Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shoonra
You already have a contract with the credit card company. There were some forms you had to sign to get the credit card.
You would do well to review all of them (ask the bank, or the credit card company itself, for a set of all the forms used to get a card, to make sure you see a full set).
The forms probably made it clear that you agreed to pay the credit card bills and, if you didn't, the credit card company could farm out the bills to a collection office and/or take you to court.
The collection agency doesn't need a contract between itself and you. There's a contract between you and the credit card company, and another between the credit card company and the collection agency. That's good enough.
|
mrg does not presume to speak for dmc53.
mrg seriously questions the motives, and accuracy of Mr. Shoonra's statement to Mr. dmc53.
Does Shoonra presume to speak for Mr. dmc53?
Does it not seem that Shoonra does indeed presume to speak for Mr. dmc53?
Shoonra knows as a matter of provable fact in law that Mr. dmc53 already has a contract with the credit card company?
Shoonra was there?
Did dmc53 provide Shoonra with verification by affidavit, oath, or deposition any validation that Mr. dmc53 already has a contract with the credit card company?
Why would Mr. dmc53 not ask for the full set of forms that dmc53
actually or purportedly signed, rather than blanks, as Shoonra seems to suggest?
Do the forms
actually make clear, or
probably make clear?
And what governs the definition of "makes clear?"
Unsophisticated consumer?
Does Mr. dmc53 appear to be asking to apply for a credit card?
Do debt collectors need to fully adhere to FDCPA?
Do credit card companies need to fully adhere to TILA?
Do banks need to fully adhere to TILA?
Shoonra is in possession of truth as a provable fact in law that the debt collector has adhered to, and is adhering to FDCPA to the letter of the law?
Shoonra is in possession of truth as a provable fact in law that First National Bank has adhered to TILA to the letter of the law in its alleged contract, or other alleged dealings with Mr. dmc53?
Shoonra is in possession of truth in fact that the credit card company has adhered to TILA to the letter of the law in its alleged contract, or other alleged dealings with dmc53?
Shoonra is absolutely certain there is, as a provable matter of fact in law, a "contract between [dmc53] and the credit card company, and another between the credit card company and the collection agency?"
Shoonra was there?
And Shoonra hopes to accomplish exactly what by attempting to, and possibly succeeding to convince Mr. dmc53 to accept without question that there actually exists as a provable fact in law a valid "contract between [dmc53] and the credit card company, and another between the credit card company and the collection agency"?
Shoonra knows as a matter of fact in law that the referenced presentment Mr. dmc53 received is anything more than an allegation, or allegation of a claim, or an attempt by a third party debt collector to make a collection?
Shoonra has examined it and/or has first hand knowledge?
Shoonra knows as a matter of fact in law that Mr. dmc53 has no rights to see proof by valid substantiated verification of
all claims, whether stated, presumed, assumed, implied, insinuated, assumed, etc., according to the operative law, and any other applicable law that Mr. dmc53 and his life, liberty, and property is protected by?
Shoonra suggests that Mr. dmc53 has no such rights to question allegations and alleged claims, and Shoonra has made a value judgement as to Mr. dmc53's character based upon unsubstantiated allegations?
Shoonra understands the concept of due process of law?
Shoonra is certain that dmc53 is not asking for due process?
Is Shoonra a bit presumptuous?
Does Shoonra not seem to have a proclivity for postulating and tendering presumptions, and then proceeding as if what is presumed, is fact?
What exactly is a credit card company?
What is a bank?
What is the difference?
What
exactly is a contract?
What are
all the conditions of a credit card contract?
Why would not Shoonra suggest that Mr. dmc53 acquire a lawful, authentic, acknowledged, certified, sworn, true, signed, and dated
verified copy, (a well defined legal term) showing front and back, of those forms that Shoonra alludes to, that Mr. dmc53 allegedly signed as contract, and then compare each word, phrase, sentence, clause, paragraph, section etc., as well as the whole, and the parts of the whole in relation to the whole, with and against TILA, and any other law that may shed light in favor of Mr. dmc53's rights on the alleged claim?
Shoonra is not employing artifice to induce Mr. dmc53 to fall into error, or to detain him in it, so that he may make an agreement contrary to his best interests?
