Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Keepmine, I just got down to 20% UL credit. I was at 80-90% for quite some time, until I went a spoke to a mortgage consultant and that was the first thing I fixed. Christi, I will NOT settle for just deletion so don't you worry . Do you think my being denied for CL increase (inquiries pulled reason for denial collection activity) is considered damages? I thought so, but now keepmine has me wondering. When I first saw the attorney, that was the first thing he said to do was "get damages" apply for credit that you would have normally gotten. SO I did. I too think the $250K is too much, but honestly I really don't want to settle, I really want the CA to learn a lesson, whether we go to court or not, well that's up to the CA.
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ GOOD, make them suffer As far as denials my attorney told me denials IS/ARE proof of damages, luckily Marie had finally FORCED me to do this. I was hesitant because I didn't want any more inquiries. She finally said do it or you don't have a leg to stand on, so I did. I'm SOOOOOOOO grateful to her for that, because that is the first question he asked before I was even in the chair "what PROOF of damages, in the way of denials do you have"? He said for you to have a court case there must be liability (them breaking the law) and damages (denials). He said they can break the law a million times, but if you have no damages you can't win one red cent. With the settlements I was able to have the inquiries removed, because if my report HAD been accurate, I would NOT have been denied. So...my moral is this: In your settlement or lawsuit tell them you want the inquiries removed because if they weren't reporting you would NOT have been denied and you shouldn't be penalized for their actions hang in there
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Hoping this link can help you, talks about mortgage interest rates in the form of damages. http://www.bayhouse.com/credit-forum/showthread.php?threadid=241&highlight=lawsuit+and+damages
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ 1*Who is on trial here Kellie or The CA? 2*How does what you say below prove that Killie owes the amount that the CA claims? 3*Even if kellie did owe what the CA clames how does that excuse the CA for vilating the law mutiple times?
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ lbrown59, once again you're batting a perfect zero record. You have missed the point of the thread entirely. Go to your corner. Now. OF COURSE Kellie isn't on trial. NOBODY HERE wants to see her lose this. Keepmine and others simply want to let Kellie know the kinds of questions she may be up against should she decide to sue the CA for a huge sum of money. No, she's not on trial. However, the entity she's suing is entitled to defend itself, and the way they do that is to ask Kellie questions regarding the alleged debt. I guess lbrown59 would like everyone to quit trying to prepare Kellie for all possible outcomes. Boo to the CA. Yay to Kellie! Let's all just say nice things and be cheerleaders! You get 'em, girl! Frankly, lbrown59, everyone here wants KHM to get 'em. But silly obstructionist comments like yours deserve heavy criticism in return. Yes, I said silly. Doc
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ 1*It's not and that isn.t what's on trial. The Ca is on trial for multiple violations of the law. 2*She certainly does.! 3*Even if she did owe the bill it is not a legitimate defense for the CA to violate the law multiple times. Just as she is is expected to pay the bill if she owes it - The CA is expected to pay when they violate the law. What's good for the goose is good for the gander!:
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Wow, that felt good, lol. Ok, Kellie, a few opinions from my direction. I realize everybody's got opinions, and they're about as helpful as you-know-what, but here goes anyway: 1) I think suing for more than $1000 per infraction is not going to go anywhere unless you were seriously damaged. Yes, being denied credit constitutes "damage," but not SERIOUS damage. (Example of serious: let's say you were the victim of identity theft where no CA or CRA believed your true story, so you ended up losing your business line of credit which, in turn, caused your business to fail.) 2) In cases where you suffer minimal damage (like being denied credit), a judge will see your minimal claim of $1000 per infraction plus court costs to be reasonable. So, for example, if you have them on 4 infractions (they failed to provide validation; they failed to notate the CRA files that the account was being disputed; they failed to remove the tradeline; they failed to cease collection activity), then asking for $4000 plus court costs plus a cessation of collection activity for the alleged debt would be very reasonable. Any judge in that case would see that you are being reasonable and not attempting to strike a life fortune over the matter. Moreover, the amount of the claim would be small enough that the current owner of the alleged debt would be likely to settle rather than go through an even more costly protracted legal dispute. 3) Being denied a $15,000 line of credit does not constitute $15,000 in personal damage to you. A line of credit is not equivalent to income. Rather, it's simply an opportunity to borrow somebody else's money. In order to suffer $15,000 in personal damage, you would have to lose an asset worth exactly that amount. The opportunity to borrow somebody else's $15,000 doesn't qualify. On the other hand, being denied credit DOES constitute being damaged because you were personally inconvenienced. Requesting $1000 for that inconvenience might be respected by a judge if you wanted to go for that kind of compensation. On the other hand, what's USEFUL about being denied credit is that it satisfies the legal requirement that SOMETHING BAD had to happen to you (no matter how minimal) in order for you to file suit in the first place. So, for example, if you had no damages whatsoever (let's say you were GIVEN that credit card), you couldn't sue the CA for putting the bad tradeline there because you wouldn't be able to demonstrate that it hurt you somehow in the real world. That's the only reason the lawyer told you to get damaged, lol -- so you would be able to sue in the first place. I hope something in these ramblings helps you. Doc
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Thank you everyone SOOOOOO much. It sheds quite a bit of light to have many opposing opinions, instead of my one "They screwed me now they'll pay" opinion. I DID get a hold of my lawyer today, YEAH!! He said he has everything we need and we will meet at some point next week. I asked him if I would be better off filing alone and he said (of course) NO. When a lawyer goes in, lawyers are considered dickheads and the lawyers client just look like they are doing what the lawyer says. If a person files pro se it makes the person look like the dickhead. He also said "the balls in my court, it's time to go on this". He said he will file first then talk settlement, that way they know we are serious. I would really like to go to court, to show that people will not and don't have to stand for the CA's illegal tactics. Christi, one more question for you. I know you sued the CRA's and you mentioned about getting the inquiries removed, how would I go about that seeing as I am suing the CA? I know you can't talk about specifics of your case, but is the inquiry in itself considered damages, seeing as it hurt my credit score? Again thank you everyone!!!! ::giggles:: Doc said "silly"
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Hey Susitna, can you point me to the proper Alaska statutes I could use? Thanks Hermit
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ What about being denied employment or consideration for employment?
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ How much in damages should one "suffer" ? Is a few credit denials enough? Or should one be denied for a mortgage, auto loan ect? I'll file soon and nee dto prove damages.
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ You know, I could be wrong about this of course, and I would love to hear what others think (especially any attorneys or paralegals if they happen to be reading), but it seems to me that loss of employment might constitute serious damages. In any event, "I lost the opportunity to have this job because of erroneous credit reporting and resultant defamed character" sounds like an argument that would speak to many judges. Thoughts? Doc
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Yup, Doc...loss of employment would be considered damages, *if* you can prove the employment offer was not extended solely (or at least partially) due to the consumer report and the consumer report contained errors. L
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ "Collectec the evil empire" I agree. I received a letter from that from a citibank account as well as a letter from postcard from the card collection center for UMB bank well after the Bankruptcy stay had been put into place. Citibank knew about the bankruptcy as I had told the first collection people National Financial a particularly nasty bunch, at which point citi just sent the account elsewhere.
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Doc I have a question, for you and for everyone. I pay $200 a week for rent (I know outrageous), however I was wondering if applying for another apartment that's say $150 a week and getting denied for this would constitute damages? What do you all think? $50 a week difference is quite a bit, and seeing how there is no way I am going to start the mortgage process with this on their, how about going this route?
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Apply to the police dept. They will do a financial background check and reject you. You have $ problems and are bribeable. Can't hire ya. So you are denied the job and lost a great career. Sue and retire.
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Kellie, As a Cajun fiend of mine likes to say, "that sounds more better". Yes, being unable to lower your cost of living by getting a cheaper place is easy to quantify. Proof would be easy as well. Just a letter from the leasing agent. Since you have a meeting with the lawyer next week, I'd hold off until you run the idea by him. Sounds good to me though. Good luck!
Re: Lizardking/LKH/Doc need help w/ Hermit, The Alaska Unfair Trade and Deceptive Practices Act is AS.45.10 or go to http://touchngo.com it has all the Alaska Statutes, there are some good laws here in our favor. I didn't realize that before but we do have some consumer protection laws up here. The Unfair and Deceptive Practices Act allows you to recover triple the amount of your damages and allows a consumer instead of the AG to file suit. email me if you get time and let me know how your APA battle is going. Good Luck Susitna
