Jean: You are pretty much spot on. That is to say that in trial, the Plaintiff has the burden of proof, persuasion, and in this instance, production. In order to produce their evidence, they must comply with the rules of evidence in order to introduce something evidencing a contract and right of assignment. More often than not, they rely on Affidavits and fail insofar as unless the Affiant is present, it is precluded as hearsay. Now, the FDCPA standard for validation is not typically the threshold for putting forth evidence. In other words, something may suffice as validation and allow for future collection activity but not suffice as admissible evidence. Good thread.
Wow there is alot to read and reread. I've don this 1) Prepared a letter to mail in the morning saying I've received your letter in response to my request for validation. However what you sent me does not meet the criteria for validation. 2) Wrote a letter to Equifax and Experian asking for my report because I was recently denied credit. I don't need to write TransUnion because I was able to get it online for free due to the denied credit and LNVB shows their collection account on there and the OC shows it as well so I know what account it is but I don't know how they computed what I owe. 3) Prepared a dispute letter to TU for the account in question Now I'm going to send the letter in 1 CMRR and once I know they have received it send the dispute letter to TU and see if it comes back verified. Am I missing anything?
Apexcrsrv, I went through the discovery process, demanding documents, interrogatories and admissions. To EVERYTHING I received non-responsive, elusive, boilerplate objections and answers. I then did a Motion to compel, which was denied, at the same hearing where summary judgment was pronounced against me. That was Jan 28th. You can see all of their paperwork and mine here: http://www.kapowwie.com/legal/wap.htm In addition to the standard monthly statement from the OC, which was marked "duplicate statement"; and "VOID"they also submitted these two documents... not to the court, just to me. I submitted them as evidence of not proving their standing or answering the discovery process. http://www.kapowwie.com/legal/cc/discovery/071210-METRISCOMPANIES=certificateofsecretary.doc http://www.kapowwie.com/legal/cc/discovery/071210-BILLOFSALEANDASSIGNMENTOFASSETS.doc Obviously neither of these mentions my name in any way, nor do they show contractual evidence admissible in a court of law. In addition, these jokes had been copied many many times... hardly an original. And they are only a small part of some type of larger contract, which from these papers, one can only guess at.The judge accepted these as proof. Btw, that last statement of yours sums it up and makes it very easy to understand... "In other words, something may suffice as validation and allow for future collection activity but not suffice as admissible evidence."
Can anyone explain the difference between "standing" and "subject matter jurisdiction"? Is it the same thing?
A court must have subject matter juristiction. For example, you can't get a divorce in a federal court. You have to have standing to sue. For example, if you see someone run into someone else with their car, you can't sue the person who hit the other person because you don't have standing.
Bob's right. The court must have jurisdiction over the issues at bar. In state court, that would be a contract or tort claim, property, criminal offense, custody, etc. It has nothing to do with your ability to bring the action. Standing means that you are a party in interest; i.e., you have a concrete stake in the outcome of the matter. In other words, you must show a claim including causation and some fashion of harm. Monetary injury is the best. Along those lines, you did challenge whether the had experienced harm. However, standing is more of a constitutional paradigm and isn't an argument which flies well in small claims or trial level state courts. Typically, some paper will suffice to show ownership. The best evidence rule seems applicable but, there may have been another exception which allowed it in. Business Records comes to mind. I don't know, it just seems as though you ran into a judge that wasn't interested in hearing this. Still, oppose the motion for summary judgment as to liability. Even if the grant it, you can still contest damages. You may gain some footing there is you can find a way to claim equitable estoppel. Then again, you would have to move the court to compel them to produce what they paid for the debt and that is unlikely.
Since you don't have PMs enabled here, I couldn't send you a PM. So I sent you an e-mail from this site. It would go to whatever e-mail address you used when you registered here, I think. It would be from Hedwig.
Did you send your Correspondence has " return Recite requested " if you used standered mail you can not poof they received. return Recite requested requires then to sigh for your letter you now have a record of date sent and day they received in relation to time frame.
standing is last chance to act on your part.subject matter jurisdiction means by your inaction they now have the everything required by law to sue.
Did you send your Correspondence has " return Recite requested " if you used standered mail you can not poof they received. return Recite requested requires then to sigh for your letter you now have a record of date sent and day they received in relation to time frame.
The new letter was sent out return receipt requested. The original was not. However logic stands to reason if they sent me validation it is only because they received my request for validation
Hedwig, You were right, I had it set in one place to accept PM from members, but there is a second checkmark next to buddies and moderators only. I've sent you my private email address. Jean
