Debt reliefAmex GC ServicesQuestion: One of my Amex accounts was
recently (7-28-08) turned over to GC Services. I had been trying to
work this out with Amex, but it was not resolved in time, and sent to
collections. I received a message to call them (GC) back. I did right
away. After the gentleman found my account info he told my I was being
sued for the amount due $22,000.00+. and I needed to come up with the
money. He will call me back on Wen. the 30th for payment info. My
question is how do I reply? I don’t have the money, and I did ask him
if they would work with pay off arrangements, and he said they would
not, and that I should barrow or ask friends or family for money. Can I
ask for written proof? can they attach leins to my assets? This is very
stessfull and do want to take care of the debt. What about debt
relife/help companies?Thanks you, DavidAnswer: You want real debt
relief? What do you think a debt relief company might be able to do for
you? I don’t know what you think a so called debt relief company might
be able to do for you.There are only two ways to get debt relief that I
know of and you already said you can’t pay the debt so that way is
apparently out of the question.The only other kind of debt relief I
know anything about is where you learn how to make them forget about
collecting anything and agree to it in a written contract, take it off
your credit reports, pay you for your costs of getting the debt relief
and your damages on top of that.Now that is real debt relief as far as
I am concerned.I’m reasonably comfortable with the thought that such
strong talk may raise eyebrows and cause great skepticism but let me
refer to the words of an attorney at Nitzen & Associates of Michigan.
Nitzen & Associates are debt collection attorneys. It is their job to
collect debts by filing lawsuits on people who don’t pay their debts.
If that kind of attorneys write words like the following then what I am
saying must be true.Nitzen & Associates said:Attorneys for Debt Buyers
beware…they are on to us!I love defending people against debt buyers
because the Plaintiffs case is as strong as a house of cards in a
hurricane. Debt buyers buy judgments, credit card charge offs and other
sordid garbage debt for pennies on the dollar. Hell, there are even
debt buyers that buy debt that has already been through a collection
agency or two. Usually, when a debt buyer purchases his paper, he gets
little more than the judgments or a spreadsheet showing the balances
due. What does this mean for the consumer that is sued? Everything. The
debtor buyer has no proof that the consumer owes anything other than
some shmoe’s word for it that the debt was owed in the first instance.
Recently, someone got wise to the idea that an attorney who sues on
this crap and does not have the goods to show that the debt is actually
owed, may be violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I can’t
wait to share this case with you.In Isom v Javitch Block and Rathbone
(“Javitch”), the defendant is a law firm that had sued Ms. Isom in
state court for a debt that was purchased by some company called Direct
Merchants. Javitch attached an affidavit to its complaint that had been
prepared by Direct Merchants. When Ms. Isom demanded discovery in the
state court case, Javitch simply dismissed the case. Why? Because it
did not have any proof to show that its client was entitled to any
money from Ms. Isom. Now, its Ms. Isom’s turn.She sued Javitch in
federal court and asked for class action status. She alleged that
because Javitch had sued her without having any documentation to show
that she owed the debt that Javitch had violated the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act. Ms. Isom alleged in her complaint that
Javitch attached a false affidavit signed by Direct Merchants that said
that Direct Merchants had personal knowledge of the balance due by Ms.
Isom. The court held that because Ms. Isom alleged fraud her complaint
against Javitch, that she has enough of a case to go to trial. The
court denied Javitch’s Motion to Dismiss Ms. Isom’s claim.In analyzing
Ms. Isom’s case, the court noted two lines of cases that dealt with the
issue of whether a debt collector violates the FDCPA by suing a debtor
without having substantial supporting documentation for its case. In
Delawder v Platinum Financial, the U.S. District Court denied the
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. In Delawder, the Plaintiff alleged that
the debt collector had committed fraud because the affidavit in support
of its case misrepresented the amount of the debt or the debt
collector’s legal claim upon the debt.The second line of cases involved
Harvey v Great Seneca Financial in which the Plaintiff alleged that the
filing of a suit to collect a consumer debt without the means of
proving that debt was a violation of the FDCPA. The court in Harvey
dismissed the action stating that Plaintiffs do not need to prove their
cases at the time that the lawsuit is filed. However, in Harvey, the
Plaintiff did not allege that the affidavit attached was false.In Ms.
Isom’s case, she alleged that the affidavit that was attached to the
complaint against her in state court was false. She alleged that there
was no way that the Plaintiff had “personal knowledge” of her debt to
the original creditor. The court found that Ms. Isom’s case should
proceed to trial on the issue of whether the Defendant’s affidavit was
false and if so, whether it violated sections 1692e and 1692f of the
FDCPA; the Act’s prohibitions against false or misleading
representations and against unfair collection practices,
respectively.Javitch pled to the court that it should not be held
responsible for an affidavit that its client had signed in support of
the complaint. Judge Barrett would have no part of that argument.
Javitch’s attempt to side step the FDCPA bullet was foiled when Judge
Barrett correctly pointed out that it was Javitch that signed the
complaint and attached the affidavit in support of its complaint.
Javitch, as a third party collector, has to take responsibility for its
own actions.ATTORNEYS FOR DEBT BUYERS BEWARE. Remember that you are
responsible to verify that the debt and every part of the debt that you
are collecting is legitimate. The days of suing debtors without having
proper documentation and hoping for a default judgment is like playing
Russian Roulette. You are bound to piss off some debtor who reads my
blog and knows his rights. Now, you have to doubly (if there is such a
word), that the affidavit that you are attaching to your complaint is
accurate. The FDCPA makes you a guarantor of sorts that the affidavit
is bona fide.I have two students in federal court with exactly
identical cases as the ones mentioned above and both will win easily.
So how did I find out about this case? I have several of what are known
as RSS feeds on my message board at Creditwrench message forum and they
bring constant updates to the board from various blogs written by
attorneys.The RSS feeds automatically update every 12 hours bringing in
any new information written by attorneys who write such things. Those
feeds keep my readers up to date and finding information they need to
win their cases against debt collectors.That should prove beyond any
shadow of a doubt that when I say something like I did I’m not just
blowing smoke. People are doing exactly what I’m telling you that you
can do all the time now. And most of them are learning how to do it
without lawyers.Now that is what I call debt relief. What do you call
debt relief?

–
Posted By Creditwrench to creditwrench at 7/29/2008 07:47:00 PM