Author Topic: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal  (Read 2652 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Clydesmom66

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #45 on: October 09, 2017 02:36:32 AM »
I would add GE/Synchrony as a co-defendant, alleging GE routinely sells accounts to Calvary with the knowledge that Calvary attempts to avoid the terms of the contract, thus displaying gross negligence and breach of fiduciary duty to their customers.

Go sit on the bench next to Gowyo.  It is really BAD frivolous cases like that suggestion that are causing way more harm to consumers than the debt collection industry themselves.  Once the OC sells the account they have ZERO liability for the assignee's actions.  ZERO and you know it.  You know darn well when the account is sold it is without the knowledge of what WILL happen in each account.  Not to mention that they owe NO fiduciary duty to the customer beyond accurate accounting and reporting.  It isn't even negligence.

The worst part is not just that you advocate that someone do this but that you probably have. 
Be VERY careful following advice from the internet! What worked for someone with thousands of posts on a message board may not work for YOU in your state.  Consult a lawyer when ever possible.

kevinmanheim

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 11515
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #46 on: October 09, 2017 11:36:18 AM »
Once the OC sells the account they have ZERO liability for the assignee's actions.  ZERO and you know it. 
The fiduciary has a responsibility to protect the consumer. If there is a history of selling accounts with known defects, the creditor's sale of the account may be a breach of fiduciary duty.

Why do you think Chase stopped selling accounts a few years ago?

Invoking Gowyo's case is a cheap shot on your part. You're better than that.

Read through what Chase did to consumers when it sold debts. They did it with full knowledge that consumers were being placed in the line of fire.

You think GE is different?


CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10457
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #47 on: October 09, 2017 03:45:09 PM »

The fiduciary has a responsibility to protect the consumer. If there is a history of selling accounts with known defects, the creditor's sale of the account may be a breach of fiduciary duty.





Good luck on getting that one to fly.  Since a JDB is NOT in the business of offering credit, the question of fiduciary responsibility of the creditor to the consumer is moot.

As for Chase not selling the accounts any more...Well...After the debacle with the robo-signed affidavits of a decade ago, Chase chose to limit their exposure.  That was as much a PR move as it was and financial one, although the losses that the suffered because of the hoo-haa certainly were "financial".


Jane007

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 303
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #48 on: October 09, 2017 07:38:08 PM »
Does the agreement also allow for court?  If so, they could not have breached the agreement by doing what the contract allows.

Do you agree with all of the Bentrud opinion except for the part that states;

"If Bentrud is concerned about Bowman-Heintz resuming litigation after he elected arbitration a procedural oddity, at worst his remedy sounds in breach of contract".

Does the Bentrud opinion have it all correct except for that one part?

1,2

YYaWannaNO

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 66
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #49 on: October 09, 2017 08:55:32 PM »
The OP isn't going to win the case in arb.

The OP may be able to convince Calvary that it isn't worth pursuing the case. To do so, the OP needs to appear bigger as they back away from the bear.

I was thinking that.  While as of now, I don't have a clear strategy in mind, I think I'll have something to work with when/if they supply whatever proof they have in regards to the debt. As I mentioned in another thread, another CA (Convergent) is chasing me down for the SAME debt (Paypal) but a smaller amount.

Jane007

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 303
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #50 on: October 09, 2017 09:22:14 PM »
... another CA (Convergent) is chasing me down for the SAME debt (Paypal) but a smaller amount.
Since the amount is different, are you sure that it is the same debt?  Did you have other credit accounts attached to your PayPal account, such as an account formerly known as "Bill Me Later"?

YYaWannaNO

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 66
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #51 on: October 09, 2017 09:49:40 PM »
Since the amount is different, are you sure that it is the same debt?  Did you have other credit accounts attached to your PayPal account, such as an account formerly known as "Bill Me Later"?

VERY sure.  I only had one account and it was Bill Me Later

Jane007

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 303
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #52 on: October 09, 2017 10:09:56 PM »
VERY sure.  I only had one account and it was Bill Me Later
Are you sure that you are very sure?  I don't think GE Capital Retail Bank issued "Bill Me Later" accounts.

If I recall correctly, GE (later known as "Synchrony Bank") offered a PayPal MasterCard, and something called "PayPal Smart Connect" as an alternative to people who applied for the MasterCard but didn't qualify.

This is all changed now.  The various MasterCard, Smart Connect, and Bill Me Later products have been renamed and/or are served by different (or renamed) "banks" or other providers.

YYaWannaNO

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 66
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #53 on: October 09, 2017 10:28:05 PM »
Are you sure that you are very sure?  I don't think GE Capital Retail Bank issued "Bill Me Later" accounts.

If I recall correctly, GE (later known as "Synchrony Bank") offered a PayPal MasterCard, and something called "PayPal Smart Connect" as an alternative to people who applied for the MasterCard but didn't qualify.

This is all changed now.  The various MasterCard, Smart Connect, and Bill Me Later products have been renamed and/or are served by different (or renamed) "banks" or other providers.

Ok, so this what I can say.  Paypal Smart Connect is on my credit report Paypal Bill Me later is not  Per Cavalry, Paypal account under GE Capital (formerly Sychrony) was opened on 5/6/10 and charged off 3/26/2013

Per Convergent to OC is Comenity, the Servicer is Bill Me Later open 5/5/10 and charged off 3/25/13

Cavalry as of yet hasn't shown me any statements or anything that shows me how they came up with the amount the claim I owe.

They only thing Convergent provided was two pages of billing data showing purchases that I made on certain days via Paypal

 I don't think paypal would let me open two lines of credit two days apart.  Also FWIW, I wouldn't open two lines of credit from the same company.  So you see my confusion here :)
« Last Edit: October 09, 2017 10:33:35 PM by YYaWannaNO »

BellEbutton

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 3462
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #54 on: October 15, 2017 05:44:43 AM »
Do you agree with all of the Bentrud opinion except for the part that states;

"If Bentrud is concerned about Bowman-Heintz resuming litigation after he elected arbitration a procedural oddity, at worst his remedy sounds in breach of contract".

Does the Bentrud opinion have it all correct except for that one part?

1,2

The court did not rule that the creditor was in breach of contract.  "Sounds in breach of contract" is not a ruling that the creditor was, in fact, in breach.   The court did not expound upon the issue.

First breach is common sense.   Example:

Let's say you hire a contractor to replace your roof.  The contract with that roofer states that he will replace it within 30 days and that the full amount of the cost is due at that time.

After 30 days, only half of your roof has been replaced.   Another 30 days passes, the roofing has not been completed, but he sends you a bill for the full amount of the replacement cost. 

You don't pay because he has not completed the replacement.  He sues you for breach of the contract.

Which party first breached the contract?
« Last Edit: October 15, 2017 05:53:18 AM by BellEbutton »

Jane007

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 303
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #55 on: October 15, 2017 11:27:12 PM »
Do you agree with all of the Bentrud opinion except for the part that states;

"If Bentrud is concerned about Bowman-Heintz resuming litigation after he elected arbitration a procedural oddity, at worst his remedy sounds in breach of contract".

Does the Bentrud opinion have it all correct except for that one part?

1,2

The court did not rule that the creditor was in breach of contract.  "Sounds in breach of contract" is not a ruling that the creditor was, in fact, in breach.   The court did not expound upon the issue.

That's right, the court did not rule that the Defendant-Appellee in the Bentrud case was in breach of contract.

That's because Bentrud didn't allege breach of contract as a formal cause of action.  Bentrud filed a FDCPA case.  Whatever claim of breach made by Bentrud was indirect and in support of his FDCPA cause of action.

And the court's ruling is that the FDCPA cause of action by Bentrud was improper.  The proper cause of action is breach of contract.

Your incomplete quote;

"Sounds in breach of contract"

distorts the meaning.  What did the court say "Sounds in breach of contract"?

The remedy.

I'm taking "Sounds" to mean "resides" or "lies" or "is contained within".

In other words, Bentrud's remedy resides in a breach of contract cause of action.

Bentrud chose the FDCPA cause of action as the remedy.  The Court of Appeals ruling states that the proper remedy resides in breach of contract.

If you're deriving some other meaning from that sentence, please explain.

YYaWannaNO

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 66
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #56 on: November 01, 2017 03:56:31 PM »
So Cavalry was given 30 days to produce proof of debt.  It is now day 26 and I have received nothing. Would I be able to request dismissal of the case if they fail to provide proof of debt?

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10457
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #57 on: November 01, 2017 04:07:41 PM »
I would ask for summary dismissal with prejudice.

YYaWannaNO

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 66
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #58 on: November 01, 2017 04:33:13 PM »
Thanks!  That's what I thought.  I'm hoping that if they haven't been able to come up with proof yet, they won't *fingers crossed*  I can assume that on day 31 if there's still nothing I can go to the courthouse and submit my Motion?

BrokeBob

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1475
Re: Being sued by Calvary/GE Capital Paypal
« Reply #59 on: November 01, 2017 05:50:57 PM »
Thanks!  That's what I thought.  I'm hoping that if they haven't been able to come up with proof yet, they won't *fingers crossed*  I can assume that on day 31 if there's still nothing I can go to the courthouse and submit my Motion?

Yes.  Do what C.U. suggested, and day 31 would be a great time for that.