My husband was served from Midland Funding 11 days ago and they have not filed a complaint yet. When I call the court house they tell me to call back after 13 days. We did answer this summons the very next day with my husband's answer, certificate of service and notice of appearance. We sent certified validation letters but as I have read they do not have to respond to those. My question is, according to Utah state laws they must file their complaint within ten days or the case should be dismissed. So if this is true how do I make sure this does get dismissed so they cannot serve him again?:confused:

My husband was served from Midland Funding 11 days ago and they have not filed a complaint yet. When I call the court house they tell me to call back after 13 days. We did answer this summons the very next day with my husband's answer, certificate of service and notice of appearance. We sent certified validation letters but as I have read they do not have to respond to those. My question is, according to Utah state laws they must file their complaint within ten days or the case should be dismissed. So if this is true how do I make sure this does get dismissed so they cannot serve him again?:confused:


You can't keep him from getting served again. At some point it becomes harassment but he could be served again.

If they are out of the time to respond, make a Motion to have this service/case dismissed but that doesn't guarantee they won't serve again. As part of the Motion you could try to preclude any future attempts to collect on the same account but I don't know if the Judge will grant that relief.

You can't keep him from getting served again. At some point it becomes harassment but he could be served again.

If they are out of the time period to respond, make a Motion to have this service/case dismissed but that doesn't guarantee they won't serve again. As part of the Motion you could try to preclude any future attempts to collect on the same account but I don't know if the Judge will grant that relief.



Would we be better off just waiting for it to go to court then trying to settle a lump sum with them in court? If we do make a motion to have this case dismissed do we take that to the court house and mail it certified mail to their attorney?

In our answer my husband stated that he denied the debt and wanted proof that the debt was his. Do they have to validate the debt? My husband did not respond to the first letter from the attorney stating that we had 30 days to dispute the validity of the debt and then he received the summons, so does that mean we missed our opportunity for them to validate? Thanks again for your answer.

Something doesn't sound right here. Generally the process here is to file suit, then get a summons that notifies the defendant of the suit and gives them a chance to answer.

So I don't understand how they can serve you without filing a complaint. Can you cite the law you are referring to, you may be misunderstanding it.

Yes, the plaintiff has to validate the debt. They may not do it before the hearing but have to do it at the hearing if they want to get a judgement.

The time to negotiate a settlement is BEFORE court. Once they obtain a judgement, they have the leverage. So if you think they can validate the debt then you should send them a letter stating your willingness to negotiate a settlement IF they can validate the debt.

Something doesn't sound right here. Generally the process here is to file suit, then get a summons that notifies the defendant of the suit and gives them a chance to answer.

So I don't understand how they can serve you without filing a complaint. Can you cite the law you are referring to, you may be misunderstanding it.

Yes, the plaintiff has to validate the debt. They may not do it before the hearing but have to do it at the hearing if they want to get a judgement.

The time to negotiate a settlement is BEFORE court. Once they obtain a judgement, they have the leverage. So if you think they can validate the debt then you should send them a letter stating your willingness to negotiate a settlement IF they can validate the debt.


I called the court house today and it had just been filed so never mind about that, they did serve him first and then filed the complaint. So you say the best time would be now to settle. In my husband's answer he denied the debt saying he needed proof and so forth, can I send a letter now for settlement. I really just want this to go away and it is his debt so I want to do the right thing. My father-n-law said he would help us so we might as well try to settle. If I do send a letter what percentage should I start at? I was thinking 30 percent. Thanks again for all of your help. He has another one we are trying to settle on that has threatened to sue so this is a nightmare.:(

No, your husband sends a letter stating that he is unsure if this is his debt or not. However, if they can provide proof that it is, he is interested in negotiating a settlement. You don't offer anything until they verify the debt. If they do, then I would start at 50%.

No, your husband sends a letter stating that he is unsure if this is his debt or not. However, if they can provide proof that it is, he is interested in negotiating a settlement. You don't offer anything until they verify the debt. If they do, then I would start at 50%.

Thank you, you have been so helpful with your answers. I guess now I just have to wait and see if they can prove this debt is his.

My husband is being sued by Midland Funding. We answered the summons and sent for validation of debt. He just got some paperwork in the mail from Bennett & Deloney and I am not sure what I do next. Please help! They have sent my husband a letter that states, per your request you will find documentation providing verification of the debt. Attached to this is an affidavit in support of judgment. It reads as follows:

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority personally appeared and personally known by me, this day, and who after being duly sworn deposed and says as follows:

1. That I am a competent person over eighteen years of age. I am employed by Midland Credit Management, Inc. servicer of this account on behalf of Midland Funding, I make the statements herein based upon my personal knowledge. Midland Funding is the current owner of, and/or successor to, the obligation sued upon.

2. That Midland Funding predecessor in interest sold and assigned all right, title and interest in the defendant's (original card holder and account number were stated, as well as Midland's account number for this)to Midland Funding. In the ordinary course of business, Midland Funding purchases charged-off credit accounts, installment acounts andor other credit lines.

3. That the scope of my job responsibilities in cludes the oversight of credit accounts maintained by Midland. Blah, blah, blah (talks about the persons duties)

4. That based upon my personal knowledge of MCM, Inc's business records and the practices for servicing of the credit accounts of Midland the contents of this Affidavit are true and correct. If called upon and sworn to testify herto, I could and would so competently testify thereto.

5. That in addition to the foregoing, Midland maintains, as a regular practice of its business, computer records of activity on its accounts, including payments received, amounts owing on such accounts, credits and offsets. Etc, etc...

6. (This paragraph gives the just and true balance on account).

7. That demand for payment of the just amount has been made more than 30 days prior hereto and payment for the amount owing has not been tendered. There is no record of any legitimate dispute by the accountholder.

8. That all documents attached hereto are certified to be correct originals of true and correct copies of the originals, being reproductions from the records or being evidence to establish the contents of a lost or destroyed document or computer transactional records. I declare under the penalty or perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

9. That upon information and belief, based upon business dealings with the defendant, that defendant is /are not and infant or incompetent person and that defendant is not in the military service and is not entitled to the rights and privileges provided under the Solders and Sailor Civil Relief Act of 1940, as amended.

Then at the bottom there was a copy of a signed signature. Then it said it was notarized, also just a copy.

The pages that follow are a copy of the cardmember agreement.

No signature from my husband, nothing that would really prove it is his other than the account number. The next piece of paperwork that came was a request for pretrial conference, no date just request. What does this mean and what do I reply? Can I write back saying that was not proper validation and request proper validation? Thanks again.

First, I merged the two threads. Please post follow-up as an answer to your original thread do not start a new one.

Second, basically that document says that they are entitled to collect on the debt and that the person who signed is swearing the info is correct.

The problem here is that there is no signature on the credit app. Now they could claim and show proff tat the application was done online. But the lack of a signature may be your best hope.

I would accep the pretrial conference and point out then that there is no signature on the app and that your husband denies ever applying for the card.