I received a summons for a credit card debt owed by my father who is incarcerated. He opened the account and asked for an additional card for me when I was a minor. I never signed the contract he is the only one that did as far as I know and I never gave them my social security number. I used the card several times up to 2001 and then I paid what I owed and never used it again, in fact I cut up my card. My father continued to use it. At one point the people kept hounding me and I did not know what to do so I thought I should do the right thing and pay it for my dad. Unfortunately, it was a financial hardship for me and I had to quit. At one point because they continued to hound me I offered to pay 600.00 which was more than half of what was owed and the credit card company said no. I have since learned that it is showing up on my credit and it lists me as an joint user. Aren't they required to have my signature on a contract for that card to list me as a joint user? Now because I can not pay any longer as I am a single mother of 3 small children and only make enough money to keep a roof over my children's head, and get help with groceries from family. I can prove my expenses for just a house, utilities and the necessary needs are more than what I make with nothing extra. I was young at the time this all occurred and did not have anyone to help me so I did what I thought was right by trying to pay this, I was not paying it because it was my debt, I didn't know what to do now they are trying to hold me liable. How do I fight this and win since I have no money to pay this and it is not my debt.

Hello b:

Send them a certified letter. Tell them to send you a signed contract with your signature on it, and you'll pay the entire balance. If they CAN'T produce such a document (you're telling them this), then you demand they STOP all, and any, collection efforts. Instruct them to REMOVE the offending remarks from your credit reports. Tell them further, that if they continue to damage your credit rating you will sue them. Tell them additionally, that the fines for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, is up to $1,000 per day, and you will see to it that it gets assessed against them.

Send the letter return receipt requested. Send copies to ANY and ALL attorney's, banks, collector scumbags - ANYBODY who is involved.

The only option available to them at that point is to sue. That's GOOD for you, because they can't produce a signed contract. As long as they don't have one of those, it doesn't matter that you paid some, or used the card some. You are an authorized USER - NOT a principal.

excon

You may have made a big mistake by making payments. By doing so you may have acknowledged responsibility for the debt.

What you now have to do is answer the summons with a letter stating your Intent to Defend against the suit and request a hearing. Send a copy of that letter to the plaintiff with a request for documentation and verification of your responsibility towards the debt and their right to collect it.

Hopefully, they will not be able to produce the documentation. At the hearing, they may produce proof that you made payments as proof that you acknowledged the debt as your own. The judge may or may not rule intheir favor is they do that.

Hmmmm, interesting question. First of all, I'm sorry you're dealing with this situation and a dad in jail.

I'd be hard pressed to think that making a payment on someone else's account would automatically make you liable for their debt. That seems like a stretch to me.

I'm with ex-con (who is the funniest person I've run across in a long time). If the card was taken out in his name and with his social security number, the debt should be his alone. Do everything ex-con says and see what the fallout is. Good luck and please post the outcome.

Hmmmm, interesting question. First of all, I'm sorry you're dealing with this situation and a dad in jail.

I'd be hard pressed to think that making a payment on someone else's account would automatically make you liable for their debt. That seems like a stretch to me.

I'm with ex-con (who is the funniest person I've run across in a long time). If the card was taken out in his name and with his social security number, the debt should be his alone. Do everything ex-con says and see what the fallout is. Good luck and please post the outcome.

I'm sorry but excon's advice comes up a little short in this instance. The problem here is that the OP received a summons. He HAS to answer that summons. Just sending a letter to the creditor does NOT answer the summons. If he does not answer the summons, the plaintiff will stall around until the deadline for answering the summons passes and they obtain a default judgement, then use that judgement.

So the first step is to answer the summons, THEN send a copy of that answer to the plaintiff requesting verification.

While you may think its "a stretch", I assure it's a real possibility. The fact is that he was an authorized user on the card. Since the card owner is incarcerated, its unlikely he was using the card. So the plaintiff could argue that making payments acknowledges responsibility for the debt. I'm not saying they will win that argument, but it is possible.

As a side note, the mods and regulars on this site take pride in the quality of the advice given out here. We are careful in our answers. Unfortunately, we have not seen that same level of quality from you. Please exercise more care in answering questions here.

Hmmmm, interesting question. First of all, I'm sorry you're dealing with this situation and a dad in jail.

I'd be hard pressed to think that making a payment on someone else's account would automatically make you liable for their debt. That seems like a stretch to me.

I'm with ex-con (who is the funniest person I've run across in a long time). If the card was taken out in his name and with his social security number, the debt should be his alone. Do everything ex-con says and see what the fallout is. Good luck and please post the outcome.



It's not someone else's account - he said he's an authorized user; therefore, he's "authorized" to make payments. He has extended the Statute, no question.

You must address the issue of the summons.

UPDATE/EDIT TO POST: Sorry. I did read the copyright info on Bankrate and they said cannot be used for commercial purporses, which I don't think this is. In case I've done anything wrong, I'll paraphrase. As said above in my original post, you must address the issue of the summons. Some of what is said in the scenario very similar to yours would not be applicable as you have received a summons.

But the attorney consulted by the poster (who also was an "authorized user" and paid her mother's bill for six months) said that there might be a chance that as a joint user, you could be held responsible. But if you didn't sign the original loan or provide your social security number that would not make you a joint user. As someone above posted, the original signed agreement should clear up the issue in your favor. Don't want to do an extensive paraphrase so:

If you Google variations of your posting header you will be able to find the bankrate information and several others.

You must address the issue of the summons.
Or
This scenario is applicable to your case and might be of help. Originally posted on Bankrate.

Justin Harelik is a practicing bankruptcy lawyer in the Los Angeles office of Price Law Group. To ask a question of the Bankruptcy Adviser go to the "Ask the Experts" page, and select "bankruptcy" as the topic.



The OP has been served with a summons - your advice (to fax, call) does not apply in this case. The OP MUST formally and legally answer the summons in a timely fashion or a Judgment will be taken against him. Bankruptcy expertise also is not valuable in this situation.

The question is whether he has legally taken responsibility for this debt AND whether he has possibly extended the Statute.

Bankrate at one time had a paragraph about not republishing their info without permission and the penalties for so doing - I don't know if you have permission ro republish.

You must address the issue of the summons.

UPDATE/EDIT TO POST: Sorry. I did read the copyright info on Bankrate and they said cannot be used for commercial purporses, which I don't think this is. In case I've done anything wrong, I'll paraphrase. As said above in my original post, you must address the issue of the summons. Some of what is said in the scenario very similar to yours would not be applicable as you have received a summons.

But the attorney consulted by the poster (who also was an "authorized user" and paid her mother's bill for some months) said that there might be a chance that as a joint user, you could be held responsible. But if you didn't sign the original loan or provide your credit card number that would not make you a joint user. As someone above posted, the original signed agreement should clear up the issue in your favor. Don't want to do an extensive paraphrase so:

If you google "authorized credit card user" + "liability" you will be able to find the bankrate information and several others.



But did payment by the authorized user who never signed for the card extend the Statute of limitation?

The original poster didn't ask that question and not sure it would matter to her. What she wants to know is if she is liable for the debt as an authorized user and if she would be considered a joint user if she didn't sign the original loan document.

Just to clarify a few things here. My father opened the account. I was a minor and he did not set it up as a joint account he just asked for a second card and authorized me to use the card. The card was opened in 2000. I only used it a couple of times and paid off what I charged prior to 2001 and then in 2001 I cut my card up I did not use it after my father was incarcerated. I had no need to use it because I worked and went without to get myself a home for my kids and paid my bills and obtained a credit score of 720 and got my own credit cards so I had no reason nor did I have a card to use. The debt that they are trying to get me to pay was what my father charged prior to being incarcerated and of course can't pay now that he is in jail. I did file a civil answer to the summons along with a letter from my father indicating that the debt was his and informing the judge that I have never seen a copy of the contract with my signature or been given any documents to show who signed the charges that were made on the card. I sent a certified/return receipt packet of everything that I filed with the court to the attorney and I am now waiting to see what the next step will be. They did not set a hearing date as of yet when I filed the civil answer.

You made that clear in your original post.

From everything I've found, if you did not sign the original loan and/or give them your social security number, you are not liable for the debt, but if you've been issued a summons you must answer the summons and deal with the situation. As someone in a previous post said, address the summons, sent a certified letter to the creditor asking for a copy of the original loan documentation, etc.

You have to go to court because even if this is not your debt, they can get a judgment against you if you don't show and will make this issue substantially harder to fight.

Once they produce the original loan documentation, you can prove to the court that you are not a joint user and not responsible for the debt.

From everything you just posted, you're on the right track.

I did file a civil answer to the summons along with a letter from my father indicating that the debt was his and informing the judge that I have never seen a copy of the contract with my signature or been given any documents to show who signed the charges that were made on the card. I sent a certified/return receipt packet of everything that I filed with the court to the attorney and I am now waiting to see what the next step will be. They did not set a hearing date as of yet when I filed the civil answer.

That is the correct thing to do. A hearing date will be set unless the plaintiff decides to drop the suit. The likelihood is that they will either drop it since they don't have your signature on a contract, or they will pursue claiming you tacitly accepted responsibility by making payments. I think they will drop it, but the other is a possibility.

You made that clear in your original post.

From everything I've found, if you did not sign the original loan and/or give them your social security number, you are not liable for the debt, but if you've been issued a summons you must answer the summons and deal with the situation. As someone in a previous post said, address the summons, sent a certified letter to the creditor asking for a copy of the original loan documentation, etc.

You have to go to court because even if this is not your debt, they can get a judgment against you if you don't show and will make this issue substantially harder to fight.

Once they produce the original loan documentation, you can prove to the court that you are not a joint user and not responsible for the debt.

From everything you just posted, you're on the right track.



A certified letter to the creditor is not the appropriate response here - he's actually been served and must respond to the Court.

I finally called an Attorney I do work for who specializes in collections and here's his answer (in NYS, of course): a person with authorization to use the credit card (cc) who did not sign an agreement with the cc company is NOT responsible for the debt.

(If it would turn into a collections matter and there is a dispute between the card holder and the authorized user the card holder would have to sue the authorized user because the card holder is 100% responsible for the debt. This is, of course, is not what the OP asked and it's just a side comment.)

There is no legal relationship between the cc company and the authorized user in this posted instance.

HOWEVER - if the authorized user made a payment AT THE DIRECTION of the card holder it extends the Statute. If there was NO authorization by the card holder it does NOT extend the Statute. If the Statute is an issue by virtue of the payment the argument will be (between the cc company and the card holder) whether the payment was authorized. The company will, of course, say it was.

As far as extending the Statute - it is extended ONLY by ACTIVITY on the account - a charge, a payment. Contact with the cc company or a collection agency does NOT extend the Statute as that is NOT activity on the account.

Update on the civil answer filed with the court. Copies of all documents filed with the court were sent certified to the attorney who filed for the credit card company. The attorney for the credit card company has now sent a "Request for Admissions" They are asking me to Admit or Deny that I: 1. paid the credit card company money, 2. used the card with intent to purchase, 3. accepted the card in my name, 4. tried to use the card fraudulently with intent to purchase, 5. applied for and or received credit from the credit card company, 6. that I or my spouse (which for some reason I can't get them to understand that this is my father and not my spouse) purchased goods and /or services from various creditors with the credit extend to me by the credit card company, and finally, 8. admit that the principal sum, excluding interest to date is owed the credit card company. In my civil answer I told the judge that I have never received a copy of any statements from the credit card company showing what was charged or any documentation showing that I signed for credit purchases. I also told the judge that to the best of my knowledge I have never signed the contract or provided my social security number to them. The attorney then filed as evidence copies of billing statements from February 06 to December 06 none of which say where the charges were made, what the charges were or who made the charges, they were statements very much like anyone could pull off the internet. In my civil answer I also told the judge I never signed a contract with the credit card company and requested a copy of a contract with my signature and the attorney filed two pages of customer agreement pages you get when you sign a contract but do not have my signature or anyone's signature on them. It appears that these are the documents they are basing their case on and none of which prove I owe the debt because they do not show concrete proof I made the debt. I would think that since there were two cards to this account, the original and the 2nd one for the authorized user that the statements would reflect the card number of the card that was used, but all statements show one card number. The other part is the statements are all dated for the year 2006. I made no charges after 2001 and if my father made charges it would have had to be before August 2002. Does anyone know of a website I can go to that has the forms to respond to the request for admissions, request for production

You just respond that you can neither confirm nor deny anything until they verify the debt. If they sent compies of a contract without your signature, then they have not proven the debt.

As for the credit card number, most accounts use the same number for authorized users.

Question regarding the Plaintiff's request for Admissions and Prodcutions. Along with this the Plaintiff has filed an Initial Disclosure Statement. This I believe is a statement of facts as they see them. Can the defendant file an initial disclosure statement or do they respond to the Plaintiff's.

Update to this matter. A pre-trial conference was held with an attorney for the company trying to sue me for a debt that belongs to my father. After filing all the information that I had and responding for to the request for production and admissions the attorney for Capital One was actually very nice. Because there is a question of whether I am an authorized user or joint user he has requested an extension of the case and is asking Capital One to locate information regarding whether I was an authorized user or joint user. If they come back and say I was a joint user he is requesting the case against me be dismissed with prejudice and it will not be brought against me again. He will possibly though request that the case be dismissed against my father with prejudice, but I explained to him that my father is in jail until 2012 so that may be pointless. The other thing is that if he does not settle this it will continue to be sold to others and will continue to surface. He did tell me that Capital One or any credit card company only keeps their application forms on file for one year, so I am wondering what proof they will be able to produce that indicates whether I am an authorized user or joint user. I am inclined to believe that they won't be able to provide proof but will try to say I am a joint user and that will make it so. He did say that the reason the brought suit against me is because they knew my dad lived at my address and therefore there was a house so that is why they decided to sue. I explained that my father used my address for a month that he had his mail coming to me but in no way and never did have his name on my home so he never had an interest in the home and therefore they had no right to sue me and place a lien or anything against my home because of my dad. The attorney also cautioned me that there may be other creditors that may surface and to tell them that he does not live at my address and I am not accepting anything for him and guess what. I had just seen him 3 hours earlier, went home and someone was knocking on my door. Yes, it was another creditor looking for my father, however, this time the paperwork did not have my name so I did not accept it. The attorney also told me to contact the credit bureau's and see if I am listed with my father on anymore things and then tell them that I have never been married to a person with that name and get it removed. Capital One began to list me with an (A) at the end of their information on the credit bureau reports about 2 years ago. Prior to that it was not that way because it was not on my credit report when I bought my house. So it sounds like things may smooth out with this. Thanks for your suggestions. Note to all check your documents closely, keep a copy of your contracts even if they don't, write notes on all conversations with people, it is all about documenting everything. It is time to take control of things so that those that want to take advantage of the innocent can't. You may not be as lucky as I was to have an attorney who is suing you be civil about the situation or realize that the person they are representing can't prove what they need to prove and therefore he needs to get the case dropped because he has no case.

[QUOTE=bsulli1043]Update to this matter.]



Wow - good work. Thanks for the update. Most informative.