defendant, as follows: Sessoms & Rogers, P.A. Pedro J. Zabala, II 3326 Durham-Chapel Hill Blvd. Suite A-200 PO Box 52508 Durham, North Carolina 27717 Telephone: (919) 688-1000 By:____________________________
With the possible exception of 7,8,9 those are fairly good responses. My thinking on most if not all their demands is that what they are asking for is irrelevant to the outcome of the trial. They do not address the question before the court which is whether or not you owe the money. Also they seem a bit premature to me because most if not all of their demands are the type of demands that are more appropriate to demands made in garnishment proceedings. The question actually becomes one of sufficiency of your responses and you haven't stated whether or not you have the requested documents in your possession. The only thing I find a bit questionable about 7,8 and 9 is that maybe you should expand just a bit by explaining what they are irrelevant to such as Objection: irrelevant to the outcome of the trial. What seems more important is that you appear to be operating in a defensive mode whereas you might need to be in a more offensive mode. Demanding validation of the debt was not a proper response to the complaint. That should have been mailed to the plaintiff's attorney upon their first contact with you by whatever means. If I were the plaintiff's attorney I think I would have moved for default judgment because you did not file a proper response to the complaint. But since you did file a demand for validation in lieu of a valid response and they haven't moved to object to the sufficiency of your response in some manner it does stand provided it was filed within the first 30 days following their initial contact with you by any means whatever. If your demand for validation meets that criteria then it seems to me that anything they did without providing that validation would become a violation of FDCPA. Then another question is whether or not the demand for production of documents carried a debt collection notice anywhere within it. If not then the failure to give notice might be another violation. Anything not filed with the court must carry a debt collection notice. So it appears to me that you might have two violations right there. Illegal continued collection activity and failure to include the debt collection notice. But there are also other questions such as whether or not you included your initial discovery requests at the same time you mailed your response to the plaintiff. If not then I think you missed the boat on that one. I think it is always better to lead the parade rather than facing the music. In my way of thinking the parade I refer to is the discovery process. Get your requests in to them before they have a chance to get their requests in to you. That way you can move forward with some offensive motions before they do it to you. I'm involved with a case right now and I mailed a demand for validation as soon as I got their initial demand letter. Then I kept watching the court records to see when they filed. As soon as they filed I responded to the complaint before I was even served. I sent them my response and demand for admissions and they had those the same day I got served. I mailed on Saturday morning and didn't get served until Monday. The green card showed that they got my response on Monday as well. Their filing without providing the demanded validation constituted illegal continued collection activity and anything they did or will do in the future will be an illegal continued collection activity. I may turn out to be at least partially wrong in the end but I'm going to allege that filing the lawsuit was their first violation. Having me served was their second. Responding to my first discovery demand was their third violation. Failure to include any collection notice in their response was their 4th violation. Sending me their discovery demands was their fifth violation. Failure to include a debt collection notice on their demands was their sixth violation. I filed an objection to assessment of attorney fees and they responded to that. Violation number seven. I sent them a 2nd request for admissions and they responded. Violation #8 and #9. In their responses they provided false and misleading information adding many more violations. So many that I've now lost count. I'll tally up the score at some future date. (LOL). Then I filed a motion to deem admitted on several discovery requests. They will have to respond to that or maybe dismiss the case. I have no idea what their response will be at this time. Whatever it is will constitute yet another violation. And the list will just keep on growing. From here it could take several different turns. If they continue with their struggles the list of violations just keeps on growing. I might be able to come up with grounds for appeal as a result of the next hearing on July 1. They might dismiss their case and try to refile at a later date causing even more violations. There is no way to tell what might ensue from this point on. I fully expect to lose the case in local court no matter what I do. I did get a letter from them saying that I might want to contact them to try to work out a settlement in order to save the costs of litigation. Of course I ignored that because if they truly wanted to save the costs of litigation they would simply dismiss the case and hope against all hope that I don't sue them multiple times in federal court when they are done fighting. Win, lose or draw they lose in the end no matter what the outcomes may be. What they don't realize yet is that I am a pretty fair representative of the proverbial turnip so why would I want to settle with them? (LOL). I think you need to figure out how to get the upper hand if you can. Looks to me like you may have a pretty fair start.
