Defendants responses To Plaintiffs First Request For Admissions

[masterduke]

Hear are the answers to a discovery document sent to me. Will include questions and answers. Need help with ques.7 it is a definite "box you in" question so any ideas would be taken for entertainment purposes only.

1)That the defendant had a discover credit card with an account number of
***********
Response: Admitted

2)That defendant did not dispute the balance on the last billing statement, in writing within 60 days of recieving statement.

Response: Defendant requires clarification. Is the last billing statement plaintiff refers to, that it is that of discover bank or great seneca fin. corp?
Notwithstanding the defendants response, defendant did not waive statutory
remedies provided per federal Fair Credit reporting Act or Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and, state of mich similar statutory acts.

3)That defendant did not dispute, in writing, any charges on plaintiffs statements within 60 days of recieving such statement.

Response: Defendant requires clarification. Does plaintiff refer to statements from discover bank or, that of great seneca fin. corp?

4)That all payments have been properly credited.

Response: Defendant requires clarification. Defendant does not understand the admissions request.

5) That plaintiff sued for $200 million and 22 cents, which reflects the principal balance due and owing at the time of the charge off.

Response: Admitted

6)That balance plaintiff sued for is the correct balance.

Response: Deny

7)That Defendant has no records or written evidence to show that any of the forgoing is incorrect in any respect.

Response: What do ya'll think?

[wisper]

I don't want to waste your time, but is the key here item 6 where the am't was denied?

How can I get a CC with that much credit?

[charlesa6]

That beat me too.

[seeker]

Why are you admitting #1? The rest are moot if you do.

#2 -- Defendant neither admits nor denies. Defendant requires the entire file for personal review to ascertain the answer to this statement. Or did you send a VoD with a RRR ? If you add all that, you have added incriminating evidence-- how did you come by that knowledge?
#3 -- Defendant neither admits nor denies. ditto #2
#4 -- Defendant neither admits nor denies. Defendant requires personal review of all ledgers containing any book keeping entries pertaining to the alleged account to ascertain the answer to this statement.
$5 -- Defendant neither admits nor denies. Defendant equires original statements and or contracts to ascertain the correctness of this statement.

What is with number 6 -- Defendant neither admits nor denies. Defendant requires personal review of all ledgers containing any book keeping entries pertaining to the alleged account. Defendant also requires personal review of original statements, transaction slips and contracts with original wet ink signatures to ascertain the correctness of this statement.

#7 -- Did you do a VoD? If so, then yes, court should have received a certified copy of the VoD with RRR and validated, as filed in the county recorders office, from the county recorder. (you request they send it there)

Just off the top of my head. But I would NEVER ADMIT anything unless it was documentable and in MY FAVOR! As in #7.

But that's jsut what I would do. Choose your path.

Seeker

[masterduke]

Thanks All. This debt attorney/court stuff seems pretty riduculus when viewed in context with what is happening in LA. MISS. AL.
My heart goes out to all of those people. It also displays the ineptness of
the so called "gov" in dealing with this. Send in the "troops". "martial law" that will help.
These are people who are trained to kill people. which is really the only function of "government" to begin with
This awful, heartbreaking event may give the jumpstart to permanent martial law that has been forwarded and desired by certain indiviuals for quite some time now. Off topic sorry.