|
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 |
HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid?
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/28/2007 9:42 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Hi Shibumi2,
Thanks for your interest and responding to my earlier post.
I am actually trying to help my son out of this mess. Something I did not mention Citibank SD is the Plaintiff but the credit card is AT&T Universal Platinum Card. Does this make a difference?
Regards,
AC1265 (Ed) |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 196275
7/28/2007 10:17 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Right now I have a new hobby. Mom died last year leaving a few grand in credit card debt. Some has already been sold off so this could get easier.
My brother and I have two attorneys giving two different advices. One says the credit holders can go after the estate,
even going so far as to force probate if one is not filed.
The other says they got nothing to stand on and can go pound sand.
There isn't much to adjudicate since most everything was transferred with Quit Claim Deeds and Transfer on Death certifications.
Gotta put up with it anyhow. Quoting: Bean There 194164
sorry to hear of your mom's passing. It's amazing that these scumbags don't have the decency to suck up the few dollars they laid out in this case.
I think both attorneys are probably correct in this matter. Were either you or your brother authorized to act on behalf of your mom regarding the estate? IE The trustee?
If so, I think you could probably act on her behalf in the same way. If not, I would probably go ahead and do it anyway being careful how the letter was written. Something like " The person to whom your letter is address is deceased and was my mother. In accordance with her wishes, I am authorized to act on her behalf to resolve any remaining issues. Please forward lawful validation of the amount claimed owed and I will review and respond within the time period prescribed"...or something to that effect. The debt collectors are doubly fucked since your mother would be the only person that could validate the debt. There is NO WAY they could prevail on this. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 196275
7/28/2007 10:27 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Hi Shibumi2,
Thanks for your interest and responding to my earlier post.
I am actually trying to help my son out of this mess. Something I did not mention Citibank SD is the Plaintiff but the credit card is AT&T Universal Platinum Card. Does this make a difference?
Regards,
AC1265 (Ed) Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1265
Hi Ed,
Probably not, but you should check it out. Do you have the original cardholders agreement? It would say with whom your son had entered the agreement. Most credit cards now are "boutique" cards or branded in that the card will say "AT & T or UNITED airlines" mastercard or visa, but in reality the operation is being run by Citibank or whomever. There are a few majors that have the bulk of the business.
However, in my opinion that works to your advantage. How? Well t your son can say in his answer truthfully that he has NEVER, to his knowledge had an account with the Plaintiff, Citibank SD. Which i assume is true. So they will first have to PROVE by coming up with a signed contract..which is the starting point anyway. It's just another thorn to stick in their side. It could also be that AT & T somewhere along the line sold their credit card business to Citibank, which may well be true. There is another aspect in that most credit card credit is by law not assignable. This is another element of the scam but I've never had to go there since they can't get by the contract part since they don't have the originals.
I like to throw curves at them so you have another element in that you really don't, to the best of your knowledge, have any knowledge that you owe Ctibank any money...or FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES. |
|
Bean There
User ID: 252904
7/28/2007 11:41 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I think both attorneys are probably correct in this matter. Were either you or your brother authorized to act on behalf of your mom regarding the estate? IE The trustee? Quoting: shibumi2 196275
Only authorized for her Living Will. In Missouri they are called "Personal Representitives" in probate matters. Under Decent and Distribution laws the responsibility falls to me as eldest son, if I want it.
We have a procedure called Small Estste Affidavit where the amount in estate is less than $45 k. Don't even need to publish the probate in this instance. The creditors ( agents ) would need to check for themselves.
Mom died intestate. A real shock for my Bro and I considering how many friends she helped to get those details straight. No real problem though. Except I had to take up "Legal Residence" to have standing. Had to get a drivers License after 15 years without, and a bank account which I never had in all my 55 years.
Another sardonic twist, the current Probate Judge was attorney for the other party when Wife and I were sued over some real property. We lost the case but they didn't get a penny from us and I made them all look foolish and vindictive. That lawyer cum judge was pissed to no end.
Last time I was at the court house looking up some records I went to the rest room. The judge in that case ( some 5 years ago )was at the urinal. He turned around and saw me and expression turned to shock. Then I noticed a wet spot begin to form at his fly! I haven't stopped laughing yet. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/28/2007 11:47 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Hi Shibumi2,
My son came to my house with more information. I did everything you recommended. There is a verification page that came with the complaint. It has now come to my attention this is a collection agency Citicorp Credit Services, Inc., USA. He also brought me his records. This is the third collection agency 1.Citi Cards (not reg in PA) 2.Client Services, Inc. (reg in PA) 3.Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. (reg in PA) and plaintiff Citibank SD NA (not registered in PA. All his communications with the three collection agencies were verbal. The complaint is dated June 15,2007 and indicates 20 days to respond but the sheriff only served him July 14, 2007. Does this change things?
Regards,
Ed |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 243849
7/28/2007 12:39 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I was watching CNN and they said that the IRS is so behind in debt collection and recovery that they got permission to use private collection firms to go after back taxes.
This could be the dumbest thing the IRS has ever done selling the back tax debt to private companies creating third party interlopers.
P.S. this common law stuff works in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, & the police state formerly known as Great Britain as well.
There is about to be the greatest rebellion / awakening on the planet. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 273772
7/28/2007 12:56 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Your birth certificate was used as collateral backing for the national debt.... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 42896
 |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 273772
7/28/2007 12:59 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
So much bullshit, so many idiots.... |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 272916
7/28/2007 1:34 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I think both attorneys are probably correct in this matter. Were either you or your brother authorized to act on behalf of your mom regarding the estate? IE The trustee?
Only authorized for her Living Will. In Missouri they are called "Personal Representitives" in probate matters. Under Decent and Distribution laws the responsibility falls to me as eldest son, if I want it.
We have a procedure called Small Estste Affidavit where the amount in estate is less than $45 k. Don't even need to publish the probate in this instance. The creditors ( agents ) would need to check for themselves.
Mom died intestate. A real shock for my Bro and I considering how many friends she helped to get those details straight. No real problem though. Except I had to take up "Legal Residence" to have standing. Had to get a drivers License after 15 years without, and a bank account which I never had in all my 55 years.
Another sardonic twist, the current Probate Judge was attorney for the other party when Wife and I were sued over some real property. We lost the case but they didn't get a penny from us and I made them all look foolish and vindictive. That lawyer cum judge was pissed to no end.
Last time I was at the court house looking up some records I went to the rest room. The judge in that case ( some 5 years ago )was at the urinal. He turned around and saw me and expression turned to shock. Then I noticed a wet spot begin to form at his fly! I haven't stopped laughing yet. Quoting: Bean There 252904
Oh what a WONderful story! I haven't laughed that hard in a long time! Thank you, my friend!
Shibumi - I'm reading everything you said to - and thinking the best thing to do is to use the letter you provided to file for a continuance at 9 a.m. sharp - 2 hours before I have to meet with this scumbag (lordie, was he nasty on the phone to me the other day. My vindication will be that Karma is a bitch. He'll get his due whether I give it to him or not).
Scumbag is registered here in Maine, but I'm having a helluva time trying to find out if Amerikan Distress is.
The complaint says "American Express (Plaintiff) is a corporation duly authroized by law and having a business address of Centurion Bank 40 Wall Street, NY, NY 10285" (my addition here - bet they're shitting nickels with the stock market this week!)Going on, it says: "Defendant entered into a Credit Card Agreement ("Agreement") with American Express....used this card to make purchases and/or cash advances" (I guess a cash advance is what a loan consolidation is).
I've yet to see anything which could be construed as an original document/contract in this case. If there was one, wouldn't it be a part of all the legal papers he mailed to me??? I would think a proof of contract should be in that pile of crapppppp...Guess what you've been saying all along is correct! But I don't know if I dare to ask for it??? Especially if I'm going to file for a continuance? |
|
Bean There
User ID: 224800
7/28/2007 2:51 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Your birth certificate was used as collateral backing for the national debt....
You would need to look up the origin of Birth Certificates in USA and the particular statutes empowerment clause. Also Slave or Employee Death Insurance. ( Marriage Licence is also fun )
These are not subjects readily available on the net. At least in the first few pages of a search. Might get a little different perspective on your bs assertion. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 272916
7/28/2007 3:18 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Just to report on part of my homework...
Here's the link for searching for DBA's in Maine:
https://icrs.informe.org/nei-sos-icrs/ICRS?MainPage=x
Rats. Guess they're legal for DBA here since it says American Express Company on one of the 20 entries and the jurisdiction is New York - where scumbag's legal papers say their business address (Centurion Bank) is.
However - when one enters Centurion Bank into that search engine, no matches were found. But I guess that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.....
Back to writing the continuance and studying the Fair Debt and Collection Practices Act. Hope everyone is having a great weekend. I will - NEXT weekend LOL!!! |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 272916
7/28/2007 3:28 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
If they are asserting facts, DON'T support their assertions. So the complaint might say:
1) On May 1, 1996, Jane Doe, Defendant, signed a contract with American Express and received a credit card in her name.
That is their first allegation. Your answer to that will be
NEITHER ADMITTED OR DENIED. DEFENDANT DEMANDS STRICT PROOF.
The reason you answer this way is that you are making them PROVE it. You aren't agreeing or saying it's not true so THEY will have to produce the signed contract to prove their assertion. What if they can't? They have no basis in law to proceed. What many companies might produce is a photocopy of a signed application. Is a photocopy PROOF? NO. SO the attorney for the CC company says this in court: "Ms. Doe, is this your signature?" What do you think 99.9% of all people say? They look at it and say YES. What did they just do? They became a COMPETENT FACT WITNESS AGAINST THEMSELVES. Which means, that they THEMSELVES have testified against themselves and have just lost the case. THEY DEFEATED THEMSELVES!! And that, my friend is the whole ballgame.
What if the person said "I don't know if I signed that or not. I had so many credit cards in the past I can't keep track." Then the attorney has no COMPETENT FACT WITNESS. No witness no case.
The attorney will keep badgering no doubt. "Oh come on, you must be able to tell if this is your signature or not?" the answer? "Well' with computer fraud and all I know it is easy to cut and paste someones signature into a document where it looks like the real thing. I've read about this in magazines and on tv. If I could see the ORIGINAL application I would be able to tell you if it were my signature or not." Quoting: shibumi2 196275
Second part of my homework:
I found the "original documents" because I keep everything! However - here's the good part - I never sent the so-called agreement in back in 2003. It's unsigned and in my possession because they gave me the option to CALL-IN my agreement! So they shouldn't have any "original" signed agreement in their possession - Right?? |
|
dude in florida
User ID: 272097
7/28/2007 3:39 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
you mean west virginia threw out debt consolidation companies? so, i guess i need to call my debt consolidation folks and tell them delete my info....how do we get around the whole fucked up credit issue that results from this? my credit is already fucked and i was actually trying to get it back together....thoughts??
There is a way to correct your credit history and it's easy and free. You might want to first consider if that's what you really want! Seriously.
If you fucked up your credit, do you understand why? If you get a clean slate, which is easy and doesn't cost anything...what will you do next? Go out and run up a lot of new charges and default on them?
I am more reluctant to assist in this aspect unless the person knows why and isn't just using these techniques to game the system. My general criteria is if someone has the tenacity to get themselves out of their scrape and demonstrates a TRUE understanding of the system and how it operates. Also, that they agree to READ and UNDERSTAND a credit card agreement (yes, the FINE PRINT) or mortgage and they will be quizzed. They also have to have an agreement with me that they will NEVER again sign anything without understanding what they are signing.
But, bottom line?? I think people are better off without credit. Live within your means and don't get into the spiral again. It's interesting to note that ATTORNEYS, when considering filing a suit against someone or some busines, first run a CREDIT CHECK. If it looks like yours does...they NEVER FILE. Why? Cause they have to be assured of collecting. HA. Bad credit may be the best thing that ever happened to you but you just don't know it. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 196275
i am more than willing to do whatever it takes to right the ship again. i have been living on a budget for a while now trying to get things straight. and yes i understand why and how i fucked up my credit. care to help? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/28/2007 5:30 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
 |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 272916
7/28/2007 5:52 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Here's a great site with a plethora of info about the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act:
[link to www.fair-debt-collection.com]
You can find help with budgeting - even finding one of those scumba....I mean - attorneys - in your state if you choose to go that route. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76936
7/28/2007 6:27 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
btt |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/29/2007 10:24 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
|
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/29/2007 10:29 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
|
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 10:33 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I think both attorneys are probably correct in this matter. Were either you or your brother authorized to act on behalf of your mom regarding the estate? IE The trustee?
Only authorized for her Living Will. In Missouri they are called "Personal Representitives" in probate matters. Under Decent and Distribution laws the responsibility falls to me as eldest son, if I want it.
We have a procedure called Small Estste Affidavit where the amount in estate is less than $45 k. Don't even need to publish the probate in this instance. The creditors ( agents ) would need to check for themselves.
Mom died intestate. A real shock for my Bro and I considering how many friends she helped to get those details straight. No real problem though. Except I had to take up "Legal Residence" to have standing. Had to get a drivers License after 15 years without, and a bank account which I never had in all my 55 years.
Another sardonic twist, the current Probate Judge was attorney for the other party when Wife and I were sued over some real property. We lost the case but they didn't get a penny from us and I made them all look foolish and vindictive. That lawyer cum judge was pissed to no end.
Last time I was at the court house looking up some records I went to the rest room. The judge in that case ( some 5 years ago )was at the urinal. He turned around and saw me and expression turned to shock. Then I noticed a wet spot begin to form at his fly! I haven't stopped laughing yet. Quoting: Bean There 252904
Hi Ed,
If the probate attorney was an adversarial attorney in a past action against you and your wife, he has a duty to recuse himself from this matter. Not sure the exact rules in your state, but it's a no-brainer that he himself should have stepped down. You need to file a motion for the judge to recuse himself as you are entitled to an IMPARTIAL judge and his background definitely does not suggest that would be the case.
Just a suggestion. If you're happy with the guy and don't have any concerns then by all means keep him on....but his presence would indicate a problem in my mind based on his PERSONAL feelings.
BTW, if he has already made rulings against you they are subject to reversal because of this. You can file a motion to recuse and motions to reconsider any court actions that you don't like...or all of them. The judge no doubt knows this and must have some reason to be involved in this?? Maybe revenge or he's thinking he can get some $$ out of this?? Be careful and I suggest getting a new judge in the matter...which is your RIGHT. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 10:51 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Hi Shibumi2,
My son came to my house with more information. I did everything you recommended. There is a verification page that came with the complaint. It has now come to my attention this is a collection agency Citicorp Credit Services, Inc., USA. He also brought me his records. This is the third collection agency 1.Citi Cards (not reg in PA) 2.Client Services, Inc. (reg in PA) 3.Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. (reg in PA) and plaintiff Citibank SD NA (not registered in PA. All his communications with the three collection agencies were verbal. The complaint is dated June 15,2007 and indicates 20 days to respond but the sheriff only served him July 14, 2007. Does this change things?
Regards,
Ed Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1265
Hey...that's a new one. The debt collectors incorporated their business and CALLED it CITICORP. Don't be confused...its not the same outfit. One is a credit card issuer and one is a third party debt collector. But see how they try to use lies and deceit to fool people?? Fuckers.
I understand that you live in PA? The suit is filed in PA and you checked and CITIBANK SD NA (and you have the spelling exactly correct make sure) the original card issuer is NOT registered with your Secretary of State to do business in PA?
Do I have these facts right?
The way courts handle the dates changes from state to state. Go to the website for the court where this case was filed and look under local rules. At least in my state it is basically a manual of how to do things in that court. IE what the forms you file look like, how service is made, when answers are due, etc. If you want to take on these scum...AND WIN...of course you need to not beat yourself by missing filing dates, not entering documents with the court clerk, etc.
I'LL TELL YOU THIS. THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN WIN IN GENERAL IS FOR YOU TO DEFEAT YOURSELF. NOT TAKE THE TIME TO LEARN THE GAME OR TESTIFY AGAINST YOURSELF...ETC. IF YOU WANT TO FIGHT , FIGHT TO WIN BECAUSE YOU CAN.
Anyway, usually a person has 30 days from the filing date to respond. Some courts its 30 days from service (the date you got the paperwork served). In either event you need to get an answer filed in the matter. Essentially, the answer is just a response to what the PLAINTIFF is claiming. SO the answer looks exactly like the lawsuit you received, except where it says COMPLAINT or whatever they called it, you put ANSWER. And as it says, its your ANSWER to the complaint.
So if #1 says Ed Smith is a citizen of the state of New Jersey and lives at 123 Maple lane in Hoboken.....you either agree, disagree or don't do either.
So if you are Ed Smith and your addrress is correct you would answer: ADMITTED. If you moved or changed your name it would be DENIED.
So you admit or deny ONLY that which you have personal first hand knowledge. Everything else will probably be NEITER ADMITTED OR DENIED. STRICT PROOF DEMANDED.
So when they say they are CITIBANK licensed to do business in ND, you don't know that and DEMAND STRICT PROOF. When they say you took out a credit card on such and such a date...same answer. Neither admitted or denied. THEY are making the charges. MAKE THEM PROVE EVERYTHING! You know who you are and where you live, but you don't know if they are licensed to do business, what they do for a living, or whatever. MAKE THEM PROVE EVERYTHING!.
See...the court, in the complaint and answer is only trying to establish what the issues are. This isn't the place to make your arguments so the answers are only a few words. The argument and proof comes later in the process. You are just establishing the SCOPE of the controversy. As you are the defendant in the matter it falls on the PLAINTIFF to prove everything. HAHAHA they never can. They ONLY win when people don't answer, dont show up to court or dont file an ANSWER.
In your case, I would file an ANSWER or at least file a MOTION TO CONTINUE. ask for 30 days and the court or collectors can't do anything to move forward. That will give you time to learn and do it right. See the MOTION TO CONTINUE ABOVE. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 10:55 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I was watching CNN and they said that the IRS is so behind in debt collection and recovery that they got permission to use private collection firms to go after back taxes.
This could be the dumbest thing the IRS has ever done selling the back tax debt to private companies creating third party interlopers.
P.S. this common law stuff works in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, & the police state formerly known as Great Britain as well.
There is about to be the greatest rebellion / awakening on the planet. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 243849
you're exactly right. the IRS is essentially a corporation and the third party debt collectors HAVE to follow the same FDCPA. And of course they will all rely on the IGNORANCE of people to collect.
You can imagine that there is no way for them to prevail because the IRS has nothing and provided no services. This will no doubt be interesting |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 11:09 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi - I'm reading everything you said to - and thinking the best thing to do is to use the letter you provided to file for a continuance at 9 a.m. sharp - 2 hours before I have to meet with this scumbag
I AGREE. GET A CONTINUANCE AND USE THE TIME TO REGROUP AND GET AN ACCURATE ANSWER ON FILE.
(lordie, was he nasty on the phone to me the other day. My vindication will be that Karma is a bitch. He'll get his due whether I give it to him or not).
WELL, IT'S NOT AN EITHER/OR. WIN THE CASE AND HE'LL REAP THE BAD KARMA TOO. WHY CHOOSE. BTW, GROW ANOTHER LAYER OF SKIN AND REALIZE THAT HE IS BELLOWING BECAUSE YOU ARE ENTERING WHAT HE THINKS IS HIS TURF. HE HAS A MORTGAGE AND BRACES TO PAY AND HE NEEDS YOU AND OTHERS LIKE YOU TO PAY IT OR HE HAS TO GO GET A JOB. YOU CAN OUT PSYCHE HIM BY LETTING HIM BLUSTER AND YELL ALL HE WANTS, BUT THAT WON'T WIN A CASE AND HE KNOWS IT. HE HAS YOU ON HIS HOME TURF, BUT HE CAN'T CONTROL ONE THING....HOW YOU REACT. YOU CAN'T OUTYELL HIM OR OUTARGUE HIM (AT THIS POINT) BUT YOU CAN REMAIN CALM AND NOT LET HIM RATTLE YOU. HE CAN'T DO ANYTHING AT THE COURT TOMORROW NO MATTER WHAT HE THREATENS. AND COOPERATING WITH HIM IN ANY WAY IS YOUR SURRENDER. YOU ARE THERE TOMORROW TO DO ONLY TWO THINGS. FILE YOUR CONTINUANCE AND SHOW UP. YOU CAN'T WIN OR LOSE ANYTHING TOMORROW UNLESS YOU DEFEAT YOURSELF. DON'T TALK TO THE SCUMBAG BECAUSE THE TIME ISNT RIGHT. YOU WILL NEGOTIATE ONLY AFTER HE KNOWS AND HE KNOWS YOU KNOW THAT HE HAS LOST. THAT ISN'T TOMORROW. LIMIT YOUR OBJECTIVES TO FILING YOUR CONTINUANCE AND SHOWING UP. IT'S A CHANCE TO GET USED TO COURT, THE SURROUNDINGS ETC. REMEMBER. FILE YOUR PAPERS THEN SIT IN THE COURTROOM FOR THE NEXT TWO HOURS AND WATCH FIRST HAND THE BIGGEST FRAUD IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD...
Scumbag is registered here in Maine, but I'm having a helluva time trying to find out if Amerikan Distress is.
tHAT'S FINE. dOESN'T REALLY MATTER ABOUT HIM BECAUSE HE ISN'T SUING YOU.
The complaint says "American Express (Plaintiff) is a corporation duly authroized by law and having a business address of Centurion Bank 40 Wall Street, NY, NY 10285" (my addition here - bet they're shitting nickels with the stock market this week!)Going on, it says: "Defendant entered into a Credit Card Agreement ("Agreement") with American Express....used this card to make purchases and/or cash advances" (I guess a cash advance is what a loan consolidation is).
SEE, THEY ARE REGISTERED IN NY SO THEY COULD SUE YOU IN NY. BUT THEY ALSO HAVE TO BE LICENSED TO DO BUSINESS IN YOUR HOME STATE. BUT FOR NOW DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT. IT WILL BE IN YOUR ANSWER YOU WILL FILE NEXT.
I've yet to see anything which could be construed as an original document/contract in this case. If there was one, wouldn't it be a part of all the legal papers he mailed to me??? I would think a proof of contract should be in that pile of crapppppp...Guess what you've been saying all along is correct! But I don't know if I dare to ask for it??? Especially if I'm going to file for a continuance? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 272916
THAT'S ANOTHER WHOLE TOPIC...WHAT CONSTITUTES A VALID LAWSUIT. I'VE NEVER HAD TO USE THIS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET PAST THE FIRST HURDLE OF LACKING AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE. hOWEVER, FOR YOUR INFO A COMPLAINT HAS TO HAVE A SWORN AFFIDAVIT AND SOME BASIS FOR THE SUIT TO BE BROUGHT. IN THE CASE OF A CREDIT CARD, THERE HAS TO BE A SIGNED AFFIDAVIT BY EITHER AN OFFICER OF THE CORPORATION OR THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACCOUNT THAT HAS PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF YOUR ACCOUNT AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THAT CAN TESTIFY UNDER OATH OF THE TRUTH OF THE CLAIMS. BINGO AGAIN. THEY HAVE NEITHER BECAUSE THE CORPORATION OFFICERS AREN'T GOING THERE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF YOUR ACCOUNT AND ALSO WOULD NEVER SUBMIT AN AFFIDAVIT BECAUS ETHEY WOULD THEN BECOME A WITNESS AND BE DEPOSED/SUBPOENAED, ETC. hahaha
REMEMBER YOUR OBJECTIVE. ONLY TWO THINGS TOMORROW. FILE AND SHOW UP IN COURT. DON'T TALK TO THE ATTORNEY BUT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE JUDGE ASKS YOU THAT DOESN'T AMOUNT TO TESTIFYING AGAINST YOURSELF. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 11:11 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
sorry that response didn't work out well. my answers are in bold but mixed in with the original questions.
BTW i'll be out of town until wednesday and not online. let me know how it comes out.
GOOD LUCK...YOU"LL DO GREAT! |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 11:12 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
i am more than willing to do whatever it takes to right the ship again. i have been living on a budget for a while now trying to get things straight. and yes i understand why and how i fucked up my credit. care to help?
why do you need the credit? how much in total do you presently owe? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 11:16 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Second part of my homework:
I found the "original documents" because I keep everything! However - here's the good part - I never sent the so-called agreement in back in 2003. It's unsigned and in my possession because they gave me the option to CALL-IN my agreement! So they shouldn't have any "original" signed agreement in their possession - Right?? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 272916
Right. They have no contract, no agreement, no competent fact witness...nothing.
all they can do is hope to trip you up by testifying against yourself or defaulting (not showing up)so they win by default.
you can now see they are screwed. Once they KNOW you KNOW it's game over.
Keep this in mind. Once they file a motion to dismiss...make sure it says WITH PREJUDICE which means they can never refile.
This way you're done with the matter forever.
The 3rd party debt collectors, when confronted with demands for proof resell the debt over and over...to other scumbags. no honor among thieves. I just send the original docs over to the new collector and they go away as well. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/29/2007 11:17 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Thank you much Shibumi2,
Your valuable time and information did so much for my son and I.
Have a safe and pleasant trip.
Regards,
Ed |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 196275
7/29/2007 11:22 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
no worries, Ed. We'll have time for the celebrating after your son kicks their ass back into the slimy dark hole they climbed out of.
Read up on this and you'll see how corrupt and evil these people are. But going forward consider living without credit and credit cards as much as possible. Ultimately we are responsible for our own actions. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1265
7/29/2007 11:29 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2, I totally agree with you and shocked my son got himself into this mess. I am personally debt free including my house.
Regards,
Ed |
|
Bean There
User ID: 213971
7/29/2007 2:16 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
If the probate attorney was an adversarial attorney in a past action against you and your wife, he has a duty to recuse himself from this matter.
Just a suggestion. If you're happy with the guy * * * indicate a problem in my mind based on his PERSONAL feelings.
BTW, if he has already made rulings against you * * * Maybe revenge or he's thinking he can get some $$ out of this?? Be careful and I suggest getting a new judge in the matter...which is your RIGHT. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 196275
Haven't filed in probate court yet. That's coming up soon.
The "Judge" was just elected. It is an associate judge position, and probate is his mandatory watch in his home county. My attorney / legal advisor ( doesn't represent me )says it should be no problem as his hands are pretty well tied. There is little to determine but shuffling some marketable titles / deeds between names. I do know his personal feelings could well come into play.
He could possibly see $$$'s. He received a judgment against wife and I in the civil case he prosecuted against us. The judgment stands as an automatic lien against real property. However ( this is rich !! ) the case was in associate court. In order for him to take any action against property of a judgment debtor ( us'uns )the case needed to be filed / recorded in the circuit court record. To date this has not been done. Neither he nor his clients can enforce the property lien. I think he hates the people he represented more than li'l 'ol pro se me! He knows for sure I know my way around the civil procedures and local court rules and will be happy to have a new hobby with him in his official capacity / office of trust.
Doesn't matter anyhow. My interest in the real property involved will be quit claimed to a trust or my brother then into trust. Won't be nothing to attach.
Thanks for your input. To others here, the thread is full of valid info. OP and others should take heart.
Peace and Victory All. Bean There |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 272916
7/29/2007 2:48 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I just want to take a bit of time to ever so sincerely thank you, AC 196275 and Shibumi2 for the help you've given. I only wish I'd found this thread back in February before I got a lawyer and let things ride. But the important matter is to proceed from here and AC 196275, you summed up exactly ALL I have to do tomorrow morning - file and show up.
Before I read this thread, I had NO idea how to approach this hearing. The scumbag had NOT been sending copies of what he sent me to my lawyer, so by the time I called him about it - it was too late for him to take over the matter. I'm glad now 'cuz you guys have given me an education more valuable than all my years of college! BTW - the hearing tomorrow is being called a trial management conference - which I'm assuming, if I spoke at ALL, it would be admitting I was at fault!
When I asked my lawyer's asst. how to prepare for this meeting, she told me to take in my bills and budget! Sure! Show them what a miserable looser and how broke I am! BULLSHIT!! Let me tell you folks about bankruptcy since 2005. Back in 1998, I helped an elderly friend of mine with his papers and they amounted to about 3. Had to list assets, but it was in a general manner. Today with the new rules??? The packet of papers to fill out is at least 30!! And you have to show them EVERY policy you own, be it life insurance, health insurance - even your home's fire insurance papers! How does that relate to a credit card debt??? I was about ready to hire U-Haul and send them my fucking file cabinet, I was so pissed! And then, they make you list EVERYthing, room by room, of everything that's in it - furniture, pictures on your walls, clothes in your closets and drawers. I was ready to list the 4 rolls of toilet paper I have left in the washroom! I hate the word rape but honest to God, that's how violated I feel by this process.
My advice to everyone is - READ THIS THREAD thoroughly BEFORE you retain a lawyer and get into the process when it first starts. Keep your dignity and sovereignty, read from the good people on this thread who've gone thru it.
Again, guys - thank you so warmly for your help. I feel I have a lot of confidence right now! No more crying! And AC 196275 - have a wonderful trip!! |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 |
|
