BEING HARASSED FOR DEBTS MORE THAN 4 YEARS OLD..... DEBT IS UNCOLLECTABLE UNLESS YOU ENTER FOOLISHLY INTO A PAYMENT PLAN AND MAKE A PAYMENT.

Dear Readers:

Not long ago I had a collector calling me regarding an old AT&T bill.  Wanted to make a deal with me to settle for HALF of what I owed.  I asked him home much I owed and he said like $400.00 but would settle for $200.00......   Then as I got to thinking..... I asked him how old is that bill?  He balked at telling me but finally admitted it was from 1998!!!!! That was like 13 years ago!!!!  I recognized as an attorney the statute of limitations had run.  I realized that that they had no more right to report this on my credit report.  I realized that they couldn't touch me.  I informed him that this bill was charged off when I was a broke person and couldn't pay.  Its well over the FOUR YEAR STATUTE of limitations he has to sue me for an account.  He tried to say that I made a payment within the last four years..... this was a lie!!!  I told him show me proof of that..... again he hemmed and hawed.....  I told him I wasn't going to pay it and that he should just sue me if he thought he had a chance to win.  I haven't heard nothing from him since!  He knew statute was blown....

BUT I GOT TO THINKING ABOUT THE NON-ATTORNEYS who don't know their rights and who could be bullied into paying a bill that was uncollectable....  Then I ran across this story..... These collectors and their attorneys could be in for a LOT OF TROUBLE!  Read on....

McCollough v. Johnson, Rodenburg & Lauinger, LLC, 2011 Westlaw 746892 (9th Cir. 2011)

            Facts:  A consumer failed to pay his credit card debt, and the issuer subsequently charged off the account.  A few years later, the issuer sold his account to a collection agency in the business of purchasing bad debt portfolios.  The collection agency brought suit against the consumer, who raised the defense of limitations; undeterred, the collection agency then referred the account to a law firm.

            According to the firm's records, the account was not barred by limitations, because the consumer had supposedly made a recent payment.  In fact, the records were incorrect. Without seeking to verify those records, the firm then brought suit against the consumer, who filed a pro se answer, again raising the bar of limitations and informing the firm that he was severely disabled.  The firm nevertheless pressed ahead with the prosecution, serving requests for admission on the consumer.  Those requests for admission failed to contain an explanation required by state law that the requests would be deemed admitted if there was no response within 30 days.  After the consumer retained counsel, the firm dismissed the second collection action.

            The consumer then filed suit in federal court, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), along with state law claims for malicious prosecution and abuse of process.  The trial court granted partial summary judgment to the consumer on his FDCPA claims.  His tort claims were then tried to a jury, which awarded him $250,000 in emotional distress damages and $60,000 in punitive damages.  The Ninth Circuit affirmed.

           

            Reasoning: The law firm first argued that it could not be held liable under the FDCPA because its conduct was the result of a "bona fide error."  But the appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the consumer, holding that the firm "erred by relying without verification" on the collection agency's representation that the account was not time-barred.  Further, the firm's reliance on the collection agency's data was unreasonable as a matter of law, since the collection agency had itself expressly disclaimed "the accuracy or validity" of its data.

            The Ninth Circuit also affirmed the trial court's ruling that the firm's requests for admission violated the FDCPA as a matter of law because they asked the consumer "to admit facts that were not true."  The court also noted that the firm's failure to include a statutorily-required explanation that the requests would be deemed admitted if not contradicted within 30 days was misleading as a matter of law, from the standpoint of "the least sophisticated debtor."  The firm argued that discovery procedures should be excluded from coverage under the FDCPA, since the applicable court rules already provide sufficient protection.  But the court held that the "clear statutory language" of the FDCPA sufficiently encompassed discovery abuses.

            Turning to the malicious prosecution claim, the court held that there was substantial evidence that the firm did not reasonably believe that the second suit against the consumer was not time-barred, since the firm failed to check with the collection agency to verify that the statute of limitations was inapplicable.  Finally, the court also upheld the jury verdict on the abuse of process claim:

[The firm] filed suit to extract money . . . that it could not legally obtain in a collection action and . . . filed a baseless action with knowledge that it had no legal claim . . . . [The firm] filed and pursued a time-barred lawsuit . . . , even though [the firm's] own electronic file indicated that the suit was time-barred . . . . [The firm] sought attorney's fees without confirming that [the consumer] had a contractual fee obligation. The jury could have inferred from this evidence that [the firm's] purpose in filing the lawsuit was to coerce [the consumer] to pay awards and fees to which it and [the collection agency] were not entitled.

           

           So for you people out there that are being harassed about an old debt TAKE HEED. 

1.  DO NOT ENTER INTO A PAYMENT PLAN FIRST

2.  ASK TO SEE AN ACCOUNTING OF THE DEBT YOU OWE.

3.  DO NOT REFUSE TO PAY SIMPLY STATE THAT YOU ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER YOU OWE THE DEBT AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ACCOUNTING.

4.  IF YOU FIND THE LAST ENTRY FOR A PAYMENT YOU MADE OR  A CHARGE ON THE ACCOUNT WAS MADE OVER FOUR YEARS AGO, CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY.  THERE MAY BE NO WAY FOR THEM TO COLLECT FROM YOU.  BUT YOU MUST CONSULT AN ATTORNEY TO KNOW FOR SURE.

Good Luck out there!

FREE LOAN MODIFICATION ADVICE AND HOW NOT TO HAVE YOUR HOUSE SOLD IN FORECLOSURE

IF YOU ARE TRYING TO GET A LOAN MODIFICATION:

1.    SIGN UP WITH NACA AND LET THEM MAKE THE INTRODUCTION TO YOUR LENDER.  SEE WHAT THEY ADVISE FIRST.  THEN FILL OUT ALL OF THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BY YOUR LENDER.

2.    SEND ALL OF THE INFORMATION IN A MANNER THAT WILL RESULT IN WRITTEN CONFIRMATION THAT IT WAS RECEIVED.  PREFERABLY BY FAX, OR E-MAIL OR BY CERTIFIED MAIL, OR OVERNIGHT MAIL, OR DIRECT DELIVERY WITH A SIGNATURE RECEIPT BY THE LENDER IF THEY HAVE A FORECLOSURE CENTER.

3.    VERY IMPORTANT:  CALL ONCE A WEEK TO REQUEST STATUS.  IF THEY TELL YOU DON’T CALL BACK FOR A MONTH, DON’T LISTEN TO THEM, CALL EVERY WEEK.  ASK THEM “ARE YOU MISSING ANY DOCUMENTS?”  ARE THERE ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS NEEDED?   IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BE RELENTLESS DO THIS EVERY DAY UNTIL THEY SEND YOU SOMETHING IN WRITING TO STOP CALLING EVERY DAY.  YOU DON'T WANT LENDER ACCUSING YOU OF TERRORISTIC THREATS.

4.    WHATEVER RESPONSE YOU GET, EITHER SEND THE MISSING DOCUMENTS, EVEN IF YOU HAVE SENT IT 64 TIMES BEFORE AND THEY KEEP CLAIMING THEY DON’T HAVE, SEND IT AGAIN.  ALSO IN YOUR LETTER SENDING IT, RECITE THE DATES OF EACH OTHER TIME YOU SENT THE SAME DOCUMENT TO THEM TO REMIND THEM AND ATTACH A COPY OF YOUR FAX CONFIRMATION SHEET OR THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT WITH EACH OTHER TIME YOU SENT THAT DOCUMENT.

5.  IF THEY SAY THAT THEY HAVE EVERYTHING, THEN FAX A LETTER TO THEM SAYING THAT “I SPOKE WITH _________ AT THIS PHONE NUMBER _____________ AND HE/SHE TOLD ME THAT YOU HAVE ALL MY PAPERWORK AND THAT I AM PRESENT BEING REVIEWED.  IF THIS STATUS SHOULD CHANGE, PLEASE CONTACT ME IMMEDIATELY.”

6.  IF THEY SAY THEY ARE MISSING SOMETHING SEND LETTER TO THEM BY FAX SAYING " I SPOKE WITH ______ WHO TOLD ME THAT YOU STILL DON'T HAVE __________.  I SENT THAT DOCUMENT TO YOU ON ____________(List all the dates you sent).  BUT FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE I AM SENDING IT TO YOU AGAIN WITH THIS LETTER.  I WILL CHECK BACK WITH YOU IN ONE WEEK TO CHECK THE STATUS."

7.    EVERY WEEK FAX A LETTER TO THEM SENDING THEM ANY BANK STATEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED IN THAT WEEK OR COPIES OF ANY PAYSTUBS YOU HAVE RECEIVED IN THAT WEEK.  THIS WAY WHEN THE REVIEWER GETS TO YOUR PAPERWORK, THEY CAN’T MAKE EXCUSES ABOUT HOW THEY DON’T HAVE UP TO DATE INFORMATION.

8.  EVERY 3 MONTHS:  YOU MUST SEND THEM AN UPDATED HARDSHIP TO LETTER TO LET THEM KNOW IF YOUR CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED.  ALSO SEND THEM UN UPDATED 4506T FORM.

8.  NO MATTER WHAT, DON'T GIVE UP.  IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE GOAL OF ALL OF THESE LENDERS IS TO FRUSTRATE YOU TO DEATH, EITHER YOUR OWN OR SOMEONE ELSES (JUST KIDDING)  I BELIEVE THEY HOPE YOU GIVE UP SO THAT THEY CAN JUST TAKE YOUR HOUSE AND ADD IT TO THEIR PORTFOLIO OF REOs.  THE BANK LOOKS LIKE A STRONGER INVESTMENT TO PEOPLE IN DUBAI AND IN CHINA WHEN THE PORTFOLIO IS FILLED WITH REOs AND NOT A BUNCH OF LOANS WHICH HAVE SHOWN POOR PERFORMANCE IN THE PAST.  HOPEFULLY MY SAVVY READERS GET THIS POINT BY NOW!

9.  IF THEY WON'T CONTINUE A SALE DATE AT LEAST 5 DAYS BEFORE IT IS SCHEDULED TO GO TO SALE, FIND A BANKRUPTCY ATTORNEY TO FILE A BANKRUPTCY IN CHAPTER 13 TO STOP THE SALE.  IF THE BK ATTORNEY YOU CONSULT SAYS YOU CAN'T DO IT, CALL ME AND I WILL DOUBLE CHECK IT FREE OF CHARGE.  I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HELP A LOT OF PEOPLE EVEN WHEN OTHERS DIDN'T HAVE THE FAITH OR KNOWLEDGE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN

MY CLIENTS WHO FOLLOW THIS PROCESS SEEM TO DO BETTER THAN THE ONES WHO DO NOT.  THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES THAT YOU WILL GET A LOAN MODIFICATION AND THANKS TO THE COWARDICE OF CONGRESS AND OUR PRESIDENT IN NOT STANDING UP TO THE BANKS, AND TAKING THEIR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS, THEY WON'T EVER STAND UP TO THEM, THERE IS NOTHING REQUIRING OR MANDATING THAT YOU BE GIVEN A LOAN MODIFICATION.

GOOD LUCK OUT THERE!!!!!

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND DEMAND HYBRID CRAM-DOWN NOW

I am a Bankruptcy Attorney here in the Valley.  I wanted to see if anyone would listen to a proposal I have about mortgage-cram down that could work in Chapter 13 Bankruptcy.  Let people pay their mortgages at fair interest rate based on what the property is worth during the five years in which the homeowner is in bankruptcy.  Then when they get ready to complete the 5 year repayment plan, then the principal will be reduced to 110% of market or fair market whichever is greater. Any money that the debtor's are behind would be wrapped up into the principal.  If the homeowner falls behind then the bankruptcy would cancel and the loan goes back to old status.

This would help homeowners start paying on their mortgages.  The banks would start getting liquidity back into the markets, and they wouldn't take as big a hit as a full cram-down would give and it would give the banks incentive to fix this mortgage mess and get our economy going again so that real estate values could come up again in five years enough to a much higher recovery on those loans.  The banks would get more money in five years than what they would get doing a foreclosure now.  It gives struggling homeowners a chance to get ready to move or earn more money to pay the house.  By allowing this in bankruptcy only, the banks would be protected by the courts from fraud.  It is a win win for everyone.  Who can I share this with, in the hopes that this idea might catch some steam?

Word to the wise about LAM STIPULATIONS..... __CDCBAA__ X Reply | R Grace Rodriguez to cdcbaa show details 8:39 AM (0 minutes ago) Dear Friends: Okay I really goofed and now I have to go back to court and clean up the mess. But let me share an experience I had with Virtual Bank so that the rest of you don't make my mistake. I filed a Lien Avoidance Motion before Judge Ahart. Two weeks before the hearing, the lender contact me to do a Stipulation. I said sure send it over and let me look at it. They sent it over and it looked pretty standard and I had intended to sign it. Things got busy.. . . 3 days before the hearing, Virtual Bank calls. I apologize that I hadn't gotten to it yet but I would do it in that moment. I open up the document and it doesn't look right to me. Something is wrong with this Stipulation and I just couldn't put my finger on it. But I called Virtual Bank and told them that the Tentative ruling had already come out and that I wasn't going to sign the stipulation. They said they would come to the hearing to oppose the motion. We ended the call. At the hearing, my appearance counsel shows up. The matter is called, she sits back to see if there is any opposition. BUT NO ONE SHOWED UP TO OPPOSE. The court granted the motion. Apparently appearance counsel shows up sometime later and I absolutely don't have any idea how it is that the appearance counsel was able to do this, but he had the motion recalled, the case was continued so a stipulation could be filed. I'm assuming that appearance counsel made some representations about the Stipulation to cause this to happen. However, I can't imagine what representations other than perhaps that I was amenable to a Stipulation, which was false. In any case the hearing was continued. I imagine the principal fed the appearance counsel untruths. Appearance counsel called my office, and my trusted assistant said appearance counsel made an actual threat against me and my practice if I don't call him to fix the stipulation. Now out of respect (a respect which is now lost) I talked to appearance counsel about the stipulation, and how it was pretty standard not to worry, and to facilitate matters, I finally agreed to stupidly sign the stipulation. It got filed. THREE MONTHS LATER....... Now the client is getting letters from the lender that the Stipulation says nothing about them trying to collect money on the loan even though the lien was avoided. DOH!!!! Now I will have to go back to court and bring the motion again to clarify this point. I spoke with the lender. and they say they are even going to sue the clients in violation of the terms of the Chapter 13 Plan to try to get money back. So if any of you have some ideas for me how to rectify this so Virtual Bank will leave the client alone. SO LESSON TO ALL: Read your stipulations carefully to make sure they include this valuable term. I ALSO: YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR LACK OF EXPERIENCE..... but maybe my experience can lessen the burden for some of you newer attorneys. Have fun out there y'all. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Reply Forward Your message has been sent. Reply | R Grace Rodriguez to Peggi show details 8:39 AM (0 minutes ago) - Show quoted text - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: R Grace Rodriguez Date: Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:39 AM Subject: Word to the wise about LAM STIPULATIONS..... To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com Dear Friends: Okay I really goofed and now I have to go back to court and clean up the mess. But let me share an experience I had with Virtual Bank so that the rest of you don't make my mistake. I filed a Lien Avoidance Motion before Judge Ahart. Two weeks before the hearing, the lender contact me to do a Stipulation. I said sure send it over and let me look at it. They sent it over and it looked pretty standard and I had intended to sign it. Things got busy.. . . 3 days before the hearing, Virtual Bank calls. I apologize that I hadn't gotten to it yet but I would do it in that moment. I open up the document and it doesn't look right to me. Something is wrong with this Stipulation and I just couldn't put my finger on it. But I called Virtual Bank and told them that the Tentative ruling had already come out and that I wasn't going to sign the stipulation. They said they would come to the hearing to oppose the motion. We ended the call. At the hearing, my appearance counsel shows up. The matter is called, she sits back to see if there is any opposition. BUT NO ONE SHOWED UP TO OPPOSE. The court granted the motion. Apparently appearance counsel shows up sometime later and I absolutely don't have any idea how it is that the appearance counsel was able to do this, but he had the motion recalled, the case was continued so a stipulation could be filed. I'm assuming that appearance counsel made some representations about the Stipulation to cause this to happen. However, I can't imagine what representations other than perhaps that I was amenable to a Stipulation, which was false. In any case the hearing was continued. I imagine the principal fed the appearance counsel untruths. Appearance counsel called my office, and my trusted assistant said appearance counsel made an actual threat against me and my practice if I don't call him to fix the stipulation. Now out of respect (a respect which is now lost) I talked to appearance counsel about the stipulation, and how it was pretty standard not to worry, and to facilitate matters, I finally agreed to stupidly sign the stipulation. It got filed. THREE MONTHS LATER....... Now the client is getting letters from the lender that the Stipulation says nothing about them trying to collect money on the loan even though the lien was avoided. DOH!!!! Now I will have to go back to court and bring the motion again to clarify this point. I spoke with the lender. and they say they are even going to sue the clients in violation of the terms of the Chapter 13 Plan to try to get money back. So if any of you have some ideas for me how to rectify this so Virtual Bank will leave the client alone. SO LESSON TO ALL: Read your stipulations carefully to make sure they include this valuable term. I ALSO: YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR LACK OF EXPERIENCE..... but maybe my experience can lessen the burden for some of you newer attorneys. Have fun out there y'all. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Reply Forward We collect your judgment - Experienced judgment collectors Ad $0 upfront, free consultation! www.Enforcementsetc.com

Dear Friends: Okay I really goofed and now I have to go back to court and clean up the mess.  But let me share an experience I had with Virtual Bank so that the rest of you don't make my mistake. I filed a Lien Avoidance Motion before Judge Ahart.  Two weeks before the hearing, the lender contact me to do a Stipulation.  I said sure send it over and let me look at it.  They sent it over and it looked pretty standard and I had intended to sign it.  Things got busy.. . . 3 days before the hearing, Virtual Bank calls.  I apologize that I hadn't gotten to it yet but I would do it in that moment. I open up the document and it doesn't look right to me.  Something is wrong with this Stipulation and I just couldn't put my finger on it.  But I called Virtual Bank and told them that the Tentative ruling had already come out and that I wasn't going to sign the stipulation. They said they would come to the hearing to oppose the motion.  We ended the call. At the hearing, my appearance counsel shows up.  The matter is called, she sits back to see if there is any opposition.  BUT NO ONE SHOWED UP TO OPPOSE.  The court granted the motion.  Apparently appearance counsel shows up sometime later and I absolutely don't have any idea how it is that the appearance counsel was able to do this, but he had the motion recalled, the case was continued so a stipulation could be filed.  I'm assuming that appearance counsel made some representations about the Stipulation to cause this to happen.  However, I can't imagine what representations other than perhaps that I was amenable to a Stipulation, which was false. In any case the hearing was continued.  I imagine the principal fed the appearance counsel untruths.  Appearance counsel called my office, and my trusted assistant said appearance counsel made an actual threat against me and my practice if I don't call him to fix the stipulation.  Now out of respect (a respect which is now lost) I talked to appearance counsel about the stipulation, and how it was pretty standard not to worry, and to facilitate matters, I finally agreed to stupidly sign the stipulation.  It got filed. THREE MONTHS LATER....... Now the client is getting letters from the lender that the Stipulation says nothing about them trying to collect money on the loan even though the lien was avoided.  DOH!!!!  Now I will have to go back to court and bring the motion again to clarify this point. I spoke with the lender. and they say they are even going to sue the clients in violation of the terms of the Chapter 13 Plan to try to get money back.  So if any of you have some ideas for me how to rectify this so Virtual Bank will leave the client alone.  SO LESSON TO ALL:  Read your stipulations carefully to make sure they include this valuable term.  I ALSO:  YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR LACK OF EXPERIENCE..... but maybe my experience can lessen the burden for some of you newer attorneys. Have fun out there y'all. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL:  I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:   This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Reply Forward Your message has been sent. Reply | R Grace Rodriguez  to Peggi show details 8:39 AM (0 minutes ago) - Show quoted text - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: R Grace Rodriguez <rgracelaw@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:39 AM Subject: Word to the wise about LAM STIPULATIONS..... To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com Dear Friends: Okay I really goofed and now I have to go back to court and clean up the mess.  But let me share an experience I had with Virtual Bank so that the rest of you don't make my mistake. I filed a Lien Avoidance Motion before Judge Ahart.  Two weeks before the hearing, the lender contact me to do a Stipulation.  I said sure send it over and let me look at it.  They sent it over and it looked pretty standard and I had intended to sign it.  Things got busy.. . . 3 days before the hearing, Virtual Bank calls.  I apologize that I hadn't gotten to it yet but I would do it in that moment. I open up the document and it doesn't look right to me.  Something is wrong with this Stipulation and I just couldn't put my finger on it.  But I called Virtual Bank and told them that the Tentative ruling had already come out and that I wasn't going to sign the stipulation. They said they would come to the hearing to oppose the motion.  We ended the call. At the hearing, my appearance counsel shows up.  The matter is called, she sits back to see if there is any opposition.  BUT NO ONE SHOWED UP TO OPPOSE.  The court granted the motion.  Apparently appearance counsel shows up sometime later and I absolutely don't have any idea how it is that the appearance counsel was able to do this, but he had the motion recalled, the case was continued so a stipulation could be filed.  I'm assuming that appearance counsel made some representations about the Stipulation to cause this to happen.  However, I can't imagine what representations other than perhaps that I was amenable to a Stipulation, which was false. In any case the hearing was continued.  I imagine the principal fed the appearance counsel untruths.  Appearance counsel called my office, and my trusted assistant said appearance counsel made an actual threat against me and my practice if I don't call him to fix the stipulation.  Now out of respect (a respect which is now lost) I talked to appearance counsel about the stipulation, and how it was pretty standard not to worry, and to facilitate matters, I finally agreed to stupidly sign the stipulation.  It got filed. THREE MONTHS LATER....... Now the client is getting letters from the lender that the Stipulation says nothing about them trying to collect money on the loan even though the lien was avoided.  DOH!!!!  Now I will have to go back to court and bring the motion again to clarify this point. I spoke with the lender. and they say they are even going to sue the clients in violation of the terms of the Chapter 13 Plan to try to get money back.  So if any of you have some ideas for me how to rectify this so Virtual Bank will leave the client alone.  SO LESSON TO ALL:  Read your stipulations carefully to make sure they include this valuable term.  I ALSO:  YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR LACK OF EXPERIENCE..... but maybe my experience can lessen the burden for some of you newer attorneys. Have fun out there y'all. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL:  I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:   This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. -- R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq. OFF: (818) 734-7223 CEL: (818) 554-9922 NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL:  I do not accept e-mail notice for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular business hours. CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:   This message contains privileged and confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute, store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Reply Forward We collect your judgment - Experienced judgment collectors Ad $0 upfront, free consultation! www.Enforcementsetc.com

Stop Creditor Harassment. . . . at least for a little while. . .

Dear Readers:  It has been a very busy time for my office.  But I ran across this tid-bit i wanted to share with all of you.  Credit card companies are notorious about auto-dialers.  They will call you until they finally get to talk to someone.  But you have a shot at putting an end to it by requesting written communication only.  Here is a sample letter for you readers to send to your credit card companies.

Via Certified Return Receipt Mail
Dated: ____________________

Name of Creditor or Collection Agency
Address
City, State & Zip

         Re:       My Name
                     Account Number
                     Name of Creditor

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please be advised that I am unable to continue making even minimum payments towards the account referenced above.  

Pursuant to 15 USC, Section 1692C9c) and California Civil Code, Section 1788.17, I am hereby requesting that you stop all oral communication with me immediately.  If you fail to honor this request please be aware that you will be in violation of federal and state law.  Moreover, your continued harassment may force me to take appropriate legal action against your company.  

I have retained the Law offices of R. Grace Rodriguez, (818) 734-7223 to explore potential bankruptcy options and/or debt settlement negotiations.  I will contact you once I know what option I will be electing.  Thank you for your anticipated cooperation during this very stressful time for myself and my family.

Sincerely,

Another Struggling American!