My First Documented Legit Violation, need advice extracting payment from CA

Jam / others.
the form i will be using is at http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/sc100.pdf

3 questions.
-1) The defendant has one name on the letter "ABA" and reports on my CR as "A funding" do i name them each separately in section 2?

-2) What do i choose for section 5? I live in California the "CA" is in the state of MN. There is no "property/contract" if i choose option E what do i specify?

-3) How do i choose which court house to file the claim? (i can PM you the county i'm in) I see there are multiple courthouses and the website said you must file it in the appropriate court but doesn't say which one or how to find the right one.

 

Update:
Every 1st of the month i pull a new Equifax report.
Today i found out even though ABSOLUTELY NO ALERTS were given,
THE CA in question has been reporting to EQ since 6/10/13. DOFD Reported: 06/2013
It is 100% still on my EQ CR, i've screenshot and saved a copy of the report in case it goes magically away again.

I've signed up for Eliminate ID CMS as Equifax (should be Equifalse) is clearly unreliable, and i cannot get into the TU backdoor dispute method since their online dispute is always "unavailable at this time", It takes 2 days for them to allow me access to all 3 reports and it is a supposed good CMS for daily pulls. I'll update as to what TU says then. But i think it's safe to say i have for sure all the evidence i should need ...... i just need all the help i can get to not lose this on a technicality!

 

Update: Got the reports from Eliminate ID...

- The CA is not listing ANY accounts. on ANY reports.... some how i'm starting to feel like big brother is watching these forums. (massive amount of views for this thread with 3-4 people replying bothers me)

- The report is a 3-in-1 report which a) is not the most reliable b) includes the name and address of the CA in the "creditor contacts" area of the report, so there's still trace evidence of them even though no account is listing.
Regardless evidence is stacked that they did report again and even lied about the DOFD and the CRA's even allowed them to backdate the "reported date"

I'm just going to proceeds to the ITS and prep to file a lawsuit. At least it will be a lesson learned for BOTH of us =)


Jam i did not see your response...
1) Honestly, the filing fee is what got me thinking small claims. I read that CA like to ignore and bluff until they know you paid the big $ to file in federal court. Then they'll drag it out to the last minute....
Where as they might be swayed when someone would put out only $30 to force them to spend on a legal battle they know they will lose...

2) Maybe i misunderstood but i thought that The FDCPA violation would only net $1000 in TOTAL. no matter how many violations occurred. The FCRA is per incidence right? And the CA is bound by FDCPA not FCRA right? hence i thought the max would be $1000.

I did not want to put out the $350-$400 to file;
http://court.cacd.uscourts.gov/Cacd/forms.nsf/0b2b50f03ce1d589882567c80058610a/66cc90529a00dc1688256dcf005f4ac3/$FILE/G-72.pdf

 

I've combed through section 604 -607. At 607 it seems that there are possibilities BUT reading Section 607 (5B-D), i think this is the area i would catch a violation but

1) It would mean i would have had to dispute through the CRA and the information would have been removed , and then allowed back on to violate this section..... It never got to a CRA dispute. I DV'd the CA they sent a letter saying it would be removed.

2) so this section doesn't seem to apply unless i dispute again with the CRA this time and if the CRA verifies then i have proof of previous admittance.


3)But still, isn't this still just a violation for the CRA? The wording talks mainly about the "agency" being responsible for keep checks and balances in place.


I need to reed more FCRA, also based on the info on my file it looks like the dates were updated, is this considered re-again the debt as well?

sorry for all the questions but i want to get it all on the ITS letter in one shot and be done, but it's taking me forever...

 

Yeah i saw that & similar form for small claims... but i do not think i will qualify.
so here is how i see this going

1) I send ITS with just the THE FDCPA violations.... requesting $1000. Send ITS letter with a copy of the court complaint form CMRRR 10 days to postmark a response. Would i need to provide them a copy of the letter they mailed me telling me they would remove it? is 10 days enough?

2) Gamble and CRA dispute this, and i highly think at this point they will discover and remove the tradelines, netting me $0. As i think them removing the accounts and me threatening to sue and asking for $ is borderline extortion. HOWEVER like it has been said, once you rob a bank if you go and give the money back that doesn't change the fact that you robbed a bank!

 

Should i include a copy of the letter they sent me stating they would remove?
Also do i give them copies of the screen shots of the accounts reporting?
What is the shortest appropriate response time to give them? 5? 7? 10? 15? 30 days?

 

is 5 days from receipt of the ITS too short of a time frame to respond. I don't see anything that my local courts require for them to respond.

 

30 days is a long time.. i have little patience.. lol
this is my first going at this so i guess 30 days will give me time to learn the court rules.
Is it odd that i hope they want to go to court??? lmao.

So got a 2 page ITS letter done!
(getting it to 2 is a HUGE accomplishment for me, just look at my post lengths!)
I was hoping to post for advice but i'm reluctant to "show my cards" maybe i should PM you jam /Mindcrime?

also since i'm going the federal court route as suggested i'm using this form correct? Civil complaint form
i got that from here: USDC CACD | Forms

Finally the CA is listing as "A" on my report, responds to DV as company "b" and on their website they are listed as a subsidiary of company "C"....
when naming the Defendants is it okay to list them as one defendant like this:
"C" ; DBA "B"; DBA "C".
or
is it best to name each of them separately as defendants.

 

Also,
I'm going after them in the ITS with:
FDCPA. Section 809. B [15 USC 1692g]
FDCPA. Section 807. 2(A) [15 USC 1692e]
FCRA. § 623 [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2] (a)(3)
FCRA. § 611 [15 U.S.C. § 1681i] (a)(5)(B)(i)
California Rosenthal Act:
§ 1788.10. (c),
§ 1788.13. (i),
§ 1788.17

Let me know if you think i'm forgetting anything else.

My question is on the court complaint form on page 5 it states to write the Claim and then Supporting facts for "Claim I" ...

so will i have to fill out separate sheets, one claim and supporting facts for each of the violations i listed above? this would total 7 separate "claims" or does all violations go under one "claim"

 

Well this went nowhere. letter received and ignored. CRA said they "NEVER" reported the account and stated that is must be the Credit Monitoring Service i was using that was messed up....Shocked because the CRA that said this was EQ... and guess which product i use as my CMS ... EQ....depressing!

Also this could not be true because i have screen shots of when other CRA's reported on their own report from their website not "through my CMS"

The damn thing just vanished and i don't really feel up to playing these *$#($&-ing games ONLY BECAUSE I DO NOT HAVE THE TIME! - This is how they get away with their tactics, unless you have no job and can spend hours upon hours learning the law and the exact process to sue or paying $$$ for a lawyer, you are screwed!