Validation request met with subpoena ‍♀

If you already have a default judgment entered against you, then you need to address that.
 
I'm a little confused. Last September we were discussing the statute of limitations and I asked:

'When did you default on the unpaid balance of the American Express account? Month and year if don't know the exact date?"

You replied:

"December 2020."

Now you say:

"My defense for why I do not owe this money is because I did not open these accounts. They are identity theft."

I believe an explanation is in order.
 
adjusterjack said:
I'm a little confused. Last September we were discussing the statute of limitations and I asked:

'When did you default on the unpaid balance of the American Express account? Month and year if don't know the exact date?"

You replied:

"December 2020."

Now you say:

"My defense for why I do not owe this money is because I did not open these accounts. They are identity theft."

I believe an explanation is in order.
Click to expand...
OK, what that was remains a mistake in reading your question. I thought you mean when did the default judgment get set on me. That is the question I thought I was answering. I believe within the responces that followed I was clear the debt was not mine. However, I see after reading that I only refer to the validation letter I sent them. In that letter I was clear to them that I do not recognize this account and it is identity theft. Thanks
 
On the first court date, I came with evidence to prove that the debt was not mine. I did not know the protocol for this court. Meaning, I thought I would have a moment to pass evidence to the judge and then make my case. The judge explained to me that I would have to add it properly to the case via a Supplemental Affirmation in Support of Order to Show Cause. So I prepared that with the evidence and filed it with the court and served it to the plaintifs law firm. As I said, the plaintiff (AMEX's law firm) had recently served me with a document stating the corporation was mine. I served that back to them, stating the information showed the company was out of business before the account was opened in the corporation's name. I also included the affidavits from persons to state that the named person they claimed to have personally served is not a person who lives or visited or does anybody recognize. When I returned to court, my lawyer (free lawyer CLARO) suggested that I need more in my favor. He suggested the police report and then (adjourned) scheduled another date. I asked why we could not present the current stuff. His response was it would be better if I had more in my defense.
 
Prior to this I sent the law firm representing American Express information that my bank accounts of this time had been compromised. At the last court hearing I was told by my lawer (CLARO) that they were saying I paid this from one of my accounts. My first question related to that is: if they are going to state that don't they have let that account be known? Meaning… verify what account they are talking about by providing a specific account number? Or is that trivial?
Click to expand...

Can anyone give advice related to this point?
 
Zigner said:
What point? They didn't believe you, so they sued you. Now, you can present your evidence in court.
Click to expand...
I mean the point that at court they told my lawyer... "but he paid the Amex account from his bank account". As if that is some type of proof the account is mine. My question is, which bank account? (even thourgh it seems like they do) are they allowed to just state something and it just be fact?
 
pctechtv said:
I mean the point that at court they told my lawyer... "but he paid the Amex account from his bank account". As if that is some type of proof the account is mine. My question is, which bank account? (even thourgh it seems like they do) are they allowed to just state something and it just be fact?
Click to expand...
It's up to the other side to dig deeper if they feel the claim is not supported. Did you?
 
Zigner said:
It's up to the other side to dig deeper if they feel the claim is not supported. Did you?
Click to expand...
I am in the process. I am here asking for suggestions no how I would do that. I am assuming I can corospend with the law firm and ask them to be clear. I do not want to do things in the wrong manner and botch my chance with the court to hold them to what they are saying.
 
pctechtv said:
I am in the process. I am here asking for suggestions no how I would do that. I am assuming I can corospend with the law firm and ask them to be clear. I do not want to do things in the wrong manner and botch my chance with the court to hold them to what they are saying.
Click to expand...

You need to rehire the attorney you once hired, hire another attorney, or risk mucking things up more by trying to squirm, wiggle, and argue your way out of this mess.

There is no way that any online "legal" site can do much for COMPLEX legal matters. Hire an attorney ASAP, or prepare for a legal beat down.
 
pctechtv said:
I do not want to do things in the wrong manner and botch my chance with the court
Click to expand...

You may have already botched your chance.

pctechtv said:
at court they told my lawyer... "but he paid the Amex account from his bank account".
Click to expand...

Who is "they"? Was it an employee of Amex? Was that person testifying while on the witness stand?

pctechtv said:
My question is, which bank account?
Click to expand...

Did you ask that question during cross examination of the witness?

Did you question the witness at all during the hearing?

pctechtv said:
are they allowed to just state something and it just be fact?
Click to expand...

Yes. They can state what they believe to be true. It's up to you to refute it by cross examination of the witness coupled with evidence and testimony of your own.

Nobody here can second guess what you did or did not do in court or teach you cross examination in a few paragraphs.

Is your lawyer from Claro appearing in court for you or just giving you advice from the sidelines?
 
Up to now I have only been to court after filling the OSC. Everytime it has been ajurned for a new date. Yes, my lawyer from CLARO is appearing with me. I described what he did at the last court date. What he said... being that they were saying I paid this through my bank account.
I want to be advised on how I get the plaintif to name that account. I think it will disprove that point.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top