CA's Lawyer is asking ME for debt validation

they are basically asking you to provide evidence against yourself.respond with that you don't have those things.

Thank you for the quick reply, but is it ok if I ask them back for the same items? Because the items they are asking for are basically the items that I would ask them for validation. Did they do it so that I cannot ask it again resulting they will never have to provide me the information in court? Thank you.

i really wouldn't.because them asking for those things is them saying they don't have them.when you go to court,then you can ask the CA for those things.it's called the discovery phase.that is when you ask for validation.they know this and want you to give them the info they don't have.you should ask for those things in court.it is your right.do not provide them with what they are asking for.

Unless a court orders you to, you don't have to give them anything. As Paul said, seems like they don't have enough evidence to prove you owe it, and they're trying to get you to make their case for them.

love me some debtcruncher backup.thanks. :D 8)

it sounds like the OP filed an answer to the summons and is actually in the discovery period. if this is true OP please inform - if you filed an answer you need to address the interrogatories. if you fail to do that a summary judgment could be granted, and that would be damming for any defense you have in the future.

giving them 30 days to respond?i highly doubt that they even entered the court room yet,but we'll wait for the op's response.

interrogatories come before the court hearing. and of course they would be given a set time to respond. the discovery process cant be never-ending. but OP is also allowed to send THEM requests, and i would definitely include some request for documentation.

it's just as debtcruncher said about it being ordered by the court.it doesn't sound like this was.itjust sounds like they are trying to get evidence against the OP.we'll see what they say.the OP i mean.

well my point is that if the OP filed an answer then they NEED to respond to these requests. they are now a willing participant in the litigation process and they must follow proper procedure or summary judgment will be granted. and then good luck vacating summary judgment!

let me pose you this question - why would the law firm push the issue if they issued a summons and complaint and the OP didnt respond? the law firm would much rather wait out for default judgment, wouldnt they?

because some collectors are bottomfeeders that don't play fair.again after the discovery phase any supposed requests must come from the court.not the CA.they are sent by the court to the defendent or the plaintiff.sorry,but the OP could respond by stating that they do not have the information requested.you see guest believe it or not alot of bottomfeeding CA'S sue counting on the defendent not knowing they have rights or hoping they don't show up.i have seen these types of cases before,and just about all the time it is the reason me and debtcruncher outlined.why don't we wait for the op before this degenerates okay?

I guess I am more familiar with an informal courtroom setting. My company files suits in Cook County, which is actually very debtor-friendly. There really is no discovery phase in our court cases. If I, as the creditor, didn't have copies of the original contract, the judge would toss my case.

Regardless, I have been subpoena'd for information; in that case, the court compels my response. If I don't respond, yes there can be a motion for summary judgment and/or contemp.

If the attorney in this case hasn't gone through due process, they cannot compel information. If the court compels, then by all means you are required to produce.

Although the OP could just say they are without knowledge or no longer posesses such information. How would the plaintiff prove they indeed have a copy of the contract and are lying about it?