I am running out of time and need to send this out today. Can I get some feedback, any tips? Does it sound too "legal"? Some info I copied from other places. ME 1234 John Wayne Rd February 19, 2004 NAF PO Box IMASS RE: Ass LLC v ME File Number: FA1234567891231 Claimant File Number: 1234567891011123 Respondent states: Respondent is not bound by the â??Agreementâ?. Respondent has never had an account with Ass, LLC with account number 1234567891011123. Respondent never signed any agreement or contract wherein the Respondent agreed to arbitration. It is the Respondents understanding that mandatory arbitration may not be imposed without the MEANINGFUL consent of BOTH parties The undersigned refuses and objects to participate in any arbitration process for the following reasons: (1) There were no existing or legitimate disputes between the parties at the time the claimant made the attempt to include any arbitration provision in any purported agreements. 2) Respondent objects to arbitration because Respondent has never signed any agreement or contract with Ass, LLC. If such an agreement or contract exists, Respondent is entitled to view the signed agreement or contract. Respondent is not required to submit to arbitration since no valid agreement or contract exists between the Claimant and Respondent. 3) Respondent contests that any arbitration forums chosen by the claimant are unfair and, unconstitutionally violate respondent's rights to due process and they constitute an unfair trade practice as recently established by the California Appellate court. (A) "The arbitration agreement in a credit cardholder agreement is unconscionable and unenforceable, to the extent it prohibits class treatment of small individual claims, where presented as a 'take it or leave it' clause with no opportunity for negotiation" Szetela v. Discover Bank, No. G029323 (Cal. 4th App. Dist. April 22, 2002) (B) The purported arbitration clause is not enforceable because it unconscionably requires the respondent to arbitrate in a distant state under an organization and rules designed to favor the purported lender. (a)Patterson v ITT Consumer Financial Corp., 14 Cal. App. 4th 1659, 18 Cal Rptr 2d 563 (Cal App. 1993) "The claimant has no authority to unilaterally change any terms of any agreements that may or may not exist between the claimant and respondent. The post-agreement, unilateral arbitration clause is unenforceable because it exceeds the unilateral right of one party to make subsequent, substantive, changes to the agreement, violates the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and because the resulting jury waiver was not unambiguous and unequivocal, as required to waive a constitutional right." Respondent is not in default because this account is not a valid account. 4) Respondent is requesting validation of the alleged debt and any documentation pertaining thereto. 5) No award is allowed because no valid debt or contract exists that the Respondent is obligated to pay. 6) Attorney fees are not reasonable because Respondent is not at fault in this matter. I therefore reiterate, I refuse to accept arbitration and dispute your claim in its entirety. Sincerely, Tcmc
