I'm being sued by Asset Acceptance

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Sportsguy, Jul 9, 2006.

  1. Sportsguy

    Sportsguy New Member

    I just received a summons. I'm being sued in FL by Asset Acceptance for a debt that was charged off by Chase Manhattan in November of 2000 and is past the Satutue of Limitations. No payment was made on the account since May of 2000.

    However, in the complaint Asset Acceptance claims that a partial payment was made in May of 2003 (presumably, to claim that they are within the SOL). This is false.

    If anyone can help, I'd really appreciate knowing...

    1. How to respond to the summons (I have 20 days).
    2. How to prove that I did not make the 2003 payment.

    Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.
     
  2. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    You can't prove a negative. They should have to prove the payment WAS made.

    How much money is involved?
     
  3. Sportsguy

    Sportsguy New Member

    I know, but I was hoping to get the case dismissed without having to go to court...

    The alleged debt is for roughly $10K.
     
  4. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    For $10K, it is worth it for them to claim anything, even a payment you never made. They are hoping on a default judgement anyway, and looking at it from their perspective, what is their expected payoff?

    For $10K, it is worth it for you to find an attorney with FDCPA experience, who can get the case thrown out, or force discovery to make them produce their alleged payment documentation or get it quashed, with FDCPA penalties and attorney's fees or other sanctions for filing on an out of statute debt.

    They figure you are a dumb consumer who won't figure out what to do in time, or is too cheap or poor to consider putting up any defense. Most of their targets are.

    Hope is not a plan.
     
  5. lucas222

    lucas222 Well-Known Member

    I'm not a 100% sure but i believe if you promised to make a payment that is the same as making a payment. Just keep that in mind.
    Good Luck
     
  6. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    Whether a promise resets SOL depends on state law, and may depend on whether it was in writing. In any case, they are claiming a payment was made, which should be verifiable by records if it really happened, not that the debt was reaffirmed.
     
  7. xtriscuit

    xtriscuit Member

    Ahh yes, Asset Acceptance. The jerks are based out of Warren, MI I believe, my hometown. Anyhow, yep, they are after me also for a mere $200-$300. I've never spoken to them. However, they keep re-upping (not sure the term used) it on my credit report. From what I have read, they are notorious for doing so aloing with the likes of NCO. Can that be stopped with a C&D letter?
     
  8. Sportsguy

    Sportsguy New Member

    Thanks for all of the help. I have an appt with an attorney.

    I also noticed in their complaint that "the application executed by the defendants has been lost or destroyed."

    Assuming the app constitutes the contract, ever heard of anyone successfully filing a motion to dismiss a breach of contract case based upon the fact that the plaintiff cannot produce the contract in question?
     
  9. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    The app may be evidence of the contract, but contract changes sent in your statements, followed by your use of the card for additional charges, may also be evidence of your agreement to the new terms. That would all have happened before it was charged off.
     
  10. trachkids

    trachkids Member

    The paragraph & link below will answer your question and tells you how to answer a complaint without an attorney. You may want to retain one, but Asset is notorious for attempting to "re-age" accounts and file for summary judgements hoping that noone will answer their complaints. Once you answer it, they usually go away because they know that they A) Have broken the law & B) Do not have proper proof or documentation.

    This is from the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure (Url posted below) Pg. 24 of 151:

    " (c) The Answer. In the answer a pleader shall state in short and plain terms the pleaderâ??s defenses to each claim
    asserted and shall admit or deny the averments on which the adverse party relies. If the defendant is without
    knowledge, the defendant shall so state and such statement shall operate as a denial. Denial shall fairly meet the
    substance of the averments denied. When a pleader intends in good faith to deny only a part of an averment, the
    pleader shall specify so much of it as is true and shall deny the remainder. Unless the pleader intends in good faith to
    controvert all of the averments of the preceding pleading, the pleader may make denials as specific denials of
    designated averments or may generally deny all of the averments except such designated averments as the pleader
    expressly admits, but when the pleader does so intend to controvert all of its averments, including averments of the
    grounds upon which the courtâ??s jurisdiction depends, the pleader may do so by general denial."

    Copy & Paste Link... http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/Attachments/10C69DF6FF15185085256B29004BF823/$FILE/301CIVIL.pdf?OpenElement

    Hope this helps.
     

Share This Page