what law has been broken?

[zim69]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

Hi All,
I was sued by a collections agency but I was never served a summons. Obviously, I never made it to court and a judgment was made. I plan to appeal to vacate the judgment on several grounds. However, there is one issue in particular that I need some expert commentary on....

Assume that the statute of limitations has expired and the law firm representing the collections agency has filed a lawsuit to recover the money. If the law firm swears under oath that they have a right to the money when, in fact, they know that the statute of limitations has expired,
(1) can this be considered perjury?
(2) can this be considered fraud?

Finally, if this law firm consistently sends summons to incorrect addresses in order to ensure that the summoned individual is not aware of the lawsuit until after judgment is made
(3) what law has been broken?

Thank you!!!!
z

 

[nrknlknek]

I don't see that any laws have been violated. If you believe their facts are inaccurate, then you can challenge them.

 

[Dandy Don]

Laws about proper notice to a defendant have been broken (what incorrect address do you claim they sent your notice to?) and debt collection laws (perhaps the Fair Debt Credit Act) about the rule for statute of limitations on al debt.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Laws about proper notice to a defendant have been broken (what incorrect address do you claim they sent your notice to?) and debt collection laws (perhaps the Fair Debt Credit Act) about the rule for statute of limitations on al debt.

Do I need to call JETX over here to straighten you out again? Your entire response is incorrect.

 

[Antigone*]

Do I need to call JETX over here to straighten you out again? Your entire response is incorrect.

You go YAG...bring on the pit bull!!!

 

[Dandy Don]

Please help the original poster by explaining exactly what about my response was incorrect.

 

[Zigner]

Please help the original poster by explaining exactly what about my response was incorrect.

I can tell you that the SOL does not prevent pursuit of a debt.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Please help the original poster by explaining exactly what about my response was incorrect.

First of all, I already replied to the poster in his original thread - this is a duplicate.

Second, you're the one who needs to support his reply, not me (remember, only one of us is a NY lawyer).

Third, each of these questions has been asked and answered before. If the OP does come back, 5 minutes of searching will give him all the answers he needs.

 

[Dandy Don]

So obviously you are more interested in arguing than answering a question. You only NOW mention that it's a duplicate when you could have mentioned that before.

 

[zim69]

First of all, I already replied to the poster in his original thread - this is a duplicate.

Your replies were monosyllabic and not very helpful.

Second, you're the one who needs to support his reply, not me (remember, only one of us is a NY lawyer).

I'm looking for thoughtful replies. If, as you claim, you have no expertise in NY law, why did you respond?

Third, each of these questions has been asked and answered before. If the OP does come back, 5 minutes of searching will give him all the answers he needs.

You are correct. Technically, you wrote a response to my questions. But it doesn't seem like you are interested in being helpful, so for all practical purposes, the questions remain unanswered.

~z

 

[HomeGuru]

Your replies were monosyllabic and not very helpful.



I'm looking for thoughtful replies. If, as you claim, you have no expertise in NY law, why did you respond?



You are correct. Technically, you wrote a response to my questions. But it doesn't seem like you are interested in being helpful, so for all practical purposes, the questions remain unanswered.

~z

**A: too funny.

 

[You Are Guilty]

And with that, gentle readers, I see this post going unanswered.




PS: zimwit, it isn't DandyDon who is the NY lawyer

 

[HomeGuru]

And with that, gentle readers, I see this post going unanswered.




PS: zimwit, it isn't DandyDon who is the NY lawyer

**A: YAG, glad you cleared that one up.

 

[Ohiogal]

And with that, gentle readers, I see this post going unanswered.




PS: zimwit, it isn't DandyDon who is the NY lawyer

I should not be drinking carbonation this early. I just snorted Pepsi Max.

 

[Ohiogal]

Your replies were monosyllabic and not very helpful.



I'm looking for thoughtful replies. If, as you claim, you have no expertise in NY law, why did you respond?



You are correct. Technically, you wrote a response to my questions. But it doesn't seem like you are interested in being helpful, so for all practical purposes, the questions remain unanswered.

~z

Ummm... yeah... just one thing - helpful does not mean telling you what you want to hear. That may be what you desire but that is not help.