Seems some whippersnapper who calls himself "old joe" or maybe "average joe" posted a message this morning claiming that when a debtor starts playing games the best thing to do is to sue them.
Well, lets see how well that works out when the debtor is just a bit more educated than the average.
Old joe there runs out and files a motion for summary judgment expecting the debtor to shrivel up out of sheer fright and just roll over and give up on the spot.
But then about 10 days or so after the debtor gets his summons he files an answer to Joe's complaint and the next day files a neat little brief in support of his answer that and the next day sends joe a demand for admissions and production of documents that joe don't want to answer because answering them just wouldn't be to his advantage.
Next joe gets hit with a motion to have the answers to those admissions he didn't want to answer deemed admitted by the court. OOPS! The "ultimate weapon" just became the ultimate way to commit legal suicide.
Of course that isn't the only way old joe can fumble the ball and lose his perfect case by a long shot. That's just one way it happens. There are a myriad of ways he can lose and THE WRENCH personally knows of more than 250 instance this year alone in which "average joe debt collectors" lost their perfect cases.
In fact it is getting downright dangerous for "average joe" to even dream of filing a lawsuit because the backlash is a suit against him for filing a frivolous lawsuit against the debtor he thought was a dead duck.
Funny how smart some of their attorneys can get too. Had one the other day state to the court that the guy he sued obviously purchased his defense kit off the internet and wanted the court to force the guy to reveal where he bought his defense kit so that the seller could be prosecuted.
Well, all that got the dummox was his case dismissed by the court. Seems that the court agreed with the debtor that the attorney's statements before the court were somehow unfairly prejudicial to the debtor's defense and very, very inappropriate.
Seems that attorneys are making those kinds of statements in court these days as though it were some kind of magic bullet that will slay the dumb debtor's case dead on the spot. I guess maybe they been reading the comments of U.S. Magistrate Bristow Marchant in a case that came before him a few months ago over in South Carolina or somewhere near there.
Marchant blamed THE WRENCH as being the root cause of some dumb cluck who thought he could get Judge Marchant to overrule the findings of a state court judge. Of course, Judge Marchant quickly shot the case out of his courtroom because a federal judge cannot usually over rule the findings of state court judges, especially in civil matters.
Judge Marchant also didn't take too kindly to the dumb cluck attempting to copyright his name in his court filings and a few other idiot tricks to be found in abundance on the internet. (LOL)
Although it isn't in evidence in the court records, the boob probably strode into Judge Marchant's court room demanding that he remove his black dress, the gold fringe around the flag and obviously looking for the high water mark on the court room walls. Believe it or not, such shennigans are all too common these days. Such are teachings of more than one message forum and gooroo these days.
Another fringe lunatic debt collector also fails to understand that there are many ways to "resolve" one's problems with debt collectors and claimed that a statement I made a couple of years ago seemed to indicate that I thought one should work out his problems with the debt collectors instead of hiding from them or running from them. Seemed to him that I had changed my stance in the last two years. Sorry about that little misunderstanding, but back then just as is the case today, "resolution of the problem" can take many forms and may not necessairly mean that the problem is resolved to the liking or satisfaction of the 3rd party debt collector.
After all, our troops have worked out a resolution to the problem of one dictator in Iraq who thought he had the world by the short hairs until they dug him out of a hole in the ground and stuck him in a jail cell. That most likely wasn't the resolution he was looking for nor expected now was it???
Another resolution was reached with a little hitler in Panama a few years back and he is still sitting out his remaining years in an American prison. In fact, there have been a lot of resolutions throughout history that have not worked out the way some thought they would.
I still agree that the debtor ought to resolve his problems with the debt collector but the final resolution does not usually work out to be in the best interests of the lunatic debt collector who thinks he has the debtor by the short hairs.
Sorry about that Mr. Debt Collector.
Well, lets see how well that works out when the debtor is just a bit more educated than the average.
Old joe there runs out and files a motion for summary judgment expecting the debtor to shrivel up out of sheer fright and just roll over and give up on the spot.
But then about 10 days or so after the debtor gets his summons he files an answer to Joe's complaint and the next day files a neat little brief in support of his answer that and the next day sends joe a demand for admissions and production of documents that joe don't want to answer because answering them just wouldn't be to his advantage.
Next joe gets hit with a motion to have the answers to those admissions he didn't want to answer deemed admitted by the court. OOPS! The "ultimate weapon" just became the ultimate way to commit legal suicide.
Of course that isn't the only way old joe can fumble the ball and lose his perfect case by a long shot. That's just one way it happens. There are a myriad of ways he can lose and THE WRENCH personally knows of more than 250 instance this year alone in which "average joe debt collectors" lost their perfect cases.
In fact it is getting downright dangerous for "average joe" to even dream of filing a lawsuit because the backlash is a suit against him for filing a frivolous lawsuit against the debtor he thought was a dead duck.
Funny how smart some of their attorneys can get too. Had one the other day state to the court that the guy he sued obviously purchased his defense kit off the internet and wanted the court to force the guy to reveal where he bought his defense kit so that the seller could be prosecuted.
Well, all that got the dummox was his case dismissed by the court. Seems that the court agreed with the debtor that the attorney's statements before the court were somehow unfairly prejudicial to the debtor's defense and very, very inappropriate.
Seems that attorneys are making those kinds of statements in court these days as though it were some kind of magic bullet that will slay the dumb debtor's case dead on the spot. I guess maybe they been reading the comments of U.S. Magistrate Bristow Marchant in a case that came before him a few months ago over in South Carolina or somewhere near there.
Marchant blamed THE WRENCH as being the root cause of some dumb cluck who thought he could get Judge Marchant to overrule the findings of a state court judge. Of course, Judge Marchant quickly shot the case out of his courtroom because a federal judge cannot usually over rule the findings of state court judges, especially in civil matters.
Judge Marchant also didn't take too kindly to the dumb cluck attempting to copyright his name in his court filings and a few other idiot tricks to be found in abundance on the internet. (LOL)
Although it isn't in evidence in the court records, the boob probably strode into Judge Marchant's court room demanding that he remove his black dress, the gold fringe around the flag and obviously looking for the high water mark on the court room walls. Believe it or not, such shennigans are all too common these days. Such are teachings of more than one message forum and gooroo these days.
Another fringe lunatic debt collector also fails to understand that there are many ways to "resolve" one's problems with debt collectors and claimed that a statement I made a couple of years ago seemed to indicate that I thought one should work out his problems with the debt collectors instead of hiding from them or running from them. Seemed to him that I had changed my stance in the last two years. Sorry about that little misunderstanding, but back then just as is the case today, "resolution of the problem" can take many forms and may not necessairly mean that the problem is resolved to the liking or satisfaction of the 3rd party debt collector.
After all, our troops have worked out a resolution to the problem of one dictator in Iraq who thought he had the world by the short hairs until they dug him out of a hole in the ground and stuck him in a jail cell. That most likely wasn't the resolution he was looking for nor expected now was it???
Another resolution was reached with a little hitler in Panama a few years back and he is still sitting out his remaining years in an American prison. In fact, there have been a lot of resolutions throughout history that have not worked out the way some thought they would.
I still agree that the debtor ought to resolve his problems with the debt collector but the final resolution does not usually work out to be in the best interests of the lunatic debt collector who thinks he has the debtor by the short hairs.
Sorry about that Mr. Debt Collector.
posted by Creditwrench at 7:45 AM
