Another Junk Debt Buyer Lawsuit

[Friendsplacect]

Being sued for a second time from the same Junk Debt Buyer and the same Debt and the same lawyer.
The last case was withdrawn and they re-filed this year.

After examining the complaint I found it flawed. So I filed a Motion To Dismiss pursuent to section 10-72 of the practice book and Ct General Statute 52-118 titled "Action by assignee of chose in action".
[ The assignee and equitable and bona fide owner of any chose in action, not negotiable, may sue theron in his own name. Such a plaintiff shall allege in his complaint that he is the actual bona fide owner of the chose in action, and set forth when and how he acquired title]

The Complaint does not allege when and how.

The Plaintif's attorney files an objection stating that the complaint properly alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of the chose in action and that the chose in action was acquired by assignment. They attached an exhibit to their objection. This exhibit was not part of the complaint.
The exhibit is titled "Bill Of Sale" and has a figure of $20,845,000. Does not have my name on it or any account number. The purchase price on the Bill Of Sale is blacked out. Its signed by the Vice President of Chase.

I was wondering since this document is being entered into evidence shall I subpoena the Vice President of Chase to testify to the authenticity of this document?

[masterduke]

The Erwin Rommel School of Law with Justin Garriet has a segment about demanding a jury trail and the supeona of various federal bank and thrift regulators. I don't know if anyone has ever done this? But I believe it is aimed at exposing the debt attorney for the frauds that they are. That assignment+ account stated crap is the method of lying the defendant into 'proving' culpablity. They use this same crap time and time again. It is really the only method they use. And we all knows where it goes from there...... What A dirty racket they have constructed. Sure seems like a criminal enterprise. Cloaked in legality.

[Livefire]

Originally Posted by Friendsplacect

Being sued for a second time from the same Junk Debt Buyer and the same Debt and the same lawyer.
The last case was withdrawn and they re-filed this year.

After examining the complaint I found it flawed. So I filed a Motion To Dismiss pursuent to section 10-72 of the practice book and Ct General Statute 52-118 titled "Action by assignee of chose in action".
[ The assignee and equitable and bona fide owner of any chose in action, not negotiable, may sue theron in his own name. Such a plaintiff shall allege in his complaint that he is the actual bona fide owner of the chose in action, and set forth when and how he acquired title]

The Complaint does not allege when and how.

The Plaintif's attorney files an objection stating that the complaint properly alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of the chose in action and that the chose in action was acquired by assignment. They attached an exhibit to their objection. This exhibit was not part of the complaint.
The exhibit is titled "Bill Of Sale" and has a figure of $20,845,000. Does not have my name on it or any account number. The purchase price on the Bill Of Sale is blacked out. Its signed by the Vice President of Chase.

I was wondering since this document is being entered into evidence shall I subpoena the Vice President of Chase to testify to the authenticity of this document?

Im sure you dont owe over 20 million! By what you're saying it seems the atty has bought a block of bad paper and is now trying to collect on it. Obviously they have purchased it, that alone should be grounds to get it tossed out. Nonetheless, I would bring up the fact in your answer to their objection that NOWHERE on this exhibit, can one see any account information that would personally be attached to you, therefore the exhibit is irrelavent to the case.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Friendsplacect

Being sued for a second time from the same Junk Debt Buyer and the same Debt and the same lawyer.
The last case was withdrawn and they re-filed this year.

After examining the complaint I found it flawed.

I hope that you remember to answer the Complaint in the allotted time. If any part of the numbered allegations are incorrect just write Denied.

[gldskr]

Originally Posted by Livefire

Im sure you dont owe over 20 million! By what you're saying it seems the atty has bought a block of bad paper and is now trying to collect on it. Obviously they have purchased it, that alone should be grounds to get it tossed out. Nonetheless, I would bring up the fact in your answer to their objection that NOWHERE on this exhibit, can one see any account information that would personally be attached to you, therefore the exhibit is irrelavent to the case.

This is correct for the most part. What is telling about the "Bill of Sale" is what is missing. A Bill of Sale is simply a receipt and what this receipt shows is that the plaintiff "bought" $20+ million for an undisclosed amount. Seems they may have made a good deal.

Obviously those numbers don't exist in a vacuum so the source must be identified. That source is the assignment agreement itself that identifies what, in fact, is being assigned. In order for the plaintiff to obtain title, Chase must have title first, which includes all contract documentation that is then passed to the plaintiff as part of the assignment.

One could conceivably draw up a Bill of Sale equivilent to what the plaintiff has provided to be used as a setoff. In this scenario the burden of proof would have to be the same for each party.

So far, the plaintiff has evidence of a transaction the details of which are undetermined. He has admitted that this transaction is the result of an assignment. Whether your portion of this sum is included in the assignment remains to be seen. Since he has opened the door, demand that the assignment agreement be brought into evidence. If that agreement does not list anything that can be attrbuted to you, he is without jurisdiction to persue his case.

I suspect that the assignment agreement confers the right of collection only, for the undisclosed sum found in the Bill of Sale. Title to the alleged debt does not exist, that's why plaintiff is a mere debt collector and has no standing.

gldskr

[masterduke]

Originally Posted by gldskr

This is correct for the most part. What is telling about the "Bill of Sale" is what is missing. A Bill of Sale is simply a receipt and what this receipt shows is that the plaintiff "bought" $20+ million for an undisclosed amount. Seems they may have made a good deal.

Obviously those numbers don't exist in a vacuum so the source must be identified. That source is the assignment agreement itself that identifies what, in fact, is being assigned. In order for the plaintiff to obtain title, Chase must have title first, which includes all contract documentation that is then passed to the plaintiff as part of the assignment.

One could conceivably draw up a Bill of Sale equivilent to what the plaintiff has provided to be used as a setoff. In this scenario the burden of proof would have to be the same for each party.

So far, the plaintiff has evidence of a transaction the details of which are undetermined. He has admitted that this transaction is the result of an assignment. Whether your portion of this sum is included in the assignment remains to be seen. Since he has opened the door, demand that the assignment agreement be brought into evidence. If that agreement does not list anything that can be attrbuted to you, he is without jurisdiction to persue his case.

I suspect that the assignment agreement confers the right of collection only, for the undisclosed sum found in the Bill of Sale. Title to the alleged debt does not exist, that's why plaintiff is a mere debt collector and has no standing.

gldskr

BRILLIANT! Another insightful post. Thank you.

[robhalford88]

Did you receive a notice of assignment of debt?
If not, then there is your out. That and the so called bill of sale shows nothing other than a transaction between 2 parties, neither of which are you, that may or may not involve your alleged debt.
No notice of assignment BEFORE this sale and you have no debt.

[Friendsplacect]

Originally Posted by robhalford88

Did you receive a notice of assignment of debt?
If not, then there is your out. That and the so called bill of sale shows nothing other than a transaction between 2 parties, neither of which are you, that may or may not involve your alleged debt.
No notice of assignment BEFORE this sale and you have no debt.

No not on this one, no assignment but the same Lawyer did railroad me at a pre-trial fact finding hearing on a different case with the alleged assignment. Of course nobody was there to testify to the authenticity of the document so I had to object to it being entered into evidence.

But I wonder how the scumbag judge is going to rule on this one.