Help filling out a response form

[CAB in CA]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? CA

A lawyer has filed Summons-Complaint-Contract for three Citibank cards to which I must reply by next week. Total of three accounts in excess of $12,000.

I have found the court form online to complete and I have one of two choices to select in my response, but I am not sure which one to choose. Perhaps someone can give me some suggestions.

The choices are:
a. Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint or cross-complaint. (Do not check this box if the verified complaint or cross-complaint demands more than $1,000.)
b. Defendant admits that all of the statements of the complaint or cross-complaint are true EXCEPT:
(1) Defendant claims the following statements are false (use paragraph numbers or explain.
(2) Defendant has no information or belief that the following statements are true, so defendant denies them.

4. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES-Defendant alleges the following additional reasons that plaintiff is not entitle to recover anything.

These debts have not been validated by the firm who the lawyer states now owns these accounts, therefore I do not know if they are entitled to collect. I thought I would list that for an answer to #4.

The complaint also lists me as a corporation which I am not, I am an individual.

My question is I don't know whether to choose a. and generally deny each statement or choose b. and admit that I owe the monies.

The complaint does not list any account numbers so I do not know for sure which accounts they are for. I had two AT&T accounts that converted to Citibank and two Citibank accounts at one time making a total of four accounts and there are three accounts (without numbers) listed in the suit and as best as I can guess for which accounts they are trying to collect for all of the dollar amounts are off by pennies to the last statements from Citibank for which they say they are trying to collect.

I pulled a credit report and there is only one Citibank account still listed on the report. The other three are no longer listed on the report under Citibank or under the name of the firm for which the lawyer is suing.

I am trying to buy some time by filing a reply so this does not default and they automatically receive a judgment.

I will see an attorney in probably August about filing BK, but I need to get some other matters resolved regarding joint ownership on bank accounts with my elderly mother first.

Unfortunately, in choice a. above I do not know what is meant by a verified debt. Would that be if the debt has been validated by the company that now owns the debt?

Thanks for any input anyone may have. I have to get this filed by Monday.

Also, should I mail a debt validation request to this attorney for these accounts since I have no proof his client actually now owns these accounts? The suit states they have purchased the debts and Plaintiff is the successor in interest.

CAB in CA

 

[Ladynred]

If you want to buy time, make your response a general denial. If you admit the debt in ANY way, you will lose automatically, you'll probably never see the inside of the courtroom.

If they've provided no proof, then it can't be a 'verified' debt.. verified by who ???

 

[CAB in CA]

Thank you LadynRed.

I guess my best choice is to choose Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint or cross-complaint, since there are no forms attached showing the compaint is verified.

There is an area on the Answer-Contract form for Affirmative Defenses: Defendant alledges the following additional reasons that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover anything. How should I respond to that question?

I have no knowledge of this plaintiff, Unifund CCR Partners, until this Complaint owning any Citibank accounts. The Complaint states: Other By Purchase, Plaintiff is the successor in interest to Citibank.

I have never received a debt validation as I had not requested one as I was not aware of this owner of the debt-Unifund CCR Partners.

Should I write to the attorney for the plaintiff in this suit asking for his client to validate the debt or is it too late since they have already sued me?

Thank you,

CAB in CA

 

[Ladynred]

Asking for validation now is pretty pointless. Just make them prove the debt in court the same way.

Here's a list of affirmative defenses you can use:

1) latches, 2) Pari Delicto, 3) unclean hands, 4) failure to state a claim, 5) violation of statute, 6) failure to name all necessary parties, 7) insufficiency or defect of service, 8) lack of jurisdiction, 9) accord and satisfaction, 10) fraud, 11) statute of limitations and/or other time limitations, 12) bad faith acts of omissions and/or negligence, 13) Failure to comply with applicable regulations, 14) failure to comply with applicable state or federal law and 15) estopple or collateral estopple.

 

[CAB in CA]

I read your reply for the affirmative defenses and unfortunatley I don't know what if any apply to me. I will search on the Internet and see if I can find any explainations to the terms.

All I know is I have never been notified by Unifund CCR Partners prior to the summons of their existance and ownership of the Citibank accounts.

I do know I have not hit the SOL as my last payments were 10 or 11/2002, so I know that does not apply.

Do I just leave that affirmative defenses area blank on my reply?

I do understand from your previous post to just generally deny each statement and not choose the defendant admits that all of the statments are true EXCEPT and list the exceptions... I get that part!

Thank you again for your help LadynRed.

CAB in CA