Author Topic: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court  (Read 56122 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10698
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #30 on: May 20, 2010 06:45:57 PM »
Minor point, but statute = law.


Your point is well made though.  If you follow procedures, know what you're talking about, know why what you're talking about is correct, have the legal references to back it up, and present your case in a coherent and understandable fashion, you can be just as effective as their $400/hour hired mouthpiece who doesn't know a thing about the FDCPA and its ramifications. It is also wise to stay within the mainstream of the law and the arguments, be civil and polite, and not stretch the rules and customs beyond the breaking point.  (The judge determines where the breaking point is, keep that always in mind.)

Remember that the "legal model" of debt collections relies on the default judgment which requires the $400/hr attorney to just stand up and shuffle paper in front of the judge. They love the no-work pay day since they are on retainer and usually get paid whether or not the creditor collects.

Make one of these legal eagles actually do some work, and you will find out not only that they are beatable, but they are easily beatable because they haven't the depth of knowledge that they need to attack a credible, well prepared opponent.

You also have the fun of seeing them get all bent out of shape because they know you are hammering them. They take it personally ....  as well they should.

« Last Edit: May 20, 2010 06:53:38 PM by CleaningUp »

foolsmission

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1058
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #31 on: May 20, 2010 10:17:41 PM »
The JDB attorney's also like it when you take their Mugshot with your own camera at THEIR deposition like I did, then stick to your guns on "asked and answered" responses, then threaten to end the deposition citing FRCP civility rules.

Yeah you can do it without a lawyer.

socalblues

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 55
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2011 08:28:31 PM »
I assume the chain of custody is not relevant in an arbitration?  Since it's informal forum, the rules will be much more streamlined for pro se / consumer than regular court?

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10698
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #33 on: September 16, 2011 08:38:32 PM »
Chain of custody is just as relevant in arbitration as in court.

If they cannot establish ownership, then they are not entitled to make a claim.

Arbitration is a less formal procedurally, but still adheres to the Rules of Evidence.

Firewater

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 107
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2012 12:01:30 AM »
In New Jersey in Middlesex County, they have one judge who handles credit card civil cases under $6,000.00. The head of the JDB law firm is on the committee that selects and recommends judges and sets rules for special civil law division. This judge accepted bogus bill of sale and fraudulent certification of proof as admissible. No money and time to appeal to higher court. By the time I discovered the fraud, time had passed by. 

In a perfect world, with fair judges, chain of custody is awesome.

alexander323bc

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 15
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #35 on: October 02, 2012 08:59:51 PM »
OK so I pro-founded disclosure on the plaintiff asking for chain of custody they said the were retrieving documents. I sent a interrogatories asking when I would get them no reply. the only thing they provided was 3 billing statements. Last week I filed an MTD based on the SOL. I have  pretrial conference on the 10th. I presume the judge is going to mention my MTD, Do I hammer the chain of evidence at Pre-trial since they never provided it? Not sure how I approach this at a conference.

Miami305

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 19
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2013 04:42:41 PM »
Anyone still here???

I read thru the 3 pages and I have a question......

LETS SAY
If the OC sold to COMPANY A... BUT all my papers and affidavits come from COMPANY B as if they were the ones that bought the debt, is the chain of custody BROKEN??

I believe so because Bank sold to A .. and Company b doesnt mention company A in anyyyyy papers or anything... thats where the chain is broken

HOW DO I GET IN WRITING FROM BANK OF AMERICA, who bought the CHARGED OFF ACCT because it was NOT company B it was company A...

thank guys
Thank you for your support.

kickinanscreamin

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 832
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2013 05:34:34 PM »
Miami,
There is a high probability that B of A sold to CACH, LLC.  In discovery, ask the current owner for a copy of the sales documents from the previous owner to them.  If they claim they bought the debt from B of A, ask for the sales documents, i.e. bill of sale, etc.  If the sales documents do not specify your account by name and number, they cannot prove chain of custody.

Miami305

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 19
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #38 on: April 23, 2013 07:29:54 PM »
thank you for your response..

they provided bogus affidavits (for ex) one from a bank officer saying they sold the debt to CACH llc....

which is not the case.. I called Bank of Amer and they say "square2 financial" bought the charged off account....

therefore im really lost.... also there a witness list they will be calling for trial.. the phone # provided is not a CACH llc number its Square2 financial
Thank you for your support.

Miami305

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 19
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2013 07:54:50 PM »
i just called Square 2 financial and the receptionist is saying "cach and square 2 are one in the same". He said Square 2 purchased from Bank of America and then passed down the "credit card accounts" to CACH LLC which handle accounts such as credit cards etc.. had it been a medical case it wouldve been passed to HCS health care solutions(also undersame roof)

..... very lost... hes basically saying Square 2 bought it but passed it on to CACH ... so wouldnt the affidavit need to say Square 2 purchased and sold to Cach not directly B of A to Cach ..

Thank you for your support.

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10698
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #40 on: April 23, 2013 08:50:02 PM »
No.  One is acting as the agent for the other.

It's like the collection agency that hands the account to the lawyer that works in the same office.


kickinanscreamin

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 832
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2013 09:14:14 PM »
Is someone suing you other than Square 2 Financial or Cach LLC?  If CACH LLC is suing you, and suing under their own name, then there should be some audit trail (chain of custody) because CACH LLC would be a seperate entity even though they are owned by Square 2.  Without an assignment or sales document, they would not have standing to sue.

Still, the Chain-of-custody documents would fail if they do not specify your account by name and number.

howucantoo

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 7513
I am not an attorney, just  type" A" personality.
If you need legal help, you should seek legal counsel.
My PM is turned off.

Miami305

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 19
Re: Chain of Custody - the JDB's Achilles Heel in Court
« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2013 04:52:45 PM »
TWO KEY POINTS FROM THE ARTICLE

Revenue Recognition from Purchased Debt


Purchased debt represents receivables that have been charged-off as uncollectible by the originating organization and that may or may not have been subject to previous collection efforts. Through its subsidiaries, the Company purchases the rights to the unrecovered balances owed by individual debtors.


Through its subsidiaries, the Company purchases charged-off receivables from various financial institutions at a substantial discount from face value and records the purchase at the Company's cost to acquire the portfolio.


*does this mean since CACH is a subsidary they dont have to show the sale from Square2 to Cach llc?????

and below states the diff subsidaries:

The condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company are prepared in accordance with GAAP and include the accounts of SquareTwo and its subsidiaries. SquareTwo owns the following subsidiaries: ReFinance America, Ltd.; CACV of Colorado, LLC; CACH, LLC; Collect Air, LLC; Healthcare Funding Solutions, LLC; SquareTwo Financial Commercial Funding Corporation, and Collect America of Canada, LLC. Collect America of Canada, LLC has a wholly-owned subsidiary, SquareTwo Financial Canada Corporation, which has a majority ownership interest in CCL Financial Inc. ("CCL"). CCL is a consolidated subsidiary of the Company. As previously disclosed, Parent owns 100% of the outstanding equity of SquareTwo and all other Parent investments are dormant. All material expenses incurred by Parent on SquareTwo’s behalf have been allocated to SquareTwo and are reflected in the consolidated financial statements of SquareTwo. Inactive companies are not listed. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.


Thank you for your support.

Miami305

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 19
Thank you for your support.

 

credit