Contract Credit Card. I had a process server come to my door asking for my 43 yr old son. He told me he was just like a sheriff and this is the kind of work that sheriff does. I told him my son does not live here. He asked if I get mail for my son. I said no and closed the door. I heard a noise and when I opened the door again I saw that he had left paper work on the door step and yelled at me you are served. Is this a legal serve? I thought substitute service is allowed after the third attempt. My son is working back East.

I thought substitute service is allowed after the third attempt. My son is working back East.Hello f:

You are not your son. He can YELL you are served, but that doesn't make it so.. Nonetheless, he's going to REPORT that service has been completed so they'll find against your son if he doesn't show up. So, he'll need to be in touch with the court.

excon

Yes this is the issue, how do you know how many attempts to serve your son he has done ?

Next has your son provided the credit card company with any other address, or is your home the last known address for your son.

But the process server goes back and reports that there is legal service. And there will be a court date and a hearing.
If your son does not go, the credit card company will win everything it is asking for.

So his choice is to fight this service, provide the court with his new address so he can be properly served, and then get a new court date, or show up and fight it at this court date.

I'm going to add one more point here. We frequently deal with questions about service of legal papers. The ONLY time where the legality of service comes into question is when a default judgment is entered against the defendant because they don't show up. In that case, the defendant MAY be able to get a new hearing if service was improper. So trying to avoid service is a delaying action and not a very good idea.

So lets say you don't tell your son about this and the plaintiff gets a default judgment. Your son tries to vacate the judgment. The process server testifies that he left the summons with you. The court then asks:

1) Did the server leave the paperwork?
2) Are you in contact with your son?
3) Did you inform your son about the summons?

If you answered Yes to the first two (which you have to since its what you told us here) then the court is unlikely to vacate. So tell your son about the summons and let him deal with it.

My son will file a response tomorrow. A P.O.S. was filed 12/06/11 that he was personally served. My son was working in Detroit from 11/28/11 to 12/17/11. He has hotel and restaurant receipts, airline stubs as proof. On 12/14/11 the process server left documents at my son's ex-girlfriends doorstep. I think the P.O.S. filed is fraudulent. An OSC is set for 05/21/12.
My son does not have a permanent residence in Calif. So we are using our address to file the response.His job takes him from state to state and most of the time he is back East. This lawsuit is a scam. My son never had an agreement with the credit card company, nor did he receive mth. Stmts or make payments. Had no contact with the debt collection company suing him.

My son never had an agreement with the credit card company, nor did he receive mth. stmts or make payments. had no contact with the debt collection company suing him.Hello f:

Then he should win.

excon

If he is using your address for his legal address, then them posting the notice on your door may well be considered legal service, since he can not provide proof of living elsewhere.

The fact someone related was there, and could notify him

His best course of action in my opinion is to merely show up and fight the law suit with his proof of the case.

My son will file a response tomorrow. A P.O.S. was filed 12/06/11 that he was personally served. My son was working in Detroit from 11/28/11 to 12/17/11. He has hotel and restaurant receipts, airline stubs as proof. On 12/14/11 the process server left documents at my son's ex-girlfriends doorstep. I think the P.O.S. filed is fraudulent. An OSC is set for 05/21/12.

Acronyms are not universal. Please don't use acronyms unless they are very well known.

That being said, your son should forget about whether service was fraudulent or not. It will have no bearing on his case. If he wants to pursue action against the process server, do that separately.


This lawsuit is a scam. My son never had an agreement with the credit card company, nor did he receive mth. stmts or make payments. had no contact with the debt collection company suing him.

If that's the case, then he sends a copy of his response to the suit to the plaintiff asking that they provide verification of the debt. If they don't, he goes into court and asks that the case be dismissed since the plaintiff has nothing to prove it is his debt.

I own and operate a process service company - I would consider this to be good service. He uses your address. You can argue that he doesn't "live" there. The server will argue that he gets mail there - thus, it's a legal address.

If your son doesn't respond a Judgment will be taken against him. Of course, when he goes to Court and argues he wasn't served he WILL be served in person.

When the paperwork was "nailed" to your door did you immediately notify the Court (and the Attorney) that he doesn't/didn't live there? It was followed by a mailing of the papers to him - did you get those?

If it's NOT his account, if he never used the account, then Scott is right on -

I own and operate a process service company - I would consider this to be good service. ...

As I understand what OP said, the proof of service alleges that the process server served the son personally. If that is false, and if the process server had good reason to know it was no so, the process service licencing agency should be involved.

As I understand what OP said, the proof of service alleges that the process server served the son personally. If that is false, and if the process server had good reason to know it was no so, the process service licencing agency should be involved.

OP will have to come back and let us know - I'm reading "I thought substitute service is allowed after the third attempt. My son is working back East." I took this to mean the server stated it was substitute service.

I hear "it was nailed on the first attempt" when the person being served has no idea how many times my employees were there PRIOR to the time they either slammed or didn't answer the door - or simply weren't there.

OP will have to come back and let us know - I'm reading "I thought substitute service is allowed after the third attempt. My son is working back East." I took this to mean the server stated it was substitute service.
...

This is what I'm reading (#5):


... A P.O.S. was filed 12/06/11 that he was personally served. ...

No wonder we are jointly confused. It appears to be one or the other. I'm assuming OP knows because I sure don't!

My son has filed his response to the complaint. He has also send a Demand for Production of the written agreement, Assignment of Rights letter, and proof of monthly statements send to him, and a copy of the canceled check, money order. Or bank debit , of his last payment. The response to this is due around 02-06-12. The complaint stated that a written contract exists but was not submitted as evidence instead the "terms of the agreement was spelled out". My husband and I are retired and a home most of the time. To our knowledge this was the 1st visit by the process server. After my husband slammed the door, the process server left the papers on our doorstep. I opened the door and it was to me he said you are served. No paper work was mailed to our address after this service. The process server left paper work at my son's ex girlfriend doorstep on 12-14-2011 eight days after the proof of service was filed with the court. I faxed a letter to the Attorney 12-05-2011 and mailed a hard copy but received no response. I did not report it to the court. Thank you for all your response. My son is going to fight this lawsuit.

And he should fight it! I hope he wins, I think he will. But he will win on the grounds that the account is not his. The service issue will not come into it.

On the other hand he should complain to the state licensing bureau about the actions of the server.

Had he not responded to the complaint, then he may have been subject to a default judgment that would make it more difficult to win his case.

Let us know how it works out.