FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF UTAH COUNTY
STATE OF UTAH, AMERICAN FORK
Case Number 00000000000
JUDGE HOWARD H. MAETANI
MOTION FOR DISMISAL
COMES NOW YOUR NAME, Sui Juris, by special visitation, who is unschooled in law and asks the court to take Judicial Notice of the enunciation of principles as stated in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, wherein the court has directed that those who are unschooled in law making pleadings and/or complaints shall have the court look to the substance of the pleadings rather than the form, and also hereby makes the attached Affidavit, including the related-thereto documents, the “Response” in the above referenced case.
Pursuant to Title 15 USCA 1692 The parties lack the standing to bring suit.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted, Defendant has requested from Plaintiff verification of the debt pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. (See exhibit A)
2. Plaintiff has failed to provide Defendant the requisite verification required by 15 USC 1692g(b).
3. Federal Court in re Martinez, 266 B.R. 523 (S.D. Fla. August 2001) held, “When a debt collector has sent a consumer a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) validation notice together with a summons and complaint, upon acting upon the validation notice by disputing the debt, consumer is under no obligation to respond to the complaint until, at the earliest, debt collector responds with the requested information. Consumer Credit Protection Act, § 809(b), as amended, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1692g(b).”
4. “The FDCPA is a strict liability statute, and one violation is sufficient to establish liability.” Bentley v. Great Lakes Coll. Bureau, 6 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 1993).
5. Attorney knew or should have known that his primary focus is being Debt Collector pursuant to 15 USC 1692(a) when it initiated this instant action. Attorney knows or should have known it lacked the capacity to sue Defendant Your Name within this honorable Court. As evidenced by exhibits filed with Defendants Motion and Brief and support. Attorney admitted it is the debt collector.(see Exhibit A) It is therefore a third party, lacking the capacity to sue Your Name. Attorney is a Debt Collector and a law firm licensed in this Commonwealth of Utah.
Plaintiff has failed to comply with Federal law and has no authority to proceed with his collection action as he has not verified the debt pursuant to 15 USC 1692g (b).
This Court’s determination that the Plaintiff has not complied with the verification requirement specified in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, specifically 15 USC 1692g(b) justly requires this court’s dismissing of this action as Plaintiff has failed to follow due process of the law, and Defendant hereby requests said Dismissal. Defendant also respectfully asks this court to award fees incurred in defense of this action, and any other relief this Court deems just.
Prepared and submitted
Your mileage may vary.