|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 |
HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid?
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 62244
7/25/2006 1:11 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
62244: I have the reservation of rights on my drivers license, but have never had occasion to invoke it.
When I renewed my license back in the 90's, they took a new picture and requested a new signature. I put "without prejudice" under my name. The lady at the counter said I couldn't do it.
I asked her to show me in the Motor vehicle Code where it says I can't do it. I told her it's part of my signature and went into a bit of explanation as to why.
She had a little pow-wow with someone in a back room and 5 minutes later came out and said, "it's OK, you can have your signature like that." 
case law dictates that "without prejudice" will suffice to make a reservation of your rights, I however like to throw in "without prejudice UCC 1-207" jus to let them know I KNOW EXACTLY what Im doing.
the trained robots at the bottom will always give you shit cause they don't know any better and think they have the right to do whatever they want to you, it always gets resolved when it gets kicked up to their superiors and get an education on the legal system. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/25/2006 1:20 PM
 | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I noticed a few things on the contract boilerplate..
its written subject to the Laws of the State of Oklahoma...you could state in the motion to dismiss that you have no record that CAC has standing to enforce the provisions of this agrement in NJ courts.
note that the attorneys fee provision would ONLY apply in the event that the ORIGINAl DEBTOR brought the suit. This is a 3rd party debt collector...i don't think that provision would apply although they are hitting you up for fees.
is the note assigned by seller? there is an endorsement provision on the agreement, but the copy you scanned does not show the front.
read the print on the back, particularly the assignment clause.
btw...you can file the Answer and motion to dismiss in the same document. you also should put an affidavit in if you intend to file the Motion to Dismiss.
the filing fee is a one time charge only. no cost for additional filings seperate or together.
its a fraud. you should pay NO fees....it's supposed to be a freaking court...and it's not like you want to be there. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/25/2006 1:23 PM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
62244: I have the reservation of rights on my drivers license, but have never had occasion to invoke it.
When I renewed my license back in the 90's, they took a new picture and requested a new signature. I put "without prejudice" under my name. The lady at the counter said I couldn't do it.
I asked her to show me in the Motor vehicle Code where it says I can't do it. I told her it's part of my signature and went into a bit of explanation as to why.
She had a little pow-wow with someone in a back room and 5 minutes later came out and said, "it's OK, you can have your signature like that."
case law dictates that "without prejudice" will suffice to make a reservation of your rights, I however like to throw in "without prejudice UCC 1-207" jus to let them know I KNOW EXACTLY what Im doing.
the trained robots at the bottom will always give you shit cause they don't know any better and think they have the right to do whatever they want to you, it always gets resolved when it gets kicked up to their superiors and get an education on the legal system.
As a Soverign, why do you accept their assertion that you fall under their code jurisdiction. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/25/2006 1:24 PM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
I mean, why are you required to RESERVE YOUR RIGHTS....aren't they YOUR RIGHTS to begin with? or is it like a part time thing. RIGHTS are YOURS..they can't be revoked by the whim of another, or they are actually PRIVLIDGES |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 106184 (OP)
7/25/2006 1:46 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
note that the attorneys fee provision would ONLY apply in the event that the ORIGINAl DEBTOR brought the suit. This is a 3rd party debt collector...i don't think that provision would apply although they are hitting you up for fees.
is the note assigned by seller? there is an endorsement provision on the agreement, but the copy you scanned does not show the front.
read the print on the back, particularly the assignment clause. Quoting: shibumi2
I noticed that that the actual assignment on the contract is stamped over and unclear.
The contract says that McConville Motors INC is the seller. However I only made payments to CAC from the start.
Also notice that CAC is the plaintiff in the case. Does this mean the debt collector is not the owner of this debt, but acting in behalf of CAC? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 62244
7/25/2006 1:47 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
the use of federal reserve notes requires making a reservation of your rights because you are using a GOVERNMENT SERVICE to pay for your driver's licence. That is called a contract of adhesion or invisible contract. |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/25/2006 2:21 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
SHIBUMI2
I Have to leave in half hour to file this document. Please give me last min advice.
NJ Officail pro-se site says this about anwers.
"You must respond to each numbered
paragraph in the complaint and either admit
the allegation, deny the allegation, or state
that you do not have enough information to
know whether the statement is true."
THAT BEING THE CASE THIS IS WHAT I HAVE SO FAR.
BROKE AC
SOMEWHERE
New Jersey 08075
Pro-se
CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORTATION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BROKE AC,
Defendant.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
BURLINGTON COUNTY
Docket No. L-FRAUD
CIVIL ACTION
ANSWER
Defendant, BROKE AC, by way of Answer of Complaint says:
1. Defendant does not have enough information to know whether the statement is true. Defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the contract the defendant signed. Defendant request in ‘good faith’ that original contract be made available to determine the agreement and debt are valid provided for in the Fair Debt Collection Provision Act. Defendant also notes Assignment section of the contract is unreadable and is unsure of whether the copy has been altered.
2. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A the original contract he signed.
3. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the original contract he signed.
4. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the original contract he signed.
WHEREFORE, defendant demands judgment dismissing the complaint together with costs.
SEPARATE DEFENSES
1. Plaintiff is not indebted to the defendant in any sum whatsoever.
2. The plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the operation of the six (6) year Statute of Limitations.
3. WAIVER
4. UNCLEAN HANDS.
5. ESTOPPEL.
_______________________
BROKE AC
Dated: _____________________
CERTIFICATION
BROKE AC, of full age, hereby certifies:
(1) that there is no other action known to me which involves the subject matter of this controversy to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
(2) there is no additional known parties who should be joined to the present action at this time
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
_______________________
BROKE AC
Dated: _____________________
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/25/2006 2:41 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
HOW Do I combine the answer and motion to dismiss?
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/25/2006 4:15 PM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
SHIBUMI2
I Have to leave in half hour to file this document. Please give me last min advice.
NJ Officail pro-se site says this about anwers.
"You must respond to each numbered
paragraph in the complaint and either admit
the allegation, deny the allegation, or state
that you do not have enough information to
know whether the statement is true."
THAT BEING THE CASE THIS IS WHAT I HAVE SO FAR.
BROKE AC
SOMEWHERE
New Jersey 08075
Pro-se
CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORTATION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BROKE AC,
Defendant.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
BURLINGTON COUNTY
Docket No. L-FRAUD
CIVIL ACTION
ANSWER
Defendant, BROKE AC, by way of Answer of Complaint says:
1. Defendant does not have enough information to know whether the statement is true. Defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the contract the defendant signed. Defendant request in ‘good faith’ that original contract be made available to determine the agreement and debt are valid provided for in the Fair Debt Collection Provision Act. Defendant also notes Assignment section of the contract is unreadable and is unsure of whether the copy has been altered.
2. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A the original contract he signed.
3. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the original contract he signed.
4. Defendant does not have enough information to know if this statement is true. Defendant cannot determine validity of this claim because the defendant does not recognize exhibit A as the original contract he signed.
WHEREFORE, defendant demands judgment dismissing the complaint together with costs.
SEPARATE DEFENSES
1. Plaintiff is not indebted to the defendant in any sum whatsoever.
2. The plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the operation of the six (6) year Statute of Limitations.
3. WAIVER
4. UNCLEAN HANDS.
5. ESTOPPEL.
_______________________
BROKE AC
Dated: _____________________
CERTIFICATION
BROKE AC, of full age, hereby certifies:
(1) that there is no other action known to me which involves the subject matter of this controversy to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
(2) there is no additional known parties who should be joined to the present action at this time
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
_______________________
BROKE AC
Dated: _____________________ Quoting: Moreinfoplease
Dude. Stand up job!
You certainly hit most of the important points, and came a long way quickly.
A good way to answer the points in the complaint would be, for example:
"Defendant is not in receipt of any documents which validate the claims made by CAC
"Defendant is not in receipt of any documents which prove that CAC is authorized to act on behalf of original creditor XXX.
get the idea? Challenge every point and make them prove it.
I do think that the contract, which apparently was signed in Oklahoma...or at least subject to OK jurisdiction..should be heard in OK courts...or at least we could raise the point. I also think the provision on attorneys fees should be challenged.
You can always file an amended answer if you want to make changes...by filing within the 35 day time limit, you preserve your rights even if it isn't exactly how you want it.
As far as how you file it..all together..ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND MOTION TO DISMISS...or AMENDED ANSWER AND MOTION TO DISMISS.
Overall, you did great.
I think there is some stuff I have that would help you a lot. I'll see if I can get it scanned (although its over 100 pages)...otherwise i could send it to you via mail if you're interested. |
|
ToadMaster
User ID: 122282
7/26/2006 2:39 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
:hayseed: So long as our buddy Bush finds them there weapons of mass destructions, he is permitted to use them there said weapon. |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/26/2006 9:15 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I am interested in the info. You can mail it to me if you wish. Scanned is fine with me also.
I have bad news as I was not able to reach the court house in time to file the papers yesterday and my 35 day limit expired. I was on my way from work and wouldnt you know it....an accident jammed traffic up.
I think they are getting the default judgement against me. I am sending my sister up to file it today if they say it is still valid to submit it and if they say it will be considered.
I am screwed if they wont consider it.
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
MOREINFOPLEASE
User ID: 106184 (OP)
7/26/2006 10:33 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
|
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/26/2006 10:33 AM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
don't worry about it dude.
They have to file a Motion for Default Judgment and schedule a hearing date to consider the Default request.
Missing the filing deadline by one day should be no issue whatsoever. Just make sure and get it filed today...also, if there is an article about the accident or any tangible proof why you were delayed...make sure and save it just in case.
If there was a default entered, which is technically impossible because from the papers you posted there was no hearing date scheduled, you can still move to have it reversed due to violating your due process rights. Due process essentially was established by the Constitution to assure everyone has equal access to the legal system and certain safeguards...the fundemental element of Due Process is to avoid railroading cases thru the system and give everyone a fair hearing to be considered on the merits of the case.
Get it filed...you may not ever hear from them again.
Make sure to send your Answer to the sleezebags today as well and send certified mail, return receipt requested. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/26/2006 10:36 AM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I am interested in the info. You can mail it to me if you wish. Scanned is fine with me also.
I have bad news as I was not able to reach the court house in time to file the papers yesterday and my 35 day limit expired. I was on my way from work and wouldnt you know it....an accident jammed traffic up.
I think they are getting the default judgement against me. I am sending my sister up to file it today if they say it is still valid to submit it and if they say it will be considered.
I am screwed if they wont consider it.
Just to make sure you're clear on this....THEY HAVE TO ACCEPT YOUR FILING. The clerk of court has no discretion to accept or not accept. The date on the summons means nothing and the clerk is probably not even aware of it.
MAKE SURE AND FILE TODAY! Seriously. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/26/2006 10:37 AM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Can I date your sister? |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/26/2006 10:45 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
SHIBUMI2
YOUR THE MAN DUDE!
What does Shibumi2 mean anyway?
Let me know if you want to scan or mail it.
I may start a side business helping people out of this financial crap.
:dfs:
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/26/2006 11:09 AM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
NP dude.
You get the credit because you took the info and ran with it.
Seriously, in the course of a few days, you came up to speed and actually filed a credible response that was better and more legally accurate than the complaint filed by people that do this creepy shit for a living.
If you can arrange a free day, go to the courthouse and watch how they churn this shit thru the system. A scumbag lawyer goes in front of the judge with about 50 of these or more PER DAY. About 48 didn't answer or show up, because they didn't understand or didn't have the money for an attorney...LIARS...or PRO's as the idiot posted earlier.
1 will show up with nothing prepared and be laughed out of court....and one (maybe) will actually do what you did.
CAC gets a bunch of default judgments 49 out of 50, then they use that COURT ORDER to dip into savings accouts, garnish wages, attach properties etc.
Since they only paid a few cents for every hundred dollars, its quite lucrative as you can imagine. And the interest clock keeps ticking so these poor dudes NEVER get out of debt. And a lot of them got into trouble because of DIVORCE, JOB LOSS, ILLNESS...whatever. SO they are paying off these debts, attorneys fees, interest and alimony at the same time...FUCKED FOR LIFE.
They don't have the time or resources to fight, and if they see someone is on to the scam, they usually just dump the claim...they aren't out anything and they really don't want to attract attention to their multi billion dollar scam.
The attorney general of Virginia (i believe) shut one firm down for good and chased another one out of the state. These people are pure scum...or PROS, as jerk-off above said. |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/26/2006 11:14 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Got this BOSTON LAW video from a website. Shows how CC companies look for customers who cant pay back their debts.
[link to www.boston-legal.org]
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
ToadMaster
User ID: 122282
7/27/2006 6:57 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
:hayseed: So long as our buddy Bush finds them there weapons of mass destructions, he is permitted to use them there said weapon. |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/27/2006 10:29 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/27/2006 10:57 AM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
hey...what happened to your sister? |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/27/2006 11:08 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I am anxious for that info u have. Have you decided to scan or mail it?
I am very excited going forward with this case!!!!!!
Why do you say the creature from jekyll island is disinfo?. the sites I have seen it at says it exposes the fed.
What does shibumi2 mean?
What is that avatar you have?
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/27/2006 12:17 PM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
The Creature from Jeckyll Island, I believe, is pure bullshit and a distraction. Are some elements of it true? Sure. But that's a key element of disinformation. They put some true/good stuff in with the nonsense.
The truth about the Fed is bad enough. Focus on that and you'll know what you need to know. Was there intrigue and subterfuge in the establishing of the FED--yes...as there is with all legislation. It's a corrupt system.
Read the Federal Reserve Act...go to the FED websites and read it for yourself..then read the executive orders where kennedy tried to get rid of the fed and issue US Notes...but he caught a bullet shortly thereafter and johnson, his replacement, cancelled the E.O.
Lone gunman?? doubtful.
The "truth" movements are dangerous because once they gaina little steam and credibility, they are infiltrated and the nonsense begins. But the truth is out there...you just have to apply your own filters and get it thru your head that no one has pre-packaged information that gets it all correct. The other thing with the various movements is that they fall in love with their own beliefs and fail to evolve and change. Don't get stuck on a sinking ship.
shibumi is an eastern based concept that is difficult to exactly translate into western thought. But it might be expressed as understatement, or delivering more than someone would expect. The samuari warriors in japan valued their swords above all else as it was their livelihood and protection. Some samuari would have elaborate sheaths for their swords, jewel encrusted or elaborate and ornate designs. But the true samuari would ignore the sheath and focus on the EDGE OF THE KNIFE, since that's all that would matter in battle. They also found that their adversaries would UNDERESTIMATE them because they carried what looked to be a common, ordinary sword. Of course, the battle was over quickly because the true samuari had put ALL of his efforts into the blade edge, and had ignored what was irrelevant in the battle...ornate trappings.
Like the samuari...you should see the legal arena as a battle. the judges and lawyers WILL underestimate those that come before it, which CAN work to your advantage if you focus ONLY ON YOUR EDGE. Books like the creature of jeckyll island are the ornate trappings...you can read them for entertainment, but until you MASTER that which is most critical to your cause, it is a costly distraction. |
|
shibumi2
User ID: 74188
7/27/2006 12:22 PM
| | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I am very excited going forward with this case!!!!!! Quoting: Moreinfoplease
It's the feeling of being a WARRIOR and striking back at those who fuck with you instead of being a fearful, scared SHEEP.
get used to the feeling...it works and applies to all elements of life.
Once people in the US become WARRIORS, it's all over for the losers who have control now. They are truly the fearful ones and their hours are numbered |
|
Moreinfoplease
User ID: 106184
7/27/2006 12:34 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I have been an advid observer of TPTB. I know they have conjured up this imagined reality most of us live in. I have chosen to refuse such reality.
The famous Jewish historian Josephus attests to its authenticity. He says that Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia in the fourth century B.C.E., came to Jerusalem, where the priests showed him a copy of the book of Daniel. Alexander himself concluded that the words of Daniel’s prophecy that were pointed out to him referred to his own military campaign involving Persia. This would have been about a century and a half before the “forgery” as proposed by critics. |
|
ToadMaster
User ID: 122941
7/27/2006 1:29 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
Shibumi2
I have been an advid observer of TPTB. I know they have conjured up this imagined reality most of us live in. I have chosen to refuse such reality. Quoting: Moreinfoplease
So too, have I. Armed with knowledge, we will defeat our enemies and retake truth.
:hayseed: So long as our buddy Bush finds them there weapons of mass destructions, he is permitted to use them there said weapon. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 127099
8/17/2006 10:37 PM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
bttt |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 118243
8/18/2006 12:55 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
a collection agency recently lied to me by identifying themselves as a gov agent (which i knew they weren't). when i challenged them, they hung up. wasn't that misrepresentation a criminal offence? the same company had just paid a million dollar settlement to an attorney general for destroying a guys credit rating based on wrong info.
does having unpaid debt justify this type of criminality? nevermind the harassing and insults in their phone calls. i aslso looked up their tactics on the net and i found out that this particular company puts a person in a 500-call cycle.
another debt i had on credit card theu a bank was also a bad experience. i had an overdue card debt but had a big check coming in, which i was gonna use to pay off the debt, but one that needed 5 days to clear. the4 bank told me it was too bad but my debt would automatically go to collection before the check had cleared. sure enough i started receiving calls from the agency, so i worked out a deal with them. a few days later i went to withdraw the money after the check had cleared and discovered the bank that said my account would automatically go to collection had gone into my account and taken the money anyway. well, i raised a stink and got the bank to give me the same deal that the agency offered thriugh the agreement of the bank ombudsman. done deal, right? wrong! six weeks later the agency starts phoning me again demanding the payment i'd already made. i had to rudely threaten them with a lawsuit to get them tio stop calling.
BUT THAT'S NOT THE END OF IT! several years ago my dad had a cable box rented from the cable company. when he no longer needed it, he returned. Well, about 2 years later a collection agency starts phoning my dad DEMANDING $300 for the box. My dad tried explaining nicely that he'd returned it and i contacted the cable company directly. DO YOU KNOW WHT THEY TOLD ME? they said "well, the shelf where the box belongs is empty, therefore YOU have to pay. i finally got an address out of my dad as to where he'd retuerned the box 2 years earlier and phoned that outlet. After a few minutes, the dude tells me "yeah, the box is right here" IT HAD BEEN SITTING THERE FOR 2 YEARS AND BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T FORWARD IT TO THE RIGHT OFFICE, they held my dad liable. SO i phone the collection agency and explain to them where to find the box, and then ask, 'so does this affect my dad's credit score? they said: 'well, you'll have to find out yourself'. So i said, "ok, but i'm gonna charge you my professional fees plus expenses' Then they said "ok, we'll do it".
can you believe the nerve of these pricks? the banks and the agencies! |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 61357
8/18/2006 9:45 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
This....this is the most informative thread i think i have read in a long time.
that was almost orgasmic.
Thanks to all |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 102782
8/18/2006 10:26 AM | | Re: HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid? | Quote |
bump above the spam |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 |
|
