AMEX filing suit

[CompTweaker]

The story is different if you do not OWE the money and can provide the documented proof supporting your argument.

This board is dedicated to people who OWE money and are attempting to figure out a path to bankruptcy; either formal (through the system,) or informally (walk away and accept all risks.)

The person suing is the one who has to provide the documented proof, that the amount sued for is correct, and that they have the right to collect it, be it an OC or JDB (JDB has to provide the chain of custody). The defendant always has the right to being provided with this information.

And yep, I know this is a bk forum, but this is the collections part of the forum, and I wasnt aware that responding to civil action discussion and questions would cause such an uproar....like its not allowed or something. I dont know, I guess I should start wondering why I even attempt to help sometimes....or correct misinformation and discouragement constantly posted by some to others who choose to fight a lawsuit and try to save the bk bomb for a more absolute final action.

I know what has worked for me, and that site has "many" regulars and case law to back up everything I have posted. Never once have I seen BB post any case law that proves he's right. Just constant discouraging posts of "they will get a default". Na, no thanks, I like to see FACTS backing up what some people say here.

Not everyone can file bk and sometimes IT IS worth it to see if you can fight the lawsuit. Why some of you guys discourage it so much, heck if I know.

Is there a particular reason other than its your own personal choice? I mean, most times in a forum setting like this one, people are around to help, not discourage.

[treehugger1]

I want to add the following. I've done a lot of research into debt collection cases (OC and CA) in my region. I have looked at federal cases and local cases. I watch the local circuit court cases for things I might be interested in and show up to observe. Regardless of the letter-of-law, judges (local, state, and regional federal) have considerable latitude in applying and upholding civil rules of procedure.

I met with many BK and consumer advocate attorneys attorneys a few years ago. In addition, I was willing to pay them hourly to pick their brains. They all echoed one warning. If you owe the debt, and you know you owe the debt, then the last thing you want to do in my local,state, or federal district is to waste the time of the court system. In fact, in my local circuit court, frivolent counter-claims will get you a fast pass to judgment for the plaintiff. Contrary to popular belief on some boards, I don't think this is an uncommon response from teh court system. Here is an example. CA files suit but has violated state or federal fair debt collection practices acts. You supply a counter-suit or counter-claim. Case comes to trial. You lose and "win." The judgment goes against you, the defendant, for $10K. The judge allows your FDCPA counter claim for $1000. Now keep in mind you may have spent (depending upon your state) $2000 of your money and/or time to file all the appropriate motions, discovery requests, etc. You have gained nothing other than time.

On the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, if you do not owe the money, then you should defend yourself against a fraudulent attempt to collect money on behalf of the plaintiff.

Other than that, for every day that goes by without a summons/service, then thank your "god." In the meantime, act under the protection afforded to you as a consumer (state collection practices and FDCPA.) Being a consumer might get you a lot more time then attempting to "practice" law.

Just my not-so-humble opinions.

[catleg]

I appreciate this discussion even though it has turned into a barroom brawl.
My take away from this is that no matter what legal strategy you may read about or consider, it has to be understood in proper context to decide whether it will be effective or not. What works for JDB may not (probably won't) work for OC's, which we all seem to be in agreement on. BB may be right that for OC the only strategy is to hide from service and then hide from judgement. I don't have the experience (fortunately) but have no reason to doubt him. The argument over how a lawsuit response opens you up to vulnerability was an interesting point I never realized before (not being a real lawyer).

[treehugger1]

I will only add this. If you file an answer, then you are in the mix and must be ready to "play ball." This includes the area of discovery by both parties. This includes being asked to present your finanical situation before anyone has a judgment against you. If the plaintiff suggests such financial issue is relevent to their case, then you will either have to provide the information, or provide an answer why you cannot provide the information.

Why bother with the above if you know the eventual outcome will show you owe the debt? At that time, not only have you wasted your time and money (in my state every answer, motion, response, whatever by the defendant costs money) but you have now provided information to the suing party that they could use against you when they finally get the judgment.

I say let them get the judgment and worry about possible interrogatories later. If worse comes to worse, you always file for BK and have the judgments vacated at a potentially far less cost then fighting for something you cannot win.

While it is certainly true that at times when you answer a suit, the plaintiff will not show up in court or fail to answer your own discovery questions, the suit can be dismissed. However, you cannot know the outcome before you begin. In order for you to "win," you need to have an ironclad case and be able to represent it in court.

If one is stalling for time, my experience suggests you might ignore non-small claims suits and see what happens.

I know there are boards out there dedicated to "suing your creditor/CA," but I also notice that there are very few members who post regular posts, and much of the discussion traffic is days/weeks/months old. There always appear to be a few members on those boards who truly understand the laws and have the resources (money) to partake in a suit as a defendant. For most folks, the personal utility of fighting a suit where they know they owe the money is not even in their cross-hairs.

The story is different if you do not OWE the money and can provide the documented proof supporting your argument.

This board is dedicated to people who OWE money and are attempting to figure out a path to bankruptcy; either formal (through the system,) or informally (walk away and accept all risks.)

[CompTweaker]

I am trying to get you to learn what is going on with the lawsuit process. They (swirlgirl and others) were talking about affirmative defenses....if you care to learn about that. Ad hominem? no, its a push to get you in the right direction....but call it what you want.

Care to address that or play victim?

Im not interested in getting all personal here. Im trying to get you to realize and understand what you were reading in that link. If you want to go in another direction, then yea, thanks for the good luck, and Im sorry I couldnt be of more help. You're buddying up with BB and regardless of what I say, you'll stay on his side, which is fine with me....just please learn more about the process for yourself.

[2Bshinyandnew]

Who the heck said anything about using "i cant pay" as a defense? You're drinking a little bit too much of BB's koolaid. The defenses swirglirl was referring to were the affirmative defenses that one raises when answerring a complaint.

Can we get on the same page here or not? I feel like Im trying to prove a point to a few who just choose to ignore for the sake of ignoring and arguing....and pulling crap out of thin air like "I cant pay" as a defense.

educate yourself about answering summons and complaints, using affirmative defenses, and discovery please.

Resorting to ad hominem attacks? Nice.

Kindly keep your patronizing tone and ad hominem attacks out of your responses to me. They do little to further the purpose of this board. I certainly did not accuse you of being under the influence of anything.

Go back and read the OP first post. Good luck to you!

[CompTweaker]

which brings us right back around to what BB2U said, which is IMO the point of this thread "So lets see, your being sued by the OC, you defense is (and its not really a defense) I have no money to pay it. So that pretty much opens the door to the plaintiff to ask about your finances"

To which I would point out what a poster on this other board said in the thread you referenced here: http://debt-consolidation-credit-rep...1&postcount=26

swirlgirl = "It seems like you're going through a lot of wrangling here. But the big question is what are your defenses? Your defenses will help you decide on how to answer the interrogatories."

If your only defense is you can't pay, you are just complicating your life with all this crap. You can try and answer their interrogatories with a boatload of "Objection. Information is personal and confidential. Request intrudes on personal privacy that is Constitutionally protected. Account numbers, institutional relationships and personal financial history of purchases are not relevant to plaintiff's claim", but in the long run, if "I can't pay" is your only defense, and you do actually owe it, and it's the OC, you are spinning your wheels and have a very good chance of the plaintiff getting a summary judgment. Lotta work for nothin.

Who the heck said anything about using "i cant pay" as a defense? You're drinking a little bit too much of BB's koolaid. The defenses swirglirl was referring to were the affirmative defenses that one raises when answerring a complaint.

Can we get on the same page here or not? I feel like Im trying to prove a point to a few who just choose to ignore for the sake of ignoring and arguing....and pulling crap out of thin air like "I cant pay" as a defense.

educate yourself about answering summons and complaints, using affirmative defenses, and discovery please.

[2Bshinyandnew]

http://debt-consolidation-credit-rep...d.php?t=290466

which brings us right back around to what BB2U said, which is IMO the point of this thread "So lets see, your being sued by the OC, you defense is (and its not really a defense) I have no money to pay it. So that pretty much opens the door to the plaintiff to ask about your finances"

To which I would point out what a poster on this other board said in the thread you referenced here: http://debt-consolidation-credit-rep...1&postcount=26

swirlgirl = "It seems like you're going through a lot of wrangling here. But the big question is what are your defenses? Your defenses will help you decide on how to answer the interrogatories."

If your only defense is you can't pay, you are just complicating your life with all this crap. You can try and answer their interrogatories with a boatload of "Objection. Information is personal and confidential. Request intrudes on personal privacy that is Constitutionally protected. Account numbers, institutional relationships and personal financial history of purchases are not relevant to plaintiff's claim", but in the long run, if "I can't pay" is your only defense, and you do actually owe it, and it's the OC, you are spinning your wheels and have a very good chance of the plaintiff getting a summary judgment. Lotta work for nothin.

[CompTweaker]

kindly point to a specific post on that board that offers this information. I have read this particular board before and have found the information to be credible for the most part..so if you could show me a link that provides specific caselaw or statutes that indicate the the rules of civil procedure, specifically the discovery phase are somehow different in debt collection than in all other areas of law, I would appreciate it.

I'm pretty sure that outside the legal arena you don't have to disclose bank accounts and employment, but once a civil suit has started, if you fail to answer an interrogatory, and the moving party files a motion to compel,if the judge believes the requested information is related to the case, you will be court ordered to answer. Answering interrogatories in a vague manner intended to hinder the case and waste the courts time could result in sanctions against the defendant. Personally, I've spent a bit of time in court rooms as a student and folks who try to get over by being vague don't win. The judge is not an idiot.

http://debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=290466

[2Bshinyandnew]

Wrong!
What they do if you choose to not respond to an interrogatory, in my state and many other states, is this: If answers are not provided at all, the moving party is assumed that you put up no defense and they file a motion for summary judgement in their favor, and they will get it. But you can answer the integ without answering every single question....they DO NOT have the right to ask you personal information that does not pertain to the lawsuit, such as your current bank account, where you work, ....or your favorite color ....it doesnt pertain!

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=177

PLEASE go to the site above and start familiarizing yourself a little more. Maybe your state is different, I dont know. But what you and BB have posted so far doesnt work that way in my state and many others from people on this site that have CASE STUDIES posted, PROOF, EVIDENCE, ITS ALL THERE!

kindly point to a specific post on that board that offers this information. I have read this particular board before and have found the information to be credible for the most part..so if you could show me a link that provides specific caselaw or statutes that indicate the the rules of civil procedure, specifically the discovery phase are somehow different in debt collection than in all other areas of law, I would appreciate it.

I'm pretty sure that outside the legal arena you don't have to disclose bank accounts and employment, but once a civil suit has started, if you fail to answer an interrogatory, and the moving party files a motion to compel,if the judge believes the requested information is related to the case, you will be court ordered to answer. Answering interrogatories in a vague manner intended to hinder the case and waste the courts time could result in sanctions against the defendant. Personally, I've spent a bit of time in court rooms as a student and folks who try to get over by being vague don't win. The judge is not an idiot.

[fltoo]

Honestly, if you are filing BK soon, this is not that complicated. Chase sued me, got the judgment. I did not and would never respond to it. Why complicate your life?

Your wages cannot be garnished. Close your bank accounts until you file. I closed all my accounts two years ago and had absolutely no problem walking into a bank last week and opening up a new checking account.

After BK, you can file to vacate the judgment yourself, it is a simple matter, or have your lawyer do it for a nominal fee.

I would not waste one minute of my life fighting a judgment unless you really, really need to bide some time. In your case, let them get the judgment, file BK and vacate it.
Live simply and stress free.

[CompTweaker]

Now why don't you just go run along and do some of your own reading. Like really read what I said... I said fighting it works against a JDB or CA most effectively, but not against the OC.

Sorry, but this also needs to be pointed out. Even the OC HAS to provide evidence and the defendant is well within their right to ask for it! In the cases of some people, maybe the OC was bought out by another bank.....ever think about that? No! You just try to discourage evryone from fighting and "accept the default". And Ive seen you do that regardless if it is an OC CA or JDB. So run along and re-read some of your own posts!

[CompTweaker]

I don't think you really understand what BB2U is saying, CompTweaker. The rules of civil procedure apply in any civil case, regardless of type.

If you have responded to a lawsuit you open yourself up to being asked questions about your assets/work/bank accounts. That does NOT come after the plaintiff has won the lawsuit. If you do not respond to an interrogatory, the moving party can file a motion to compel and you can be court ordered to answer those questions. If the questions are relevant to the case, you can bet your sweet bippy the judge is going to make you answer them.

Unless you are collection proof and have nothing a creditor can attach, you don't want to put yourself in the position of being vulnerable to being forced by the judge to answer those interrogatories. Again, Interrogatories are asked during the discovery phase of a case, NOT AFTER the plaintiff has "won"

This website explains this here:

http://www.ihatedebt.com/DealingWithYourCreditors/TheDebtCollectionProcess/LegalProblems.php

"# Interrogatories - Interrogatories are questions that are given to you in written form before


A Debtors Exam is a supplemental proceeding, done AFTER a judgment. Two entirely different actions.

Wrong!
What they do if you choose to not respond to an interrogatory, in my state and many other states, is this: If answers are not provided at all, the moving party is assumed that you put up no defense and they file a motion for summary judgement in their favor, and they will get it. But you can answer the integ without answering every single question....they DO NOT have the right to ask you personal information that does not pertain to the lawsuit, such as your current bank account, where you work, ....or your favorite color ....it doesnt pertain!

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=177

PLEASE go to the site above and start familiarizing yourself a little more. Maybe your state is different, I dont know. But what you and BB have posted so far doesnt work that way in my state and many others from people on this site that have CASE STUDIES posted, PROOF, EVIDENCE, ITS ALL THERE!

[CompTweaker]

Yep, im tired with you too BB, because you always love to attempt to shut down anyone who chooses to fight a lawsuit and in EVERY single post, you make it personal. Well bud, Im not going there. I went that route with you before, and after I got down to your level, ....well you remember what happened.

Anyway, if YOUR state's specific rules are going to scare you away from fighting a lawsuit and you choose to settle for a default, I just feel that for the sake of disclosure, before you jump on people for asking questions or for advice about fighting lawsuits, that you state YOUR reasons in YOUR state for YOU! Instead of so widely generalizing like you and your state applies to everyone. I guess thats why we keep butting heads. I dont care why we butt heads, but I do care about sharing information that works. And what you share, well it doesnt work that way in my state, or along with many other states from what Ive gathered. Everything that Ive shared, along with the web site I linked, is full of proof with many stories and strategies THAT HAVE WORKED IN FIGHTING LAWSUITS! I'm 2 down with 1 to go and well on my way winning that one. So take it personal or whatever you want, I dont care. But expect me to chime in when you post information based on your states RCP and you try to force it down everyone else's throat, who may not be from your state, that comes here looking for help, and you're doing your best to discourage them!

[2Bshinyandnew]

BB, please go here http://www.debt-consolidation-credit...play.php?f=177

and get familiar with lawsuits. I dont have a lot of time to get into it right now, but just because they ask you questions in an interrogitory (not an answer to a complaint, thats what you file after receiving the summons and complaint, they make accusations in that, not ask questions).....but in the interrogatory, you dont have to give your bank account info, your work, or anything you own.....all of that would come later IF they won the lawsuit and you were in a debtor's exam.


Giving out personal information like your current bank account number is privileged info and has nothing to do with the debt in question of the lawsuit. I just want to make sure you realize that and dont run from potential default judgements especially if they're from a JDB. Just trying to help, not argue.

I don't think you really understand what BB2U is saying, CompTweaker. The rules of civil procedure apply in any civil case, regardless of type.

If you have responded to a lawsuit you open yourself up to being asked questions about your assets/work/bank accounts. That does NOT come after the plaintiff has won the lawsuit. If you do not respond to an interrogatory, the moving party can file a motion to compel and you can be court ordered to answer those questions. If the questions are relevant to the case, you can bet your sweet bippy the judge is going to make you answer them.

Unless you are collection proof and have nothing a creditor can attach, you don't want to put yourself in the position of being vulnerable to being forced by the judge to answer those interrogatories. Again, Interrogatories are asked during the discovery phase of a case, NOT AFTER the plaintiff has "won"

This website explains this here:

http://www.ihatedebt.com/DealingWithYourCreditors/TheDebtCollectionProcess/LegalProblems.php

"# Interrogatories - Interrogatories are questions that are given to you in written form before


A Debtors Exam is a supplemental proceeding, done AFTER a judgment. Two entirely different actions.