Being Sued For Credit Card Bill

[immikeswfe]

Illinois

I have been served with papers for an old Credit Card bill. Pretty sure this is a collection agency suing for the credit card company(capitol one already charged off) The original Credit limit was only 800....now they say they are suing for 2300.00. This was back in 2002 or 2003 I honestly don't remember. I do know however that I did not CHARGE over the $800.00 limit. Can I ask when I go to court for a detailed listing of the charges and how they arrived at the 2300.00 balance? I would think I could, don't they need to PROVE I owe money. I cannot PROVE I don't if I don't know what I owed? I would think that would be like me going to court to say anyone of YOU owed me money......don't I need to show detailed proof? How do judges in court feel seeing that the fee's and charges are now 3 times + the original debt.....I've never been to court for something like this....Could a judge say I only owe the original amount? Should I contact a lawyer....would it even be a reasonable idea to do so?

Looking for answers
ThanksWhat is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?

[averad]

They do charge interest.

[Betty]

Yep - that interest adds up.

[debtcollector`]

Plus court costs and attorney fees.

[immikeswfe]

If my debt is with Capitol one......they charged off January 2004. Last payment to them was April 2003.....Now a collection agency purchased the debt....why wouldn't I owe the amount charged off....which is 1400.....still over the 800 limit...but now they say I owe 2300.....Very confused. Doesn't the collection agency only pay a portion of the debt to Capitol one anyway when they purchase?

[SimpleMind]

When you took the card with Capitol One, you did sign a contract. The contract probably said, you are subject to a $39.00 late fee for each month you are late, $39.00 over the limit fee for each month you are over the limit, and are subject to the default interest rate when you start to default (usually 30 to 32%). With that being said, the late fees and interest have probably put you over the limit. So you are being charged $78.00 a month in those fees plus the 30% interest. $800.00 can increase to $2,300 in a short period of time.

A judge will probably make you pay the full balance since you did sign the contract agreeing to those terms when you took the card. There is a possiblity you may settle for a payoff. Lets say if you probably could settle for $1,500.. But the disadvantage is you will probably receive a 1099 form in the mail around taxtime. The remaining balance of $700 will be taxable income.

Really you have no choice but to make a settlement or pay the entire balance. You are subject to the $2300 you are being sued.

[immikeswfe]

I'm just curious....once the original debtor charges off the debt (in this case @ 1400.00) how can the terms of the contract be passed along to a 2nd possibly 3rd party down the line. And.....can I ask for a detailed listing of how the amount now reaches 2300.00?

[Debt Guy]

once the original debtor charges off the debt (in this case @ 1400.00) how can the terms of the contract be passed along to a 2nd possibly 3rd party down the line.

Yes.

And.....can I ask for a detailed listing of how the amount now reaches 2300.00

Yes. If you do it correctly. You must file a response to the lawsuit. This response is called and general denial. You also file a motion for discovery to require the plaintiff to provide documentation to support the debt and the amount.

The process is not hard -- but, it is very precise. Unless you are willing to hire an attorney, you must educate yourself how to follow all the court procedures.

[longsally111]

you said that this happenned in 2003? What is the SOL in your state? That might be an affirmative defense if they sue you.

[fatlard]

Originally Posted by longsally111

you said that this happenned in 2003? What is the SOL in your state? That might be an affirmative defense if they sue you.

Unfortunately, the statute of limitation 5 years or 10 years (some discussion here regarding which one..). Neither will apply since your last payment was 2003.

Debt Guy is correct. You do need to file a response within the 30 days.

However, you also can send a detailed validation letter to the lawyers. Did the lawyers/debt collector send you a letter via regular USPS mentioning validation and stating they are "debt collectors.?"

If they did, then by their own admission, they are debt collectors and as such they fall under the rules of the FDCPA, which requires validating. Also, many states, CA for one, have their own state laws requiring validation, that not only cover the debt collectors and lawyers, but the original creditor as well. Check your state laws on the matter.

Even if they say they are just lawyers, you can still challenge this in court by determining if most of their business is in collections. Their is a formula (%) to determine if they are considered such, but I can not find the exact figures at the moment. It could be used in your case.

Most of the time, these rent-a-lawyers/debt collectors are using the courts to scare people into settlements or hoping a no-show from the defendant and they win by default. Most of the time, they do not have the original documents to prove anything. You have to determine how you want to proceed.

It depends on the lawyer and original creditor, but most will not settle for anything less than 90% of the amount asked for. I have read that having a lawyer to negotiate for you is best, they can, if your are lucky, sometimes bring it down to 40-60%.

If this is your only debt problem and since it is so low, I would not recommend bankruptcy, but it does offer full protection from any pre/post judgments/garnished wages/most debts, etc. So, either settle or go to court pro se/with counsel.

Good luck!

I just wanted to add one more thing to my previous post because I was not very clear on this issue.

The reason you want to validate is twofold;
1. To determine if they can prove they own the debt (original documents)
2. Hoping they won't respond ...which is what you really want and most likely they will not.

If they do not respond within the 30 days from you validation letter and are proceeding with the suit, you can counter-sue them in small claims court for up to $1000 plus court fees, etc for not following the rules under the FDCPA and/or state laws. You can hire court appointed agents for $25 to $50 to serve them papers (include fee into lawsuit.)

The purpose is not really to win, although that would be ok, it is to give you leverage against the lawyers to drop the case or settle for cheap.

[debtcollector`]

Originally Posted by Kanman

I just wanted to add one more thing to my previous post because I was not very clear on this issue.

The reason you want to validate is twofold;
1. To determine if they can prove they own the debt (original documents)
2. Hoping they won't respond ...which is what you really want and most likely they will not.

If they do not respond within the 30 days from you validation letter and are proceeding with the suit, you can counter-sue them in small claims court for up to $1000 plus court fees, etc for not following the rules under the FDCPA and/or state laws. You can hire court appointed agents for $25 to $50 to serve them papers (include fee into lawsuit.)

The purpose is not really to win, although that would be ok, it is to give you leverage against the lawyers to drop the case or settle for cheap.

Wrong. The suit has already been filed. FDCPA no longer applies. I eagerly await your incorrect dumbass comment.

Originally Posted by debtcollector`

Wrong. The suit has already been filed. FDCPA no longer applies. I eagerly await your incorrect dumbass comment.

Wrong... #1. I would never believe ANYTHING a debt collector says and #2 in this case, the appeals court determined:

"Brennan (plaintiff collection agency attorney) violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b) when he obtained a default judgment against Spears (defendant) after Spears had notified Brennan in writing that the debt was being disputed and before Brennan had mailed verification of the debt to Spears."

Spears vs. Brennan [url]http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinions/archive/03260101.ewn.html[/url]

This means that you have an absolute defense in court to deny them judgment if they still have not validated the debt. Once you get your FDCPA dispute letter in, the collector cannot even get a judgment until they satisfy the FDCPA law. The appeals court overturned the default summary judgment in part because the collection agency lawyer did not meet the rules of the FDCPA.

This could be grounds for getting a default judgment vacated. It's also another violation of the FDCPA and you can collect $1,000 from them.

Looks like you are the dumbass.

[Debt Guy]

This means that you have an absolute defense in court to deny them judgment if they still have not validated the debt. Once you get your FDCPA dispute letter in, the collector cannot even get a judgment until they satisfy the FDCPA law. The appeals court overturned the default summary judgment in part because the collection agency lawyer did not meet the rules of the FDCPA.

This could be grounds for getting a default judgment vacated. It's also another violation of the FDCPA and you can collect $1,000 from them.

There is more to Brennan than you are understanding. Regardless that I believe you are factually wrong, do you seriously think this novice (mikeswife) is capable of effectively arguing Brennan before this state court judge who does not want to hear about a bunch of stuff he does not understand?

Remembering that I think you are in error; even if by some chance you are right, the only way the OP can prevail is to appeal this whole mess to federal court after she loses in state court. Do you really think this is going to happen? Do you reall think someone who does not understand the basic terms of her cardholder agreement or how compound interest works is going to navigate throught the federal court maze?

Finally, repeating again I think you are wrong; but assuming you are right -- and assuming the OP files the federal appeal and wins -- the best that is going to happen is she will be entitled to $1000 which can be used to offset her liability on the debt.

The OP would be much smarter and it would be far less expensive to just to make the best deal she can to settle this obligation which she admits she owes.

Now, go ahead and say something else that will prove that you could not buy a clue.