Author Topic: Please review my ITS letter  (Read 4340 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

coltfan1972

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4853
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2011 09:31:21 AM »
Okay if your attorney told them for any financial matters then they defiantly should not have contacted you direct.  Based on your answer that is a slam dunk FDCPA violation.   I would make sure your attorney is prepared to state that in court also. 

Might be a good idea to get an affidavit from the attorney right now.  It can be used as a great tool for leverage, especially since the other side would know the attorney can show up in court to authenticate the affidavit. 

On the issue of why are they still going after you since your filing BK?  While you seem like an honest person that just had some bad luck and fully intend to file BK, would you care to imagine how many people tell them that in an effort to avoid lawsuits.

In addition, there are attorney's everywhere and everybody has at least a few in the family or are close friends with one.   It would not be unheard of for an attorney to even call up creditors and tell them a client is going to file BK.

A common ploy by some credit repair companies is to use attorney's to make it look like the client has one foot already inside the courthouse with a pen in their hand ready to sign the BK papers.  Once again, I'm sure your situation is not this and you are indeed going to file, but it  happens all the time that people are just bluffing. 

People telling cops they will have their badge, if you don't fix this matter right now you will hear from my lawyer, I'm going to sue you for harassment, I'll see you in court because I'm not paying this speeding ticket, and go ahead and sue me I'm filing BK anyway, all fall pretty much into the same category, in one ear and out the other.

In my previous job in insurance claims, I can assure you somebody threatening an attorney had zero effect on me or how I handled the claim or the decisions I made.  Did some get attorney's, sure. 

At that point I simply don't care.  It is just a claim.  I'm sure that is how the other side is looking at it, they don't care, their suing and if you want to BK the lawsuit, so be it, they will move to the next person.  It's just a big numbers game and they want to win more than they lose.

If they do that they don't care who files BK or not.  For every ten people that tell them BK is just around the corner, nine might be full of it.  You might be that one out of the ten that does.  However, they will make their money back on what they lost on you from the nine that were bluffing. 

So they really don't care if you are serious or bluffing.  The odds say your bluffing (I understand your not, just the odds say you are) so they are going to move forward since the odds are in their favor. 

In sports gambling if you bet the exact same amount on every game and take into account the 10% "juice or vig" paid on losing bets, you need to win 53.76 percent of the time to break exactly even.  So if you win 60 percent of the time you're making good money.  If you are really good and win 70% of the time your considered an expert and people will pay you for your picks.

However, that means 30 or 40 percent of the time you look like a losing buffoon that made a stupid bet and wasted their hard earned money.  In your case if they spend 5K getting a judgement against you, only to have you immediately BK the judgement away, they are going to look like foolish buffoons. 

That is unless they just collected 50K from all the other consumers that did not BK their judgements away yet gave them the same or similar story you gave them. 

Your thinking about it from a common sense, emotional, just focusing on a single account and lawsuit perspective.  They are looking at it from a business perspective backed by research and data that supports their decision to sue you even though your threatening BK and have had an attorney contact them. 

They are wanting to win the war and not necessarily the particular battled against you.  I'm sure you have heard the phrase, "It's just the cost of doing business."

Now with all that said I do hope you do make this a very expensive cost of doing business for them.  Sometimes Attorney Generals do have a way of making that cost of doing business a little more costly and painful.
Scroggin succeed in making this case an expensive nightmare for both CBOJ and its counsel.
Scroggin made a "mockery" out of CBOJ's deposition.

Scroggin made "perverted one-liners" during his deposition.
Scroggin called CBOJ'S counsel "a little witch"

Scroggin used the FDCPA as a "sword of intimidation."
Scroggin loves suing debt collectors.

Scroggin is proud of his behavior and "unapologetic."

Rebecca Worsham - Lead Counsel, Scroggin v. CBOJ- 3:12-cv-128, Eastern District of Ark.

Sweets27

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 68
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2011 09:48:55 AM »
Coltfan, your insight is always enlightening - I thank you!

With that said, I have been doing my homework in court cases. I can't believe how they can use pocket service to get judgements in counties 200+ miles apart all on the same day. I know the AG is working on that, but jimeny crickets! I was able to pull only 2 months at a time because of the volume of cases the attorney working on my file at the moment, has brought. 90% of the time, people didn't answer their summons. 5% they filed after discovery and small mixed percentages of people who tried to stand up, and lost mixed with a few that got their discoveries thrown out and were MSJ'd.

There was not one case of anyone filing a complaint against them.

The AG was able to give me very good information, and I know this is a very well documented case. Even without an affidavit from my attorney, a recorded call shows they had my attorney documented. my attorney is able to provide me a call log, copies of the fax transmissions and with that, I have the call to back it all up.

I'm looking to file it as a counterclaim under a few provisions that MN civil procedure might have. My bk file is ready and paid for, just need to pull the trigger.

I understand why they do it, Risk vs. Reward. At some point their risk is going to have to hurt. I also could file for a few more, but the hardest evidence and infraction would be under section 805.

coltfan1972

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4853
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2011 05:22:57 PM »
There was not one case of anyone filing a complaint against them.

There you go, you just saw it for yourself on why they go full steam ahead all the time.   
Scroggin succeed in making this case an expensive nightmare for both CBOJ and its counsel.
Scroggin made a "mockery" out of CBOJ's deposition.

Scroggin made "perverted one-liners" during his deposition.
Scroggin called CBOJ'S counsel "a little witch"

Scroggin used the FDCPA as a "sword of intimidation."
Scroggin loves suing debt collectors.

Scroggin is proud of his behavior and "unapologetic."

Rebecca Worsham - Lead Counsel, Scroggin v. CBOJ- 3:12-cv-128, Eastern District of Ark.

coltfan1972

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4853
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2011 05:43:45 PM »
Even without an affidavit from my attorney, a recorded call shows they had my attorney documented. my attorney is able to provide me a call log, copies of the fax transmissions and with that, I have the call to back it all up.

Yes, I know you have a them on a slam dunk violation if everything you have posted is exactly how it all happened (no reason to think it's not). 

The reason I advised to get an affidavit this early in the game, is because anything you try to introduce that belongs to your attorney, such as; call logs and fax transmissions, is inadmissible hearsay. 

If your attorney puts it all in an affidavit it is still hearsay at the actual trial and the affidavit could not be used.   However, in my opinion, with an affidavit from your attorney which you are able to show them, it will come across to them you are serious and the attorney is going to turn the inadmissible hearsay evidence into admissible evidence.

In other words your giving the a free preview of the evidence that is getting ready to sink them.  However, the most important fact is your letting them know you have your witness lined up and ready to deafeat the hearsay objection. 

An attorney telling one of their clients who are upset what they want to hear, to put them as ease and deflect the anger to someone else, is not an uncommon occurrence.  The other side also knows that.  You slapping them with an affidavit at this stage puts them on notice that your case against them just got 100 times stronger and more serious. 

I've seen affidavits from Capitol One where the person stating the facts in the affidavit will state at the end if they are called at trial they are able to attend trial, be called as a witness, bring all records referenced in the affidavit, and testify under oath to everything stated in the affidavit.   That is basically what I'm getting at about the affidavit.

If you fight it hard enough pre-trial and through discovery the good majority of the time the case never comes close to an actual trial. 
Scroggin succeed in making this case an expensive nightmare for both CBOJ and its counsel.
Scroggin made a "mockery" out of CBOJ's deposition.

Scroggin made "perverted one-liners" during his deposition.
Scroggin called CBOJ'S counsel "a little witch"

Scroggin used the FDCPA as a "sword of intimidation."
Scroggin loves suing debt collectors.

Scroggin is proud of his behavior and "unapologetic."

Rebecca Worsham - Lead Counsel, Scroggin v. CBOJ- 3:12-cv-128, Eastern District of Ark.

arnanda

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1010
  • Take it or leave it.
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #19 on: July 17, 2011 05:10:25 AM »
Do you have the case law for example?
Yes:

Bently vs Great Lakes Collections Bureau
Pipiles vs Credit Buruea of Lockport, Inc.
Tsenes vs Tran-Continental Credit ad Colletion Corp
TUN - 791/850 (05-28-2014). EQU - 816/850 (01-19-2014). EXP - 789/850 (08-07-2014).
Abbreviations 1st Thread
Abbreviations 2nd Thread
Smurfy's Ease of Use

bad98roadster

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1008
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #20 on: July 17, 2011 05:16:52 AM »
Thank you!

coltfan1972

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4853
Re: Please review my ITS letter
« Reply #21 on: July 17, 2011 05:47:11 AM »
Thank you!

You might want to read those cases before you take any action based on the assumption those cases set precedent giving a collector 30 days to take the action being threatned.

I have no idea how Arnda concluded, using those three cases, that a collector must act within 30 of the threat. 

The first case involves the CA flat out lying to a consumer about the intentions of the original creditor.  Per the contract that the CA signed with the OC, the CA was never to state a lawsuit was on the way. 

It was in the contract even, advising them they could not threaten legal action.  However, they did.  They were sued for lying.  It has nothing  to do with a 30 day time period in which they must sue. 

In the second case it is similar because the CA put 48 hour notice at the top of the letter.  The court ruled this implied legal action.  Once again, nothing to do with suing within 30 days.  They were nailed for implying a lawsuit was going to be filed in 48 hours.

The third case there is no way to twist into the argument Arnda is making.  It is an overshadowing case.  The collection agency put contact us immediately within 5 days while at the same time having the 30 day validation at the bottom of the letter.  It has nothing to do with taking whatever action being threatened within 30 days.

These cases deal with false statements and overshadowing only. 
Scroggin succeed in making this case an expensive nightmare for both CBOJ and its counsel.
Scroggin made a "mockery" out of CBOJ's deposition.

Scroggin made "perverted one-liners" during his deposition.
Scroggin called CBOJ'S counsel "a little witch"

Scroggin used the FDCPA as a "sword of intimidation."
Scroggin loves suing debt collectors.

Scroggin is proud of his behavior and "unapologetic."

Rebecca Worsham - Lead Counsel, Scroggin v. CBOJ- 3:12-cv-128, Eastern District of Ark.

 

credit