My aunt has been harrased by a CA for quite some time now. She's an elderly immigrant woman who gets very scared and cries her heart out on phone calls with CA's which I figure makes then chase her even more ferociously. Today she got a letter from the CA or attourney claiming to be an "information supeona" it want her to fill out a questionair about her job status, her bank accounts, other financial accounts, cars and property among other things and mail it back to the CA. When she told me this I was suspecious enought, but then I saw the letter said that if she didtn respond within 14 days she would be arrested for failing to comply? Now I KNOW for a fact a CC cannot threaten you with arrest for ANY reason as defined by the FDCPA. What I dont know is if "information supeona" 's are ligitimate court proccesses or not. I figured if this is a court document as it claims to be then it would have been mailed by the court, not the attorney. Nor would it ask her to mail it back to the attourney instead of the court? Is this a ligitimate proccess, or does she have a serious solid case of FDCPA violations?
You need to check with the local court clerk {or see if your county is online}. If she got sued and they have a judgment, the subponea is likely legimate. If it is legimate and she fails to fill it out she could be arrested for contempt of court.
Was there any prior communications by mail from this CA regarding this debt? Did this letter claim to be sent by an attorney? How much are they attempting to collect? When was the last payment made?
i just got a copy of the letter from her. The letter is from the offices of Fein, Such, Kahn and Shepard in Parsippany, NJ. Here is what the letter says word for word " Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed please find order of the Court for your arrest due to your failure to answer the information supeona previously served upon you. We are extending you one last opportunity to answer the enclosed information supeona within 10 days of the date contained on the postmark. " here is the wierd part, below that is say "This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose" above the letter it says **** This communication is from a debt collector **** Then it has a questionaire about her financial situation in inside pages claiming to be the supeona. The last page it displays a copy of an alleged court document. it lists the actions against her, such as failing to comply witht he supeona. there is one passage I find interesting. The last paragraph says "If defendent fails to comply with the information supoena within 10 days a warrant for the defendents arrest shall issue out on this courth without further notice. What is interesting is that the word "shall" is crossed out and hand written "may" in it place and the word "without" has "out" crossed out. Below is the signatures for proof of service which are completely empty. I just checked :http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/acms/disc/CV0227W0E.ASP for the docket number on the paper DC-012443-05 judged on may 2nd, and it turns out no results. How ligit are these guys or do we have seiours FDCPA violation in our hands?
Would it have been clear to the CA that called that your aunt was ignorant, unsophisticated, with no likelyhood of legal representation, and scared?
Is there any name or signature on this or any of the letters or documents indicating that it is being sent by an attorney? Such as XXXX X. XXXXX, Attorney at Law ( or Esquire)?
So this letter states that a warrent HAS been issued, and then it says it may be issued, (with notice). Are these guys really attorneys? : )
"The last page it displays a copy of an alleged court document. it lists the actions against her, such as failing to comply witht he supeona. there is one passage I find interesting. The last paragraph says "If defendent fails to comply with the information supoena within 10 days a warrant for the defendents arrest shall issue out on this courth without further notice. What is interesting is that the word "shall" is crossed out and hand written "may" in it place and the word "without" has "out" crossed out. Below is the signatures for proof of service which are completely empty. " It sounds like some document they might in some circumstances get the court to approve, if they actually would or could do that, but is there anything on it to either tie it to a particular case, or indicate a judge has actually signed it? " Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed please find order of the Court for your arrest due to your failure to answer the information supeona previously served upon you. " Their letter clearly says she will be arrested if she does not do what they say. That would be false and deceptive if no court actually required her to do that, such as if no suit had been filed. "order of the Court for your arrest" This doesn't even imply they might do this, like the crossed out document words do. It says the court already has ordered her arrest. Was the previous "subpoena" actually served, in a manner legal in this jurisdiction? "The last page it displays a copy of an alleged court document. it lists the actions against her, such as failing to comply witht he supeona. there is one passage I find interesting. " Is there a case number on anything? Has she, in fact, received a summons at all? Is there any reference to a judgement? "Dear Sir/Madam:" That is about as generic an opening for a form letter you can have. Did any attorney actually review this letter?
Does the letter say it is from "The Law Offices of XXXXXXX", or otherwise indicate that this is from, or has been reviewed by, an attorney? Does the letter, or the attached document, contain any signatures at all? Is the debt in some way tainted, perhaps past SOL? Why is it worth this risk? How much is claimed owed? Why would they step directly into the possibility of the following FDCPA violations? http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm#807 �§ 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1692e] A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: (1) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof. ... (3) The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney. (4) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. (5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. ... (7) The false representation or implication that the consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer. ... (9) The use or distribution of any written communication which simulates or is falsely represented to be a document authorized, issued, or approved by any court, official, or agency of the United States or any State, or which creates a false impression as to its source, authorization, or approval. ... (10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. ... (13) The false representation or implication that documents are legal process. ... (15) The false representation or implication that documents are not legal process forms or do not require action by the consumer. "
There appears to be such a law firm: http://www.feinsuch.com/ In this case they represented Fairbanks Capital: http://www.ripoffreport.com/view.asp?id=59569&view=printer
thank you all for your help to answer a few questions: ontrack: It would have been very clear to the CA my aunt is unsophisticated when it comes to legal matters. she said she tried to explain her financial situation in hopes they would understand,and she cried on the phone. The only signatures found are on the first page where they greet her "sir or maddam" and tell her an order for her arrest has been issued. It's a stamped signature claiming to be from philip kahn. the only other one is another stamp on the "court order" last page said to be from anthony graziano above j.s.c. She has never been served ,this letter arrived via regular mail. she did not recieve this or any other supoena via certified mail though she does recall signing for one letter a few years ago. This debt is approaching 5 or 6 years, she cant quite recall the exact date she made the last payment. Original creditor was a dicover card, original debt was $800, now 3k. another name on the document is nu-sun financial. They ask her to mail the supeona to their offices, not the court. I found no records in the passiac county court system online (updated may 22nd) http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us if there is no file, IMO these guy sare clearly guilty of falsifying court documents, and misrepresenting themselves and the account theya re trying to collect.
"the only other one is another stamp on the "court order" last page said to be from anthony graziano above j.s.c. " That may be kind of important. There appears to be a Judge Anthony Graziano in NJ. That stamp may be his signature. Did she have a default judgement entered against her? If she was served, and failed to realize it, and therefore lost, she needs legal representation. If she was improperly served, and it is in her interest to vacate a judgement, or negotiate a settlement, she needs legal representation. If no suit was even filed, or there were violations of NJ or federal law, she needs legal representation to best negotiate whatever settlement that may allow. Either way, she needs to see an attorney.
Mr. Kahn's stamped signature, unless affixed by Mr. Kahn himself, may constitute either a deceptive debt collection statement or use of a name other than one's own in violation of the FDCPA. Call a lawyer.
