Credit Card Questions

MyTf:

If you will learn to do "Conditional Acceptance for Value", you will ALWAYS remain in honor and beat them at their own game. Then, when you are dishonored for lack of answer/reply, you can follow up with a Notorial Protest; or, Fault, Default, then Res Judicata by Default; then, file an Involuntary Bankruptcy against Citicorp. We assure you, THAT will get their attention very quickly! You are looking at a win-win situation here ONLY if you HAVE PHUN!!!!

[Jerseee]

Sadie,



I will ask you to do one thing in regards to the law firm debt collectors.



I am sure you have receiveda letter from them threatening this and that. And maybe even some phone calls. Well I want you to read the letter that they sent you. I mean really READ it. Critically read it. scrutinize every sentence. And what you will find is that if you dispute anything--they are now representing you.



If you read the letter you will see their offer to represent you. That is where your problem probably began.

Sadie and others,



Since this post is back up to the front, I will give you my Citi update: I have since received from an attorney debt collector a letter using Citi's language verbatim from their original correspondence about 12 usc 24 7th, that stupid Pottorf case, and he has stated he will proceed with litigation as he has now provided me with copies of my cc statements 100 days after I requested verification (therefore subjecting themselves to penalties under the FDCPA if I decide to pursue). Even funnier is that even if they do not proceed with litigation, they have violated the FDCPA by threatening to do so!! They boxed themselves in!! hahahaha!!! I hope he sues b/c I am looking forward to wiping the floor with this character and sharing my success story - the case will never reach the court room.



Anyway, yes, the Pottorf case does exist, but here is a brief glimpse from a headnote describing a portion of the case and why I decided it was way off point:



"Document entitled "Refusal to Accept for Cause Without Dishonor" filed in response to motion for partial summary judgment, which document challenged district court's jurisdiction over action, government's authority to bring action, and validity of underlying tax liens and assessments, would be stricken on ground that any defenses stated were insufficient as matter of law and that remaining material was immaterial and legally frivolous blah blah blah...".



So, maybe in THAT case, the response may have been frivilous. However, it is a good thing that each case is actually judged on its own merits, so we have no worries if they cite that case. It does nothing for them and, if anything, makes THEM look frivilous b/c that case deals with tax liens! How is the above case related in any way to an attempt to verify my debt or to conclude that my request for verification is illegitimate? Heck, I might just create an interesting counter claim against this attorney b/c I find his communication as "immaterial and legally frivilous" (he straight up copied and pasted Citi's original letter with 2 additional sentences in a separate paragraph - what a joker! He certainly hasn't even read the case that he cited in his own letter!!). Oh the fun I could have if I didn't have more important things to do.



-squirrels

[Jerseee]

Squirrels,



You can't let this go. It is a slam dunk!!! Also, I am sure that you know that CC statements are not considered verification.



hell, I will send you a couple of months worth of statements and I will see you in court. Hahahhahaaa, yeah right.



You gotta finish the job. Pleeeeeaaaassssse.

[suijuris]

Yeah, go get em!

[seeker]

am EXTREMELY interested in this thread. Citi is one of the cards that has a motion in court for judgment -- they are also the ones who obtained a fraudulant judgment with no Proof of service (since vacated). I did the Notarial Protest -- have the Certificate and notes here, the law firm that represents them (or did they buy the account -- they have never verified the debt or their involvement) another local attorney handles stuff for the big name firm outta the city -- but his name doesn't appear on anything and I never received the dunning letter/notice that he was "attempting to collect" only a court doc.

So, my question, especially in light of the Johnson v MBNA et al case, are there more like that out there?

My cousin the attorney was helping me to write and cite a motion to dismiss, however, when I mentioned J v MBNA, he said -- if you do the motion to dismiss, you are giving them jurisdiction AND you are admitting the debt existed in the first place -- SO, I need to rethink my strategy on going in to court and with what docs -- your help would make a HUGE success for us all AND slap Citi on the nose.

Additionally, although I didn't know at the time, I made an offer to pay and they refused (over the phone, damn!) I do have the woman's name and date etc, but I think my third part CD is much stronger. There must be a few cites regarding tendering a negotiable instrument and asking for verification, and their total silence regarding your communique, where are they? This would be so helpful! And, my cousin will ensure that the correct wording and application are used so that will not be a small mistake made to throw off the entire thing.



Squirrels, more info on your stuff? You can email me privately if you'd like -- but I think the entire forum is interested and would benefit. I am willing! I have the same situation with Discover, but all of a sudden, they are calling me demanding payment! (the same law firm)

Is this because of the CRA investigating the accounts for verification? From another post -- the CRAs are sending letters to all accounts stating it is in dispute -- what can be done about that???



Seeker

[Ice]

My cousin the attorney was helping me to write and cite a motion to dismiss, however, when I mentioned J v MBNA, he said -- if you do the motion to dismiss, you are giving them jurisdiction AND you are admitting the debt existed in the first place --

Nope. You would not be admitting the debt is valid if you state that they have not provided any evidence on the record. If they haven't got "evidence" of a debt... how can the debt be admitted to??

Seeker,



I'm not sure what else it is I should be sharing. Everything you need is right here on this site (and inside yourself!). But as things develop (if they do), I will post to keep the information flowing as to how I handle the matter and what results/responses occurred therefrom.



-squirrels

Greetings Y'all,

It has been a long while since my last post. However, I am still here, and STILL a supporter of freedom, justice, truth and equality.



I am ringing in because the Department of Justice has a "citizen complaint form." If you feel like you have been victimized by the actions of these bureaucraps, GET THE CRIMINALS TO ANSWER FOR THE CRIME.



Just a thought, and perhaps a way to get some leverage and have your position taken seriously...



HAVE A GREAT SUMMER!

[sadie]

seeker,



check your state rules of civil procedure - usually chapter 12 on pleadings, motions etc. look for the

Motion to Dismiss reasons:

e.g. lack of subject matter jurisdiction

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted

failure of proper service

etc., etc.

I would throw every reason in there - it may say something in your rules about if you don't bring up a reason now then you can't bring it up later



Right away you are challenging jurisdiction so I don't see how filing the motion gives them jurisdiction, and you are saying they don't have a claim so how would this be admitting a debt?

Ask your atty. cousin about it and do your own research.