Topic: fight this lawsuit or just try to settle?

[jnb1111]

Just went and got the most recent letter from the other CA.  It's Frontline asset strategies.  They have a website that I just accessed that shows almost $1,200 on the same account, with the same account number from Continental.  I was already wondering if I should somehow include them in my answer.  Nothing would be worse than getting this thing dismissed, and then getting sued by the second agency or something...

Both CA's have my address wrong, one has both address AND phone number wrong.  The only way I found out about the lawsuit is that they sent a certified card to my wife's grandmas house for me.  I have NO idea how or where they even got that address or made a connection.

I hope one of the pros on here jumps in with some advice.  So far I have my answer prepared, at least partially.  In addition, I have a motion to dismiss or motion to stay the case until arbitration, a letter to the attorney electing arbitration via JAMS, as well as the copy of the credit card agreement, none of which I'd have been able to do without this board.  If not for this, I'd have probably either just skipped the court or gone to court hoping that the judge would side with me not believing the amounts claimed.

[CleaningUp]

While you appear to have a case, you ONLY have a case against one of them.

So watch where you put your feet.

[jnb1111]

While you appear to have a case, you ONLY have a case against one of them.

So watch where you put your feet.

Can you be a little less cryptic?  Or point me towards a section to read?  If I'm doing this wrong, I don't want to do this wrong.

[Midas10k]

Just went and got the most recent letter from the other CA.  It's Frontline asset strategies.

That's the JDB that sent me a letter trying to collect on the alleged HSBC debt that Main Street Acquisition has engaged me via a CA. 

Let me know if you engage them with a DV letter or you find anything else out about them.

[KFMAN]

That's the JDB that sent me a letter trying to collect on the alleged HSBC debt that Main Street Acquisition has engaged me via a CA. 

Let me know if you engage them with a DV letter or you find anything else out about them.

A JDB is a JDB.  If this was my issue, I would learn more about what a JDB is, how they try to collect, and the reason they more than liekly can't prove anything.  I would also study FCRA and get hard copies of my CRA's.

[KFMAN]

http://www.debtorboards.com/index.php?topic=10200.msg166254;topicseen#new

[Midas10k]

A JDB is a JDB.  If this was my issue, I would learn more about what a JDB is, how they try to collect

Yes I understand what a JDB is, what they pay for claims and how they try to collect.  I used to aid and abet their process when I traded debt claims into them at a big Wall Street bank back in the 1990's.  At the time I didn't care about what they had to do to collect because it wasn't my problem once I made my skim on what I sold to them.

With my situation, I don't want Frontline to disappear, which they might, if I send them a DV or dispute their claim.  I want their "claim" to hang around in case the CA representing a different JDB seeking to collect on the same alleged debt "claim" revives his effort and then I'll pull out the Frontline "claim" and go  from there.

I was fishing to see if this person might have some information, since Frontline and Main Street are involved in both his and mine, or if Main Street unloaded the "claim" on to Frontline.  Right now I don't have the time to research this thoroughly because I spend a lot time all day doing what I do to make a living.  In dealing with the CA on my other, separate situation, I don't believe they'll go away that easily because this alleged "claim" is twice the size of the one which I just filed an MTC on.

As for my credit report, the CA does not report to the CRA's.  I can understand why, given the room for them to open themselves up to violations.  98% of their complaints end up with SJ's.   I pulled up one of my latest credit reports two days ago there's no mention of any of the events that I'm involved in other than the CA did an inquiry on one of my reports back in August before engaging me on that one.

Now, if you are saying there's room for a cause of action because the CA did not have a right to look at my credit history because he was attempting to collect based on an invalid collection claim, I would appreciate a link to someone on this board who has pursued that course of action.

[CleaningUp]

Can you be a little less cryptic?  Or point me towards a section to read?  If I'm doing this wrong, I don't want to do this wrong.

Think about the scenarios for a moment or five.

Two collectors claiming the right to collect.

 -- One collector owns right to collect, one doesn't.  Only one can collect.
 -- One collector owns right to collect and hires another to help collection.  Both can collect.  Deception could be
     a problem.
 -- One collector owns the right to collect, the second tries to collect w/authorization.  Only the first can collect.
     Only the second can be sued without exposing oneself to a charge of frivolous suit against the owner.

In order to be successful in this game, you have to think about all of the scenarios, not just the scenario that you think will give you a pay check.  After you get slapped with paying their attorney's fees is not the time to find out that you could have avoided it if you had expanded your view to the other possible explanations of why things are happening.


As to your question on the permissability of pulls, when one no longer has the authority to collect, the debt collection purpose is no longer available since the puller has no debt on which to collect. It is a function of the law and how it must be executed.  Again, look at the scenarios and how the facts and the law interplay. When the collector loses his authority to collect, he is just like anyone else when it comes to being able to pull a credit report.

There was a fairly detailed thread a couple of years ago by DLG who hammered a bank for not having permissible purpose.  Go to the home page and do a search on "fruit basket".  She insisted on one as part of her settlement.

[Midas10k]

One collector owns right to collect and hires another to help collection.  Both can collect.  Deception could be
     a problem.

You left out a scenario:  neither JDB has the right to collect based on ROE, proof of valid assignment, etc.

If a JDB performs a credit check on the premise of attempting to collect a debt, and he gets challenged on validity of his premise and we find it was based on invalid evidence and an invalid assignment, doesn't that make his credit history inquiry invalid?

In my situation, Main Street is attempting to collect over 9 grand on their "alleged" claim on an alleged HSBC account, all of which I've disputed.  Frontline just showed up two days ago telling me in writing that they have the authority from HSBC to settle the claim for about 25% of the amount that Main Street is seeking.

Main Street may have sold the "claim" to Frontline, there is not record of that on my credit report which I checked the day I got the Frontline claim.  That a transfer was not on my credit report would be consistent with the statement the Main Street attorney made to me, in writing, in response to a different matter. 

I'm thinking they may both be trying to collect on the same account, at the same time and without the valid right to collect period.  I was hoping jnb1111 might have gathered some information without me stirring up the pot, scaring Frontline away and surrepetitiously defusing a potential landmine for both JDBs to step on.

I'm not in this game to collect law violation fees.  My motive in trying to formulate FDCPA violations is to turn up the heat on the pondscum JDB attorney and hopefully compel him to slither away back under the rock from which he lashed out at me.

If I can learn how to help others in the process I will put that learning to good, pro bono work.

[CleaningUp]

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that what is on the credit report is evidence of anything.

It is not.  It is classic hearsay.

[KFMAN]

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that what is on the credit report is evidence of anything.

It is not.  It is classic hearsay.

JDB reporting and updating information they can't prove is fraud.

[Midas10k]

Like I said, I'm not really concerned about what is on my credit report.  I don't care.  I think credit ratings are used to brainwash the public.  Orwellian stuff.

What I'm looking for is any possible FDCPA violations that can be lobbed at the other side, even if they are "grey" area formulations, to try and compel the other side to go away and leave me alone.  That's all I want. 

This whole thing is taking me away from focusing 100% on my real livelihood.  Unfortunately I have to spend a lot more time than I expected in order to make them go away.

[deepkimchee]

I totally agree with you, in that, the a credit rating is a form of brainwashing the public.

Credit rating used to be everything to me.  In the end all it did was.......get me more credit, therefore more debt.

Once my credit went down the toilet, the ball went into my court, because the "damage" was already done, and one less thing to hold over me.

Even with the real estate bubble and the great recession, I still think people put too much emphasis on credit.  Our depression era grandparents were right, "cash is king".

[CleaningUp]

A question to ask:  Who is the brainwasher, and who is the brainwashee.

The CRAs are certainly not doing the brain washing.  Neither are the creditors.  So, who does that leave?

Come on, folks, time to step up to the reality that the consumer is chasing a dream that may, just may, be beyond his capacity to handle what can come with fulfilling the dream.

[KFMAN]

Like I said, I'm not really concerned about what is on my credit report.  I don't care.  I think credit ratings are used to brainwash the public.  Orwellian stuff.

What I'm looking for is any possible FDCPA violations that can be lobbed at the other side, even if they are "grey" area formulations, to try and compel the other side to go away and leave me alone.  That's all I want. 

This whole thing is taking me away from focusing 100% on my real livelihood.  Unfortunately I have to spend a lot more time than I expected in order to make them go away.

FCRA violations carry a bigger punch than FDCPA.