MD Specific Case: (Mr yet available?)
Mr yet, can you help, please? Stupid software wouldn't let me ask in title, so I changed wording. :( I get that people needlessly overuse certain terms, but I don't want to come across as lacking in manners.
Well, in MD, you can initiate Discovery, but you have no right. The Plainfiff filing gives up that right if they file in the District Court division involving claims under $5000. MD doesn't have a specfic "small claims" court, but if the suit involves less than $5000, and the Plaintiff so chooses to meet 3 specific criteria (one being they cannot use Discovery), they can file in the less relaxed division involving smaller claims. The court is still formal, and most of the other Civil Court procedures apply. The Defendant can send Discovery, but Plaintiff can refuse, as there is no right to Discovery.
So, attorney's office sent letter stating receipt of my paperwork, and invoked their right to refuse to answer Discovery, citing the law that since the claim is under $5000, and filed in the court for handling such claims, they are not obligated to respond. Okay, fine and good. [B]But[B]... under the FDCPA, they are required to validate the debt, by providing verification. So, I guess my next move, is to send a letter requesting that they provide the verification (which was one of the things requested in the Discovery documents). I have a very strong suspicion they do not have it, as a search of their previous court cases yielded a number of them disnmissed by the judge because the Plaintiff failed to show assignment of the debt, and a copy of the written signed contact between Defendant and original creditor. Many of these involved a creditor called "Household Renaissance" that they purchased debts from, one I found involved Chase. These are cases where the Defendant chose to defend as Pro Se Litigant, or use a lawyer.
The real reason I think they don't have it, is because they claim in the letter to "talk to their client" (Cornerstone), and that they would accept a 50% payment. Hmmmmm... In the original court document, they sent papers to pay the amount in full, no mention of counteroffers, and settle before trial. Now, they will take half????? Not that it does any good, I don't have the money, and they know it, and noted they were offering this because client "Understands your disabilities". I plan on replying that I cannot accept their offer, though it was nice of them to reduce it in half out of concern for my disabilities; because I have no proof that they were legally assigned the debt, unless they supply that wet-ink signed contact between me and Chase. I am going to include a copy of the letter I linked to in another thread, so they understand what it is they must provide, and that I know my rights; and say I will consider their offer if they can produce said validation. We shall see...
Also received letter from Court, trial date now scheduled for 11/30 at 1:00 pm. I am the lone defendant, and they the lone Plaintiff, at this new time and day. I was originally lumped in with 6 other people. I hope they enjoy the 90+ miniutes each way drive for a trial with no hope of them getting so much as a dime, even if they should win.
:confused:
I have a debt validation template in the kit I have, but I am going to search the forums for different wording, I recall mr yet posting something. Until/unless the validate, I'm not even going to consider settlement. Hope I am going about this right. Got two months to go back-and-forth with them.
Comments? Suggestions?