Wow They Put It In Writing!!!!

This is a follow-up from my previous thread *Interesting Update on my FCU Accounts* Feel free to read that thread as well and respond accordingly.

Anyway, I just received a FedEx package from the second FCU - the one who told me that they destroy original Prom Notes to save space. Well the manager responded and sent a letter that says *I received your correspondence today and as I explained to you during our initial conversation we do not retain our original documents except for mortgage loans. More and more companies are turing to paperless transactions . . .*

Can you say violation of 3-305 of the UCC?? She just said she doesn't have the original Promissory Note. Therefore they are not a Holder in Due Course entitled to collect payment from me on this account. And by the way, the fact that more and more companies are turing to paperless transactions is no defense under the UCC. The original Prom Note is required.

COOOOOOL!

Write her and let her know that you will be in touch re her destruction of evidence, which (to my knowledge) is a crime.

HB

i dunno that i'd do that hb, she may only be doing her "job." you'd have to prove some definite intent to win that argument methinks...

however, that doesn't mean you can't haul the institution up...

jon

Originally Posted by jmunson

i dunno that i'd do that hb, she may only be doing her "job." you'd have to prove some definite intent to win that argument methinks...

however, that doesn't mean you can't haul the institution up...

jon

So jon am I right? She says the original loan documents are no longer available and using a paperless filing system is no good reason for destroying the originals under the UCC, right?

[Jerseee]

cute chick,

Maybe you should read the Paper Reduction Act. I think they can use this as an out.

I believe you may need more evidence of their intent. You are close but that admission that she gave you may be defended somewhat successfully from my view.

Not the gospel, mind you. ;-)

Originally Posted by Jerseee

cute chick,

Maybe you should read the Paper Reduction Act. I think they can use this as an out.

I believe you may need more evidence of their intent. You are close but that admission that she gave you may be defended somewhat successfully from my view.

Not the gospel, mind you. ;-)

Ok Jersee thanks for the heads up! I'll look at the Paper Reduction Act. Nevertheless, they still must overcome that huge hurdle of verifying the validity of the original loan agreement as this account has been deleted from my credit reports. ;-)

[Camino]

Try that excuse for not having your "original drivers license" on you when you get stopped. Officer...I am just obeying the law... that says I, as a commercial entity, I should reduce my paper to digital form.....I will fax you a copy of the original copy of my license when I get home..... hahahahahaha

Like that would fly......

Originally Posted by Camino

Try that excuse for not having your "original drivers license" on you when you get stopped. Officer...I am just obeying the law... that says I, as a commercial entity, I should reduce my paper to digital form.....I will fax you a copy of the original copy of my license when I get home..... hahahahahaha

Like that would fly......

LOL I like that analogy! That's real funny!!!!

And if you look closely at her statement, the Credit Union saved the original Prom Notes for mortgage loans but not for other loans such as car loans or personal loans. What's that all about? The UCC doesn't prefer one type of loan over another . . . . . .

[Jerseee]

Yeah Good analogy for a quick laugh but, I see something different in the future if you go up that road.

I see the tides changing on you right in front of your eyes.

You see, I say that you need more to go on because now you are entering into their business practices and how their practice is compliant with the law and/or code.

yes you are right about originals being destroyed but that can be argued if they are complaint with the paper reduction act and they have a digital copy of the original.

You need to focus on the fraud and malicious intent to defraud and how the use of the paper reduction act works against consumers.

This is just an observation of the situation if they used the paper reduction act as a defense.

Not the gospel. You need to gather more evidence of their misconduct through their greed.

Hope that helps

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Yeah Good analogy for a quick laugh but, I see something different in the future if you go up that road.

I see the tides changing on you right in front of your eyes.

You see, I say that you need more to go on because now you are entering into their business practices and how their practice is compliant with the law and/or code.

yes you are right about originals being destroyed but that can be argued if they are complaint with the paper reduction act and they have a digital copy of the original.

You need to focus on the fraud and malicious intent to defraud and how the use of the paper reduction act works against consumers.

This is just an observation of the situation if they used the paper reduction act as a defense.

Not the gospel. You need to gather more evidence of their misconduct through their greed.

Hope that helps

Yes Jerseee I did some research on this tonight and I thought about how their *electronic copies* could be considered to be duplicates which would be treated like an original in court according to the Federal Rules of Evidence. This is their defense.

I guess I'm confused now . . . . Re-read her statement again. All she said was * we do not retain our original documents except for mortgage loans. More and more companies are turing to paperless transactions . . .* We do not retain our original documents????? The words *We do not retain* can mean anything from making a copy of the original and shredding the document to making a copy of the original document BEFORE they are sold to a 3rd party. Right? SHE NEVER SAID WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ORIGINAL PROM NOTE IN THIS LETTER!!!

In other words, how can I rest easy and think that my original Prom Note was destroyed /shredded by the Credit Union and not sold to a 3rd party who may come after me for payment someday??? And if the latter is true, I would be subject to double liability because whomever has possession of the original Prom Note is legally entitled to payment. . . . . Hmmm.

It should be noted that UCC 3-302 and 3-308 only allows non-holders of a negotiable instrument to recover if the original document is lost or stolen. The code is silent with respect to non-holders willfully destroying the original in an effort to comply with the Paper Reduction Act . . . .

Furthermore, why save original Prom Notes for home loans and not for other types of loans? The UCC and other relevant laws do not make such a distinction between home loans and personal loans . . . . Hmmm.

Something ain't right here . . . . . .