logo

Debtconsolidationcare.com - the USA consumer forum

Palisades Collection

Date: Thu, 03/25/2010 - 22:03

Submitted by krstalove
on Thu, 03/25/2010 - 22:03

Posts: Credits: [Donate]

Total Replies: 8


Has anyone ever heard of a legal firm in Houston, TX by the name of Regent and Associates? They are the "law" firm that is supposedly handling my case. Are they legit? The address is

Regent and Associates
Anh H. Regent
2650 Fountain View Dr #233
Houston, TX 77057



Please let me know if this is a legit company. They showed up at my store to serve me with papers for a debt that was charged off in 2007 from Providian. Is this legal?


Concerned


Krstalove:-?


As far as the legality is concerned, Regent & Associates, is a collection agency and has a B rating from Better Business Bureau, although the law firm, Regent & Associates, L.L.P has been rated F by BBB. You may ask them to validate your debt.

You can refer to the sample debt validation letter:
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/letters/sample6.html


lrhall41

Submitted by Chris Samuels on Thu, 03/25/2010 - 23:30

( Posts: 174 | Credits: )


You are in Texas also? SOL for Texas is 4 years. They are a law firm, though I never heard of a firm personally serving..perhaps it was a process server?

Is Providian the plaintiff?

You can check the courthouse to make sure it is in fact a real suit, then you will need to file an answer. You can also ask for all documentation in discovery, though if it is the original creditor they will have it.


lrhall41

Submitted by goldenbast on Thu, 03/25/2010 - 23:33

( Posts: 2884 | Credits: )


I'm in Texas also, and I've been doing a little research on them, just in case, I have several baddies out there, I figure are going to wind up in court. Anyway, I just been looking up court cases here in the county that I live in, and I've kinda noticed a pattern with the cases filed here by the Anh Regent, if the defendents answered, the majority of the cases were dismissed. Why ? I have no ideal. they may have figured it wasn't worth it if the defendant was going to fight back, so they got dismissed, may be other reasons, don't know. but of course the ones that defendant didn't file answer got default judgement. So, Do File An Answer. Do you know when the last payment was made on the account? I know you said it was charged off in 2007, but depending on the date of last activity it may be out of SOL.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Fri, 03/26/2010 - 05:44

( Posts: | Credits: )


The reason many cases are dismissed like that is because the defendant answered. There are quite a few collection lawyers who go for the easy win. They likely realize that if the defendant answered they will likely ask for proof of the debt and many older debts just don't have that proof, so they drop the case and go on to easier pickings.


lrhall41

Submitted by goldenbast on Fri, 03/26/2010 - 12:01

( Posts: 2884 | Credits: )


Quote:

Originally Posted by goldenbast
The reason many cases are dismissed like that is because the defendant answered. There are quite a few collection lawyers who go for the easy win. They likely realize that if the defendant answered they will likely ask for proof of the debt and many older debts just don't have that proof, so they drop the case and go on to easier pickings.


That was I figure they are doing, I've looked up several other CA and CA attorneys, and it kinda appears to be the case in a lot of them, now there are some out there that will go head to head, but I think a lot of these, just file and hope the defendent doesn't answer. I've been watching this on case, which it was for 15000.00 plus possible closer to 20000.00, defendent didn't answer, they got a default judgement and abstract of judgement was issued, but it was never filed in county clerks office, but the attorney that got the AOJ later got a writ of garnishment for this persons bank account, but got less than 2000.00, but now they have filed a motion for contempt on the debtor, for not showing up for a deposition, and didn't know that they could do all that, like summons you to a deposition, then try to get contempt charges on you for not showing up. I'm still watching how this case plays out.


lrhall41

Submitted by on Fri, 03/26/2010 - 12:39

( Posts: | Credits: )


Yeah, if the court orders you to appear for something other than the initial court date, you should always appear. This doesn't happen very often though, they simply get the default judgment and try to get as much as they can out of the person.

I am wondering if this deposition you are talking about is one to ascertain the defendants assets.


lrhall41

Submitted by goldenbast on Fri, 03/26/2010 - 12:45

( Posts: 2884 | Credits: )