Never believe anything a debt collector says
Quote:
| Originally posted by bbauer Your advice is just a wee bit dangerous to say the least. You say: Not so! A defense based on Statute of Limitations must be raised by a defendant who makes proper and timely answer to the court upon notice of summons on motion of summary judgment and raises the question in open court. The court is convened and is in session to hear and act upon the motions of the movant party and is not obliged to raise questions or motions of defense for the defendant but is required to hear arguments and pleadings of the defendant if properly raised in court by the defendant. |
"I actually burst out into laughter when I read this post from you bbauer. You are a complete idiot. Your post is like legal potpourri – you have heard of some legal terms and you just throw them around even though you obviously have no idea what they mean. Let’s address what you said.
You aren’t noticed a Summons, you are served a Summons. You have to file a RESPONSE to the summons, and a summons has nothing to do with a motion FOR (not of) summary judgment.
Strictly ludicrous. One does not answer a summons but rather one answers the complaint upon which the summons was issued. A summons is actually nothing more than a notice that a complaint has been filed against the defendant and demands that the defendant answer the complaint within a certain given number of days. The summons is the court's official notice to appear and answer the complaint.
Uncle Normie
The defendant would need to file a demurrer in this case, not a motion, do you know the difference? I’ll let you look it up. In the case of a Statute of Limitations issue the defendant would have no trouble winning a demurrer.
Quote:
| Boiled down to it's essence, if the defendant does not raise the issue in defense the court will grant the motion of the plaintiff regardless of any other circumstance such as SOL. figuratively speaking it could be a 100 year old debt under a 1 year statute of limitations but if the SOL is not raised as a defense, it will make no difference whatever. |
Not true again. If the defendant lists the date of delinquency in the complaint as beyond the Statue of Limitations the court will reject the filing on its face. If they lie about the date of delinquency this can be addressed through a simple demurrer. You really need to stop giving people advice before somebody takes yours and gets hurt.
This debt collector went digging back through some old, old posts attempting to prove that I don't know what I am talking about and in the process made a priceless fool of himself. Of course, it is old "Uncle Normie" as usual but using another of his enormisly false screen names.
In the paragraph above he claims that if they lie about the date of delinquency that problem can be addressed through a simple demurrer. Well, since he suggests that I look it up, let us see what the Findlaw legal dictionary has to say about demurrer(s)
Anglo-French, from demurrer to file a demurrer, literally, to stay, dwell, delay, from Old French demorer, from Latin demorari to delay
: a plea in response to an allegation (as in a complaint or indictment) that admits its truth but also asserts that it is not sufficient as a cause of action
(compare confession and avoidance)
Note: Demurrers are no longer used in federal civil or criminal procedure but are still used in some states. General demurrers are replaced in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Special demurrers are replaced by motions for more definite statement. In the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a motion to dismiss or to grant appropriate relief takes the place of a demurrer. Demurrers are sometimes used to question a court's jurisdiction.
demurrer to the evidence
: a demurrer that asserts that the evidence is not sufficient to create a question of fact for the jury to decide
general demurrer
: a demurrer that challenges the sufficiency of the substance of allegation
special demurrer
: a demurrer that challenges the structure or form of an allegation as uncertain or ambiguous
Note: A special demurrer must specify the defect in the allegation.
The first part of the given definition is:
: a plea in response to an allegation (as in a complaint or indictment) that admits its truth but also asserts that it is not sufficient as a cause of action
Ok, first of all why would we want to make a plea in response or either admit or deny the allegation? We do not ever want to admit or deny anything if we can avoid doing so. Also, we do not want to assert anything about it's sufficiency as a cause of action for the simple reason that doing so would be an admission that a cause of action exists in the first place. Since we are talking about a debt that is outside the statute of limitations thus outlawed then no cause of action now exists. Obviously no demurrer fits such a case but debt collector wanna be lawyers think they know it all but in reality know nothing at all nor can they be believed since the only thing they are good at is outright lies, fibs, falsehoods, misinformation and other chicanery.
On top of that Uncle Normie is making light of what others who are obviously knowledgeable have to say yet does not know that demurrers have fallen into general disuse in most jurisdictions both federal and state.
As I correctly pointed out, debt collectors are know nothing scumbags whose only goal is to discredit those who are knowledgeable, willing and able to help people who need help resolving their problems. They infest almost every message forum on the internet today spreading their false and malicious misinformation by whatever means possible in order to frustrate debtors and seemingly leave them with no other option than to pay them. They have one thing in mind and only one thing in mind and that is their paychecks.
Debt collectors regularly infest popular message forums attempting to discredit others and you should ignore their so called advice because they are most likely nothing more than another scam artist debt collector purportedly offering his "advice" for free. This has been proven time and time and time again.
Those who go about message forums discrediting others are never actually doing it for free or out of the goodness of their hearts but rather because they have their own agenda to pursue.
Beware of debt collectors as they are always far worse than the big bad wolf of Little Red Riding Hood fame ever thought of being.
posted by Creditwrench at 12:36 PM
<< Home