Best Buy (purchase money security interest??) lawyer wants goods or cash

[Jf24]

Is Dell the same way with this?

[persh]

Letter to Bass and Associates

For all you pro se litigants out there... Here's a letter I crafted last month after receiving this silly letter from Bass and Associates. Note: I am not an attorney and I successfully filed my complicated bankruptcy case pro se. I was discharged in 11/2010 and received this letter in 10/2011. Be sure to change some of the references. Use at your own discretion and risk... Remember this letter assumes you are already discharged and Best Buy did nothing during BK proceeedings.

Let me explain the sections:

1/2/3/4 sections describe the fact that Best Buy never claimed that their stuff was under a PMSI while the BK proceedings were going on (they do not have to do anything at meeting of creditors - they don't need to show up at all in fact - but must instantiate any legal contentions before discharge - their rights are limited after discharge - However, one of the things they can claim is that Best Buy was listed as an unsecured creditor (they were in mine) and that this constituted "fraud" which is a real big stretch to re-open the BK. Filing a writ of replevin is a tad too late - they had all the time in the world and were notified via meeting of creditors letter, but they did nothing in my case.) I am assuming that they did not do anything during BK proceedings in this letter (i.e., file motions about PMSI, reaffirmations) I agree with tobee43 from this earlier thread that they cannot come after you after the BK discharge. Thread #63822-Letter-from-Bass-amp-associates-6-months-after-discharge

Next section - I simply state that I reject their contention that there exists a perfected PMSI and that it does not conform to relevant state statute. Notice that I mentioned that the effective date is before discharge as opposed to now - that just means that I reject that they have a currently enforceable PMSI. Note: some legal texts say that a consumer good PMSI is automatically perfected - I take the stand that I do not agree with this and make them show me

Next section: the reason why they can bug you (I think) after the BK is that they can do so unlimited to advise you of your rights. Specifically, the right to be able to give them back what they consider their stuff. This is why they use the keywords "voluntary" - that is the exact same word used in the relevant BK statute: "11 U.S.C. §524(f): (f) Nothing contained in subsection (c) or (d) of this section prevents a debtor from voluntarily repaying any debt." Obviously, Bass and Assoc consider the PMSI to be a debt since they believe a PMSI exists. I explicitly state that I will not surrender anything voluntarily - this clears the matter and makes any future contact illegal (as a type of debt collection) - I do not need to go into the assertion that the stuff does not exist anymore, since I claim that no PMSI exists in the first place...(I've seen some threads talking about telling Bass that the goods don't exist anymore)

Next section: do not contact me or I go to court... Also: this line is from my BK book - acknowledge that anything in the current letter really does not mean anything (i do not acknowledge it...)

DO NOT SIGN THIS LETTER - there is a possibility (remote) that they can use this signature to compare to the receipt slips from Best Buy electronic signature system (i.e., when you buy anything from best buy they require a signature for credit or debit).

Good luck!!

################################################

Re: HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A. (Best Buy Account #xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

Dear Bass and Associates:

In regard to your letter of __________________ about a purchase security interest in reference to creditor HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., for Best Buy Account #xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, please be advised of the following:

1. In my original Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing on __________________, HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., was listed as a creditor in reference to Best Buy Account #xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;

2. At the Meeting of Creditors (11 U.S.C. §341) on ____________, HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., or their assigned representative, failed to appear as required by law to make amendments, agreements, reaffirmations, motions, or security assignments in regard to the aforementioned account;

3. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., did not file any amendments, agreements, reaffirmations, motions, or security assignments during the bankruptcy proceedings; and

4. I was given a Bankruptcy Discharge (11 U.S.C. §§ 727) on __________________

Because no proof has been offered with receipt of your letter of _________________, I will assume that HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., never had a valid security interest at the time of bankruptcy discharge, and that the security interest was never perfected in the first instance, and that there does not exist a valid written agreement granting the security interest and reasonably describing the collateral; nor has the creditor met their burden under _____[insert relevant state statute - do a google search for your state and look for what constitutes a "consumer-goods" PMSI]______. Thus, any security interest alleged by HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., is null and void.

I understand that under 11 U.S.C. §524(f) I may voluntarily pay any debts associated with the bankruptcy after the discharge; however, I respectfully refuse to do so because of the aforementioned.

Any future contact in relation to this matter is subject to sanctions under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692-1692(o)) and the final Bankruptcy Discharge order. Please be advised that this is your last and only notice to cease communications immediately. This letter is not meant in any way to be an acknowledgment that the aforementioned account is valid or that your letter of ______________, has any effect whatsoever.

Sincerely,
Mr. X (Do not sign this letter with your handwriting - type it out instead)

[Bella2]

What happened after you sent this letter? They are harassing me into returning a camcorder. They told me that they will place a lein against me if I don't return it to them.

[mountanddo]

It seems to me that the people that tell them either they don't have the items or the cat peed on them get away with not paying and keep their items. Faust had to pay for his TV. If he would of just told them he didn't have the TV any longer would they have come to his house and checked. How is it that some people get to keep their items simply by telling them they don't have it any longer. How is this legal, fair or honest?

[jostby]

I told them all of the items I bought were x-mas, b-day, and grad gifts and that I had none of the items. End of story. Don't let them intimidate you.

[persh]

What happened after you sent this letter? They are harassing me into returning a camcorder. They told me that they will place a lein against me if I don't return it to them.

I have never heard back from them and don't expect to. A lien? Really? For a camcorder? It's up to you as to what you want to do, but if you wanted to respond to them, you could file the above letter and register it by US mail (return receipt and certified) and wait for them to file in court (They really do not want to - it's just too much money and time). If they do file a lien, you will be given a letter from the court that a lien has been filed against you, so at that point you can leave it alone (nothing wrong there unless it affects your credit rating - somewhat unlikely) or you do a motion to dismiss using the same argument in the letter - all you would need to pay is court filing costs (maybe $125?) - maybe make an appearance. You can even file the above letter in court as a response to the lien. All this is highly, highly speculative and more than likely Bass is just messing with you.

About the question of telling them that a cat peed on your stuff, sounds like a good plan for some. For me (and others who like to go the legal route), this letter should do. Really, it's not a question of my stuff is ruined and it's not worth anything anymore, it's more like you don't have the right to even ask in the first place.

About saying stuff was given away - they could say something like: "you can't give away something you do not own" - so I can imagine an extremely unlikely scenario where they would come after you. I think the key is how much money you discharged. Mine was like $900 (definitely not worth pursuing). If you had something like $60k, pursuing a legal route would definitely be a viable option. Spending $5k in legal fees is nothing for Best Buy to put you through the ringer. I still think any legal proceedings after discharge (writ of replevin, etc.) is not possible anyway, so this would be a risky move for Best Buy.