Received summons at mailbox in different jurisdiction

The problem is your mail box in San Fransisco...they assume that since your mailing address it there, you reside in the county. You will have to answer the summons with your correct mailing address proving you do not live in the country so they are likely to turn around and sue you in your county.

No FDCPA violation....you were effectively served by a rep of the court. They are not bound by the FDCPA.

1. So it's ok to just hand over a summons to a stranger that can then see my official business? It's ok to leave it in a situation where random employees can look through it? That occurs to me as a potential privacy issue.
2. Why do you think a representative of the court delivered it?
3. It's my understanding that in California the summons is not 'effectively served' until a proof of process is delivered to the court. I do have the summons in my hand, yes.
One of my original questions was, if I hadn't gone to pick up my mail for another month (not uncommon) could they have had a trial without me?

Quote:

1. Being sued is public, ok. Didn't know that. Still, the law allows for an expectation of privacy. May or may not make a case for that in a counterclaim.
2. The mailbox place is not my residence or place of business. And the employee didn't sign for it. California law, as far as I can tell, states 'residence or place of business'. So I'm not clear on the definition of 'place of business'. Does that mean somewhere I work, or some business that I frequent.
Regardless, proof of service is required, and I don't know when the 30 day countdown starts.
3. I'll take your 'that is your problem' response as a 'Yes,' though it doesn't really answer my question.
And yes, it is my 'problem', as I'm getting harassed by a JDB and now have the opportunity to learn the fine points of the law/process of defending myself.
Thank you for your responses.

your counter claim for privacy wont fly. Public information is public information. It no longer comes under the FDCPA.

You might want to research court dockets to see if they tried to serve you any other way. Or in another jurisdiction.

Thanks.
Mostly I'm trying to find out when the 30 days to respond starts. I believe it starts when Proof of Service is supplied to the court as opposed to the date a case is filed at the court, but as far as I can tell it hasn't yet.
I'll keep an eye on the case number at the court and see if/when it shows up.

Update.

Motion to Transfer action and a couple affidavits stating my residence is Sacramento not San Francisco and that I keep a mailbox in SF for my convenience.

Responded to their Opposition To Motion To Transfer Action and their Affidavit with:
1. A business mailbox is not a residence
2. A 150 year old ruling never overturned that a person has the right to be sued in the place where they reside.
3. Lawyer that did the Affidavit is clearly attempting to misrepresent the facts to the court.

Hearing was rescheduled two weeks to give the Plaintiff an option to turn in courtesy copies of the Opposition to Motion To Transfer Action to the court.

Don't know if they did or not, but Tentative Ruling granted Motion To Transfer.

That was a fun win. I wonder Cach LLC and Mandarich Law Group will put up the $ to transfer the case. I hope they do. I'm learning a lot.

Hey I have a similar situation with them, they served me at a UPS store and I never got it and they now are filing for a judgement? Saying I never answered but I never received it. What can I do to turn it around.

Do you have a mailbox at the UPS store?? Were you served by mail? Did a rep of the UPS store sign for it??

It's my understanding that in the FedEx/Kinko's mailbox stores, there's a clause in the contract that makes them legal receivers of summons.

So a summons can be dropped off.

Thus it's worth looking at your contract. Having said that, at best it's just a delay tactic and they'll have to serve again.