Getting served tomorrow

[Freddy03]

This answer is half-correct.

If a junk debt buyer now owns the debt AND the junk debt buyer CHOSE to REPORT this to the credit reporting agencies, you will see this on your credit report.

I can tell you first hand I had 8 credit cards that were purchased by junk debt buyers and only ONE reported this to the credit agencies.

Assuming you choose to answer, you should definitely ask for the suing party to produce for the court a full chain of custody on the debt.

I am sure you have seen the news lately about "foreclosuregate" - where robo-signers were falsifying documents trying to prove they owned the debt AND the amount owed. In the credit card business, the robo-signing is EVEN WORSE. Here is an article where a consumer protection lawyer claims he has only lost 4 lawsuits out of 500 or so because the record keeping is horrible.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/...look-good.html

I was referring to the original creditor (WAMU) on the credit report.

If they are listed as charged off with a $0 balance then the account has been sold. Or if it states "Sold or Transferred" then it's been sold.

If the orginial creditor (WAMU) shows a balance then they still "own" the debt. It could still state charge off/closed but it has to list a balance not zero.

[gman]

I was referring to the original creditor (WAMU) on the credit report.

If they are listed as charged off with a $0 balance then the account has been sold. Or if it states "Sold or Transferred" then it's been sold.

If the orginial creditor (WAMU) shows a balance then they still "own" the debt. It could still state charge off/closed but it has to list a balance not zero.

I agree with what you've written above...but I am not sure you are following the other half.

My true, real life example:

• Creditor X has sold off my debt over 2 years ago - and the JDB has in turn sold it again to another JDB.
• On my current credit report, Creditor X shows the account being charged off 2 years ago.
• However, the "balance owed" is still the original amount - and it is NOT zero.
• Neither JDB #1 nor JDB #2 bothered to report the debt to the credit agencies and are nowhere to be found on my credit report.

So, my point is that the credit report can show an original creditor with (a) a charge off and (b) a non-zero balance and the debt is NOT necessarily OWNED by the original creditor anymore.

One cannot assume that if there is a chargeoff AND a positive balance that the original creditor still owns the debt. I am proof positive of this - across 8 credit cards.

Her best move is to file for the suing party to provide a full chain of custody proving the debt has not been sold off. If they can provide ALL documentation (and no phony signatures, notaries, etc.) then she will lose. If not, then the creditor has an uphill battle.

[WhatMoney]

So, my point is that the credit report can show an original creditor with (a) a charge off and (b) a non-zero balance and the debt is NOT necessarily OWNED by the original creditor anymore.

Her best move is to file for the suing party to provide a full chain of custody proving the debt has not been sold off. If they can provide ALL documentation (and no phony signatures, notaries, etc.) then she will lose. If not, then the creditor has an uphill battle.

I agree on your non-zero balance comment. Actually using your credit reports to determine a debt owner, and assuming they are correct and updated, is rather silly in the first place.

The Plaintiff as listed in the lawsuit should tell who the owner of the debt actually is. If the owner is not Chase and Chase appears nowhere as one of the parties of the Plaintiff, you can be pretty sure Chase is no longer the owner of the debt. So just look at the court papers to determine who now owns the debt.

Challenging the chain of custody, in case Chase has really sold off the debt, is not going to be an inexpensive process with court and attorney fees. This will lead to more court hearings and more expense. And if the JDB has the paperwork you still lose. Should the poster spend $2000 in court and legal fees to fight a case she has a 20% chance of winning? She might as well just pay off the debt if she has that kind of money to pay for a very iffy defense. That's what her attorney was trying to tell her - either have a real defense, or do nothing and accept the default judgment.

[lindsay2181]

That's what her attorney was trying to tell her - either have a real defense, or do nothing and accept the default judgment.

^yes, that's exactly what he said.

to answer the other posters' questions--

sorry for not mentioning my state in the original post, it is louisiana like it says under my name. this is a community property state. the debt is in my name only. we do have a checking account, in both our names. he is the only one with income, his paycheck is direct deposited into our account. i guess we maybe should change that soon.

[lindsay2181]

ok so today is the day and i am taking no action. i have been sick like a dog the past few days so even if i wanted to i haven't really gotten out of bed much, except to go puke

i hope i made the right decision, but if no i'm sure i'll be getting served again by someone else real soon haha.

[WhatMoney]

ok so today is the day and i am taking no action. i have been sick like a dog the past few days so even if i wanted to i haven't really gotten out of bed much, except to go puke

i hope i made the right decision, but if no i'm sure i'll be getting served again by someone else real soon haha.

Don't just ignore this however. You need to check with the court to see what happened today, eg. do you now have a default judgment in your name. Also you should close the joint checking account ASAP and have your husband open a payroll deposit account only in his name. You may not even need your own checking account.

You also need to be aware of the community property laws and what "could" happen. They would have to sue your husband to go after his wages, and that is unlikely. At least you would have plenty of warning if they did that. Here's a brief discussion about community property debt:

http://www.bills.com/community-property-debt/

[lindsay2181]

thanks, i will check with the court. and we were planning to change our checking account, thanks for the reminder to get on that asap. i will just make sure we don't open a new account with Chase LOL!

[lindsay2181]

Ok, I thought I'd post an update on this. We did close our joint checking account, and opened a new one at a different bank, in my husband's name only, just in case.

I have not received anything from court about the matter, and I tried finding info about the case online, but found nothing. I received a letter today from Couch, Stillman, Blitt, and Conville--basically saying, they filed suit, they are aware that I was served on such and such day, and if I'd like to go ahead and make a payment plan with them please call their toll-free number. They also included some financial info sheet, where I can voluntarily list my employment, salary, expenses, bank accounts, real estate, etc. which I will NOT be filling out. It says if I do not pay them now, "litigation will continue" so.....I'm assuming this means they did not get the default judgement then? All this took place in October, so wouldn't they have received the default judgement by now? Or is it a longer process than that? We are nearing the end of December. So, for now I will stash their letter away along with the rest.

[WhatMoney]

Ok, I thought I'd post an update on this. We did close our joint checking account, and opened a new one at a different bank, in my husband's name only, just in case.

I have not received anything from court about the matter, and I tried finding info about the case online, but found nothing. I received a letter today from Couch, Stillman, Blitt, and Conville--basically saying, they filed suit, they are aware that I was served on such and such day, and if I'd like to go ahead and make a payment plan with them please call their toll-free number. They also included some financial info sheet, where I can voluntarily list my employment, salary, expenses, bank accounts, real estate, etc. which I will NOT be filling out. It says if I do not pay them now, "litigation will continue" so.....I'm assuming this means they did not get the default judgement then? All this took place in October, so wouldn't they have received the default judgement by now? Or is it a longer process than that? We are nearing the end of December. So, for now I will stash their letter away along with the rest.

You received a summons and 15 days to reply to the court w/ an answer back in October. The plaintiffs must have a Case# from the court before you were summoned if they sued you. Do you have the Case# and court? The only way to know what has happened in this case is to call the county court clerk's office and ask for the Docket, since you couldn't find anything online, or go down to the courthouse and look up your case in their computers. It's unusual to not have a hearing after you are summoned, and the usual outcome of a hearing when you don't show is a default judgment.

Maybe the attorneys didn't show for the hearing either, and there is no action taken so far. You'll never know until you ask. The court doesn't always notify you of any actions taken if you are a no show, so don't wait for the court notice that may never arrive.

[lindsay2181]

Ok so finally today, I received noticed that the judgement has been granted. "in the full sum of $3,169.45 plus legal interest from the date of judicial demand until paid, 25% attorney's fees on the aggregate of principal and interest and for all costs." was signed May 4th, 2011.

I had almost put this out of my mind since I hadn't heard anything in a while. I still don't have the money, and I have no paycheck for them to garnish...

[tobee43]

Ok so finally today, I received noticed that the judgement has been granted. "in the full sum of $3,169.45 plus legal interest from the date of judicial demand until paid, 25% attorney's fees on the aggregate of principal and interest and for all costs." was signed May 4th, 2011.

I had almost put this out of my mind since I hadn't heard anything in a while. I still don't have the money, and I have no paycheck for them to garnish...

wow....so the time line was approx. what 4 months???

[treehugger1]

Looks like about six months on top of the three years the OC/JDB sat on it.

[tobee43]

Looks like about six months on top of the three years the OC/JDB sat on it.

tree!! nice to see you.

yes, this is an excellent thread for an example of a timeline. for at least this situation.

[treehugger1]

Back at you tobee. Yes, I appreciate the original poster returning to update this. The timeline may not be the norm, but my personal experience suggests the timeline is not rare.

[tobee43]

Back at you tobee. Yes, I appreciate the original poster returning to update this. The timeline may not be the norm, but my personal experience suggests the timeline is not rare.

maybe they have slowed down a bit since there are so many defaults now, i'm sure the courts can't keep up with the work loads and back logs of all the judgment filings.