MBNA TURNS TO ATTORNEYS

[dochand]

Following non-response to my VOD/CPN, and numerous daily attempts to reach me by phone (never took one call from them), finally received what I expected - an 'attempt to collect a debt' letter from an attorney firm claiming to represent MBNA and collect the alleged 50K debt that I owe and have already discharged with my CPN. Naturally, and again as expected, they have not verified the alleged debt. Nor have they returned the CPN or corresponded with me in any written fashion.



They have offered me numerous methods to pay. They also state that I may dispute the debt in writing and that they will supply verification of the debt.



So, my response to them should be?



Thanx for all thoughts!



Doc

[gregtu]

dochand, was this a credit card?

[Jerseee]

First of all Doc read the letter. I mean READ the letter.



Why do you need to dispute a debt that is already verified? If they have verification--demand to see it.



The words I have been posting for so long should be ringing in your ears by now---NEVER ARGUE!!!!



Do you see what they are trying to do? Doesn't the word "dispute" mean to argue?



Do you see the power of not arguing now?



As soon as you dispute--you lose.



Critically read the letter and you will see that they want to represent you. So let's get this straight.......



They have proof of the debt.



They want you to dispute.



You will lose by default if you dispute because you are disputing the terms of the contract and not demanding verification of the debt.



They want to represent you in the matter at the same time they are representing MBNA.



I think you should read the letter---you will be surprised.

[Ice]

MBNA has been sanctioned a few times in court because of its violation of collection laws. Ever do a search of MBNA?? You might be surprised at what you find.

[iamfreeru2]

dochand,



I have dealt with MBNA myself and received letters from their deb-torneys. When I responded and said verify the debt and provided them with an arbitration award in my favor they went away. The thing is they cannot verify the debt and never will. Like Jerseee says: "Why do you need to dispute a debt that is already verified? If they have verification--demand to see it."



iamfreeru2

[dochand]

hi guys and gals!



Thanx for the replies.



Yes, this was a credit card.



I'm somewhat familiar with the MBNA sanctions and I have also firmly ingrained in my being the 'never argue' principle thanxs to Jerseee & company.



My question did not at all envision any disputes of any kind. I simply wanted to know an example of what the vebiage of the response should be. Do I simply seek to demand certified verification? Or do I also include the code again, etc.. In other words, how wordy should the response be?



My initial thoughts were something along these lines:



Dear Debtorney,



In order to remain in honor, I have asked for certified verification of the alleged debt from MBNA. In addition, I enclosed a good-faith payment.



To date, I have neither received certified verification of the alleged debt, nor have I had my good-faith payment returned. I am not disputing the alleged debt. I simply require certified verification of such alleged debt.



Please provide certified verification of the alleged debt.



Very truly yours,



Doc



After reading it, I began to question whether this was sufficient at this juncture. Thus, my request for your thoughts.



Thank you,



Doc

Make sure you specify the date that you sent the payment, and be clear that you sent it to MBNA. (Precise never hurts.)



I would also ask if MBNA:



1. Discharged the alleged debt with the good faith payment that was tendered by me on XX-XX-04?



or



2. Refused the aforestated payment that was tendered.





Doc, using the word tender will later allow you to use this against them.



"UCC § 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.



(a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.



<font color=red>(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.[/color]



(c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument, the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument."



Not given as advice, just putting down what I'd do. Actually, I am doing this with several issues, because what I am actually leading up to is being able to lay out on the table the times that I have asked for certified verification, and even tendered payment (which was refused by ignorance of same) and I have tried to act in good faith and all I have received are harassing phone calls (which I am recording now and notifying them of same) and threats to sue.



This will show good in my favor.



Oh Yeah, DON'T use the above cite in your letter. Save that for the party... They will see it soon enough.



Jerseee, correct me if I am wrong, but all you are doing is asking non-argumenative questions. Questions that show good faith.

[Jerseee]

Both of you have GOT IT!!!!



I am in love with those responses right now!!!!!



YOu have both got it!!! I constatntly stress that everyone read and respond appropriately. This encourages learning, makes your response unique, and avoids boilerplate docs!!



Doc, always put them on notice of the code, in every letter.



HB, yes. I am constantly asking the question that they never answer. They come up with all other kinds of responses but, I am only concern about certified verification. Something that they will never give.



Great job guys!

[dochand]

Thank you Henry & Jerseee!



It's a good feeling to know that you've 'got it' and now, with your guidance and assistance I feel quite ready to respond.



I'll keep you all posted as to the outcome, although I do have my expectations of what it will be.



Here's to continued success for us all!



Doc

[seeker]

I love the Johnson v MBNA case from THIS year. It states that MBNA is responsible for providing proof that they are the "holder in due course" and that if they cannot provide the original contract, they have not proved this fact.



I have some good information from a call the other night. It was suggested that we should demand to see a certified copy of the "attorney's contract" that the debt-attorney claims to have with the CC. What rights and authority does it imbue him with? Is he truly representing them as they authorized? Biggest -- does he have one??? If not, file a complaint with the state bar for unauthorized practice of law.



Some good new ammunition.



Make them accountable!



Seeker