No affivdavit of debt --- a good sign???

Since they are generally worthless unless the person who swore out the affadavit is present in court I wouldnt really worry about it. If tehy do produce one, object to it.

I was in a collection case, still am actually, that was filed in June 2010 and the fraudulent and deceitful Affidavit was not filed until September 2010 even though they had it in their possession since it was executed since April 2010.

You can't count on anything with theses scum except that you can't trust them, ever.

They got a judgment based on this affidavit which I only just now managed to get vacated but like the deadbeats they are they are working to find a way around it.

Did you object to the affidavit? If so, what did you use as your objection?

It was a unique situation. I was not given the proper date for the next hearing and as such I failed to attend at which point a default judgment was entered. It is interesting to note that this document (filed by Kramer & Frank for Midland Funding, 2 slimeballs, imo) failed to materialize until september. They came to court with nothing to show and continued to stall and then like the opportunists they are they were ready and waiting to show this fraudulent document as "evidence". Midland Funding has come under fire for using these same affidavits for example in Midland v. Brent. A new class action in Washington state takes them to task for the same. So they KNOW they have been found not only as not evidence but as attempts to deceive yet they continue, arrogantly, to present them as evidence. The only thing they prove is that they are consummate liars without a conscience.

I returned to court having filed a motion to vacate and strike the affidavit. In my motion and statements in support of same I alleged that among other things they had commited fraud, mail fraud, prosecutorial misconduct and so forth.

The attorney who had been handling the case conveniently disappeared once accused of misconduct and a new sham attorney materialized who complained that they had gotten the judgment "on the merits". The judge disagreed and said that they had gotten the judgment because I failed to attend. The attorney said too long a time period had passed and was unwilling to concede. In fact, he filed a motion for continuance to stall the hearing set on Dec 22, saying that he had other commitments, but oddly enough his commitments seemed to have allowed him to attend anyway since the judge denied his motion.

The case has been transferred to another division to basically start over. In my Answer in July I stated they had failed to present any cause of action, to establish any contractual relationship, to prove standing to file, which they skipped right over apparently. They still have failed to prove anything. yet now the attorney, at this late date, has sent me a letter saying I need to answer again the Interrogatories i already answered in July because he says they were not done correctly.

Which is further evidence that their entire objective is to harass, intimidate and make unreasonable demands. they really should quit while they are ahead because the charges I made are true. They intended to deceive the court by presenting their affidavit. I cannot tell you the utter contempt I feel for this lowlife bottom dwelling scum suckers.

I am filing a motion tomorrow for dismissal for failure to prosecute and I am going to attach a copy of the most recent letter in which this worthless excuse for an attorney has alleged I never filed an Answer yet I answered Interrogatories. I am going to present it as evidence that they have no evidence and that they have failed to establish standing and cause and yet are intent on harassing me about these interrogatories.

I am considering filing a case in federal court because of their harassment and attempts to use the court as enforcement for their fraudulent collection activities.

I fail to understand why, in the illegal and unfair foreclosure activity across the country using robo-signed affidavits which are clearly false evidence done with bad faith and continuing to the debt collection industry why these people are not in prison instead of practicing their diseased form of law.

I can tell you, that the first time or two some of these maggots got sentenced to do time the use of these affidavits would dry up overnight.

I have read that that Midland company is no stranger to pulling stunts like that, getting default judgements through finding ways to get around properly serving the summons to the person they are preying on. Good to here you are so far successful in your fight against them.

Thanks for the insight, I thought the affidavit of debt was supposed to be filed by now but I suppose it doesn't have to be if the advice is correct. They have not filed anything except the initial complaint.

I sent them off a set of interrogatories and production of documents that basically covers everything and the sun regarding relevant information and documents on the debt alleged. From what I understand, if they do not produce documents or anwser discovery questions then they cannot use it at the trial, if it is requested they have to sent it to me or they cannot use it at trial.

Good luck on dealing with these people. they have no conscience so anything goes.
I think they would not have gotten as far as they did had it not been for the judge giving them plenty of leeway.


so much of what happens turns on whether or not you've got a judge who actually cares about what goes down in his court.

I am filing my motion tomorrow. We will see what the new judge is made of. The other one seemed in their back pocket from the starting gate. Not sure why he ruled favorably to me this time as it is quite a switch in attitude. But I don't take anything for granted, I am by now cynical and don't trust anyone. Some people would say I must be a paranoid nut to say what I do about our justice system.

But the sad fact of the matter is that however much they "advertise" that the courts/judges have strong oversight methods to keep them in line, it sounds good but frankly "it just ain't so".

Between dealing with Bank of America and these slimey creeps I am drained and just want some time to myself where I am not having to fight for every possible and conceivable thing in life.

I've seen many reports on the net and yes, Midland is one of the top contenders in the creep category.

For my motion, I want to outline all the "irregularities" that went on before. At the same time I am mindful that by bringing it up I may open up another can of worms.

We shall see, thanks for the positive vibes, back at ya!

[SIZE=3][COLOR=MediumTurquoise]Actually, the service they got on me was not legal although I probably would have zero luck getting anywhere complaining about it. It is required to be delivered to me or to someone over 18 competent to leave it with. They left it at my doorstep and had engaged in questionable behavior at that. Pass the buck though, the sheriff says not his thing since it was private process server, the court says they don't know, plaintiff says they don't know, nobody knows, amazing, plus to add insult to injury they add the slimey creeps fee to your judgment if they get it.

in my case it was a man and woman and I read a similar complaint from someone who lives in my same local area and it sounded like the same people. If so they were stricken from the approved list for bad conduct but amazingly are back on again, go figure. :rolleyes:[/COLOR][/SIZE]

What is a junk debt buyer?

junk debt buyers are companies that buy up the rights to try to collect debts charged off by original creditors. The original creditors sell them for pennies on the dollar, very cheap. They (the purchased debt which can sometimes be sold to more than one purchaser creating problems with trying to collect when its already paid) come with little documentation and from the original creditor so that is how the junk debt buyers like Midland Funding resort to questionable practices to collect. Mostly they count on default judgments, if no one shows to contest at court then they don't need documentation, they collect without any proof at all. They are, in my opinion, detestable creatures motivated by greed. They pay next to nothing yet will try to collect every last cent, which some say is a violation of the RICO statutes because they are trying to collect a debt in excess of the legally allowed amount because the original creditor already wrote off a part of it. If you google RICO statutes they can explain better than me.

Just today I sent off my motion for dismissal and hope the judge will grant it because the unlawful firm is unwilling to let go and confess they have no proof. They even wish to take the lazy way, saying I did not respond properly to interrogatories so I have to answer them again. It is, at least to me, clearly a case of vexatious prosecution when they have nothing. It is why I despise these slimy creeps so much, they are beneath contempt. they have never had any proof at all, not even to show they bought the debt. I can see where it might be possible for someone to pay them when they in fact never bought the debt even.

If they cannot prove it then they certainly should not be paid because its the same as if someone comes to your door and says you owe money to my friend and he told me to collect. Would you pay some random person showing up with such a claim? Only if you are crazy OR intimidated by their efforts at what they consider to be legal intimidation.

One of the allegations I made against Midland in my attempt to overturn the default judgment was to accuse them of fraud. And I do consider it fraud, the legal definition of fraud fits quite well. Because of Midland v. Brent, for example, Midland is well aware that these affidavits are unacceptable yet they persist in using them because they have no valid evidence even if it exists. So they resort to the affidavits. i think they figure it is the cost of doing business if they get into trouble with them sometimes because overall, based on the sheer number of default judgments they get, collecting thousands of dollars for something they might have paid $10 for, what a profit margin that is. Where else can you buy a trinket for $5 and sell it for thousands?

In the end, they are motivated by greed. They are opportunists who see a way to extract money from people they view as powerless or in compromised/weakened positions.

I guess you can tell I have learned to loathe them. Once they get a default judgment they can garnish wages or levy / freeze bank accounts. Then if the alleged debtor cannot pay his rent or house payment they can end up homeless but the greedy junk debt buyers don't care about anything but money at any cost.

They are consummate liars, you should check the FTC website and see what they have to say about how they try to work with people but then on the other hand they are complaining about sites like this who educate people because it makes them have to work to collect as opposed to doing nothing overall. Opportunistic bottom-feeding predators. You KNOW what bottom feeders in a pond food source is don't you?:?:

Hey Gretchen, I hope that nonsense gets dismissed. I share your disgust with the entire process.

Just to be clear, I am not being sued by Midland, but another junk debt buyer.

I agree with your thoughts on these scum being awarded large sums after paying pennies on the dollar for the alleged debt. I just found out yesterday that due to my living in Kentucky, evidently there is a statute/law that has been on the books since 1942 that says a assignee of a debt cannot collect more than they paid for the debt. From the discussion on another board, Kentucky is the only state in which this is so.

I also filed a motion to dismiss, but have not yet requested a hearing, didn't even know I had to request one until I called the courthouse. At the stage of my case, I have filed my discovery and sent it off and anwsered theirs, I am choosing to sit tight and wait. I was actually happy to hear I needed to request a hearing after reading something online about how if your motion to dismiss is denied, the burden of proof is then on the defendant. I have no idea if this is true, I like you am trying to gain as much information as I can as I go. I was lucky enough to find the exact template that the junk debt buyer used in the discovery sent to me that was posted on another board and I used the feedback provided by a very wise poster to use as the basis of my anwsers.

I have been very put off, to the point of being furious, with how these scumbags are even permitted to file a lawsuit against someone without providing basic proof that I owe anything to them. The court clerks office doesn't want to give you any anwsers either when you call to ask about basic procedural matters, legal advice is one thing, but the jerks are balking at even providing basic information so that I can respond properly.

From what I have read, I should expect these scumbag junk debt buyers to not provide any proof of the debt in responding to the discovery I sent to them. I am weighing whether I should then contact them by phone, which I haven't as of yet, to kinda lay down the gauntlet, "look you mf'ers brought this lawsuit, now put up or shut up". Of course I wouldn't do it in that matter as I know that might risk making things personal, they might pursue things further just because I cussed them out.

I do wonder if letting them know that I am aware of the KY state statute that forbids the junk debt buyer from collecting more than they paid would prevent them from going further? I just don't want to provoke them by even appearing like I am challenging them, they are lawyers and I am not. But I would like to see how they were to react if after replying that they don't have to provide how much they paid for the debt, which I did ask them for in production of docs and interrogatorries, that I disagree, KRS 371.050 (I am doing that off memory, I think that is the number of the statute, I printed it out and it is not with me right now) says that they will have to provide how much they paid for it because that is all they can collect, not the 6,000 some odd dollars they are looking for, half of that being interest.

Even if I am not a lawyer, simply bringing up that statute should let them know that I know more than most.

I am not banking on the same court that permits these assinine lawsuits being fair to the defendant that chooses to fight it, but even if you lose you can at least have pride in having made an honest honarable effort in standing for what is right and just, if you are vanquished by a rotten system then what can you do?

Good luck to you, I wish all states had the law KY has governing how much they can collect for a debt they paid next to nothing for.

Thank you for your good wishes for me. We shall see.

As for your case, in my opinion (for what its worth) I would not hesitate to let these people know what you have learned about that very nice statute in Kentucky because basically it should bring a swift end to the abuse they are trying to perpetrate on you. I wish all states had such laws.

It is easy, really, to become furious, outraged and indignant at the unfairness we witness happening to ourselves and others, so I certainly understand and empathize with you. For myself, I have been trying lately to control those kinds of feelings, not that they are not valid, but they can be counterproductive for me when I feel them because it distracts me from actually trying to change anything and I just get hung up in my emotions. But emotions such as yours are entirely understandable and not unreasonable or unjustified, imo.

Here is some interesting information, at least I find it so, and I think you might enjoy reading it too. This is written mostly from the standpoint of the State of Ohio (who gave us that wonderful Midland v. Brent ruling) but it is applicable no matter what state you are in, imo.

I especially admire and appreciate Elizabeth Warren who is quoted toward the end here. She is one of the true heroes, imo, in the struggle to get recognition for the everyday people who make America work. I've got quite a bit more information I'm going to post in a day or two if you care to check back. It's encouraging to find recognition of the inequities. Anyway, here you go;

[QUOTE][INDENT] [SIZE=3][W]hen dealing with an unrepresented party, the professional advocate should be held to a higher level of honest behavior. The existing ethical codes encourage zealous representation without concern for the ordinary sensibilities of fair and just conduct.

While that may be permissible in most situations, manipulating the ignorance of the unrepresented defendant corrupts the public opinion of the American bar. Behavior that carries too far, though legally allowable, chips away at the public confidence that allows the profession to be self-governing. If lawyers [and judges] cannot responsibly govern themselves, eventually they will be governed by others.

???The Ethical Exploitation of the Unrepresented Consumer???.
The Missouri Law Review, Victoria J. Haneman, 06 November 2008.[/SIZE]
[/INDENT]To effectively combat and defeat such ???the obfuscation, the obtuse rationalizations, the facade of legitimacy, etc. must be stripped away so that the substance can be exposed for what it is.

The Ohio judiciary is the gatekeeper. Unfortunately, too often and with dismay ???that gatekeeper is either overworked, asleep, ignorant, lazy or, at worst, incompetent.

The argument that the majority of consumers sued by debt collectors are over ???just and legitimate??? debts that are owed by the consumers/defendants, whether time-barred or not, is false assumption and a baseless argument.

Over eighty percent of these types of lawsuits go to default judgments and where the judgments are rendered without a prima facie case presented within the pleadings.

Despite the excuses and rationalizations that are presented by all too many, a vulnerable segment of Ohio's population is being deliberately and methodically abused. Before change can be affected, the Ohio judiciary must acknowledge and recognize how they are being used and acknowledge such regardless of the difficulty associated with such an admission of failure. Help will, also, be necessary from the state legislature.


Ohio consumers are under attack. More specifically, it is a segment of Ohio consumers who have little to no political clout, are the aged, the working poor and the vulnerable. They are being attacked by unsubstantiated, fraudulent and deceptive litigation from a multi-billion dollar industry.

[INDENT] ???The creditors are all repeat players. They know exactly how the game works???, said Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard Law School professor who studies consumer debt. ???We're watching a fight between two players, one with a skilled repeat gladiator, and one who's thrown into the ring for the first time and gets clubbed over the head before they even get a sense of what the rules are.???

???No Mercy for Consumers, Firms' Tactics Are One Mark of a System that Penalizes Those Who Owe??? .
Elizabeth Warren , BOSTON GLOBE, July 31, 2006.
[/INDENT][/QUOTE]