Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney LOL Besides that. We all know lawyers primary reason is dinero. I am referring to this comment that Butch made"
Get an attorney if a big lawyer like that wont take it, it may be because they dont feel it has merit. that doesn't mean that there isn't a lawyer out there that wont take it. quite a few years back i was in a bad car accident, called a big named lawyer who wouldn't even talk to me because i wasnt in a hospital.
Get an attorney The attorneys at www.edcombs.com are often used as a reference and recommendation for one seeking legal counsel. They come with a good reputation and one of the few firms (at least online) that seem to have a working knowledge and passion for consumer issues. Butch previously said: You're doing just fine Trent. There's only a couple atty's. we can suggest you NOT go to, but Combs is not one of em. I do know that Combs can "seem" to salivate over a case and then come back and say "no thanks". I've seen em turn down some juicy stuff. lol I really have to disagree with that, Butch, if you suggest and make a reference to who someone should NOT go to (or anyone on this board doing the same, since you said "we"), you're asking to be sued for defamation and, and, and -- and, putting the board in a bad place as well. It should be the other way around. My experience in my interactions with the attorneys referenced is that they only take sound cases, with a confirmable papertrail, and where reasonable processes have been exhausted by the consumer at attempted resolution (as the FCRA provides for). So, "juicy" may be in the eyes of the beholder, with no paper trail and/or no or weak attempts to follow the processes for consumer resolution that can't be confirmed, it's doubtful I say, for any attorney, especially those with a stellar reputation, to see the same "juicy" factor. That's why we were asking for clarification, trent, not only of the letters you have, and what seemed to be beating semantics or who signed what and who TU was pointing the finger at, what you have done so far, but most importantly, the trail that you've established and the procedures you followed as a consumer in an attempt to reach resolution before legal action. You have to follow the process and build the trail, starting with a dispute and follow it through. One dispute isn't enough to meet the findings and if you get to a place where you know it is the furnisher (or supposed to be the furnisher, as happened to you) you have to have a trail! It is hugely important if you ever intend to hold someone responsible, the furnisher/the CRA's or both. They are ONLY required to follow reasonable procedures, you can't show they didn't if you don't follow the procedures. Juicy = attempted consumer resolution via the procedures in place WITH a papertrail to back it up. Sassy
Get an attorney This started with TU as a dispute of what I believed was not mine, , Followed by a second attempt at dispute, and then after 2 CmRRR letters to the supposed furnisher (clerk) with no response did I attempt a procedural request and then a second demand to see the certification and then a visit to the Clerk. I hope I did this all in order. DID I? And now at Butch's request a strongly worded demand to see the certification .
Get an attorney oh yeah, trent, you've got it covered, and too as jenz asked about the inaccuracy of it being reported. You and your papertrail are an attorney's juicy dream, LOL Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney I think a lawyer will strongly consider who he is suing and their policy towards suits. A potential defendant that maintains an aggressive tact towards claims filed against them is likely to ward off suits better than those who are known to settle quickly. IMHO, most lawyers really don't want to go to trial and engage in lengthy discovery proceedings. They want to settle. Generally, lawyers don't really want to sue a formidable defendant who is going to fight them tooth and nail. Just like how a CA or other creditor doesn't want to deal with the "nutcase" in the nutcase series, a plaintiff's lawyer looking for settlement doesn't want to deal with a "nutcase" for a defendant that is going to drag them through a lengthy discovery process, probably sprinkled with a set of hearings and motions just to keep the plaintiff's attorney's occupied. IMHO, CRA's are a tougher fight than most CA's and creditors. One of the CRA's, retains the sixth biggest law firm in the WORLD for .......they are prepared to go rounds more so than they are prepared to settle. Unless there is a boatload of greenback that is fairly certain to be won through trial, most lawyers probably wouldn't want to touch these guys. You could have an airtight case backed with a papertrail up the wazoo, but if there isn't enough bling bling involved or there is going to be too much inconvenience, most lawyers will exit stage right. Unless of course you can appeal to their conscience, and good luck on that ONE!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney BTW I really do not care about a lawsuit, All I want is that damn lien off my reports and if they want to throw me a grand or two I will take it, just remove the baddie and lets get on with life.
Talk to attorney's It appears that you have a good case for SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGES. As I said before, this looks like a "slam-dunk" not just for negligence but for willful violations of the FCRA. Your evidence may be even better than the $5.3 million judgment against a CRA. I strongly suggest that you get the paperwork in order and start interviewing attorneys.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney I profoundly disagree!!! It's stage LEFT. Remember the cartoon? ~
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney Are you not going to answer my question Butch? Just say so if you aren't going to.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Butch I do know that Combs can "seem" to salivate over a case and then come back and say "no thanks". I've seen em turn down some juicy stuff. lol -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Butch posted the above. I've asked if he knows why combs would turn down a case that had some "juicy stuff?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get an attorney Bumping for Butch. Anyone get close in their postings about it? Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get Butch, Faxed and e-mailed a DEMANd to see the certification and received a letter yesterday that said: We received your information and are unable to use it, we are contacting the furnisher of the information and our investigation will be complete within 30 days...WTF do they think they are doing, this is just adding fuel to the fire. What should my reply be other than sending the process server to serve them a copy of a lawsuit. As of today I think that is what needs to happen. Any words of wisdom?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Get I guess we'll have to assume by Butchs' refusal to answer, that he really didn't mean to say what he did.
