Suttell and Hammer

Suttel and Hammer are dirtbags, first off. I just left a position as the lead arbitrator at a debt settlement company, and was trying to work out something with them for 2 clients. You must be in Washington state correct? If you aren't, there are jurisdiction issues involved.

HERE IS THE MAJOR POINT OF WHAT THEY DID WRONG
You CANNOT leave a summons leaning on someone's doorstep!!
I just had a seminar the week before I left with our compliance law director who said that in EVERY single state except for NY and NJ, a summons must be PERSONALLY delivered to you.
I cannot offer legal advice, but you need to talk to someone about filing a motion to dismiss based on improper service (service of the summons to your doorstep). That is completely wrong from my understanding.

If you plan on staying in the same residence, which you probably are, and you eventually get served, you will need to file a response to summons, which in itself may get the judge to dismiss the case. Especially because of the fact that you are with a DS company!! The whole point of Suttel and Hammer taking you to court is a scare tactic that is meant to make you pay the balance in full. They have probably not told the court you are in such a program, and I would hope your DS company has offers or at least recorded negotiation calls from them on file because it will help. So basically, just by being in a DS company proves you are making an effort to pay off your debt in a satisfactory way and not running from it. Any other correspondence or recorded calls from S+H to your company will help. I would like to reiterate that this is not legal advice, just conjecture of someone who worked with clients on similar situations with suttel and hammer.

One more thing: a fact about Suttel and Hammer you may not know.. A man smashed in their main office windows with a sledgehammer! Poetic justice? It just happened earlier this month.

The bottom line is S+H are scumbags and you have a good shot at getting this thrown out due to bad service and the fact that you are making an effort to pay off your debts, and this is your last one !! Hang in there.

Thanks and I appreciate the feedback. I am very interested to here what Persels and Associates has to say about it all tomorrow, and what their strategy is going to be in keeping it from going to court. Thats hoping they do have one for these types of situations. Thanks again for your time.

Does anyone have any information on this group?

Their strategy will probably be to settle before court- depends on if S+H gives your company you a settlement that is doable (in lump sum or in monthly payments on a %), or, to try and go through the legal process as far as responding to the summons and see if there are any exemptions.

Common exemptions include being on unemployment/ SSI/ disability and having alimony/child payments.

They are trying for a judgement, which means the judge signing that the debt is valid and you owe it. If that happens you need to speak with your DS professional or a lawyer to see what you need to do to keep them from preventing execution of judgement, which means coming after bank accts and garnishments.

I just re-read your post, and the most important thing, you have to file a motion to dismiss based on improper service. Leaving the summons on your door is absolute bullsh!t and should get thrown out for that !!

The strategy for not only avoiding extended court drama, but getting the case DISMISSED(0% settlement) or sent back to the company to negotiate with your company, is what will be done with the motion to dismiss.

It is the most major thing about your whole case and a potential silver bullet. S+H is betting that you won't know that you were improperly served.

1) They most likely aren’t representing CitiBank, but CitiCorp credit services inc (a collection agency) Clear Rule 11 violation.
2) The affidavit you have is from CCS USA not CitiBank, they admit sworn that they only get the account a little while ago but have personal knowledge of everything including what time you went to the bathroom last.
3) The Dunning letter they sent you in the first place may not be for the same amount as they sued you. And contains the phrase “This account has not been reviewed by an attorney at this firm” – What kind of lawyer doesn’t look at a document before sending it to a defendant? Can you say Collection agency?
4) The summons and complaint may not have a valid claim upon which relief can be granted. (standard credit card case).
5) The copies of the bills that they presented are most likely forgeries of Citibank bills, verify them against any bills you may have from that account, line for line, letter for letter. RCW 5.45.020
6) They have set a date for a summary judgment hearing already.
7) Suttell and associates IS a collection agency: John C. Coughenour District Judge Case # C09-1047-JCC US District court WD Seattle WA so ordered it.
8) Sound familiar? Now my NON Legal advise:
9) File a complaint with all these facts with the following places:
a. Attorney General of the State of Washington
b. Federal Trade commission
c. Department of Licensing WA state
d. Office of the comptroller of Currency (this is a big one that most people miss)
i. Request and require the Vendor status of Suttell and Hammer FTC Rule 5 requires Citi bank to maintain a Vendor file for each attorney that is representing them.
ii. You will find that Citi doesn’t have a vendor file as attorneys but as a Collection agency
e. Prosecuting attorney in your court after you get the OCC report.
10) Take all your evidence to a NADA lawyer as fast as possible.
11) If you decide to go it Pro Se
a. Don’t do it
b. Do NOT go Pro Se
c. PLEASE get a lawyer
d. OK, you won’t listen
i. Get a court reporter to put the hearing “ON THE RECORD”
ii. Get KOMO news team to cover the hearing
iii. Get a reporter to cover the hearing
iv. DO NOT Go to court without a record
v. Get a lawyer.
12) I have much more information, but please just get a lawyer and file the complaints.
13) Put the aholes out of business so they can’t hurt another citizen of Washington state ever again.
14) Make them pay back all money they took from anyone ever.
15) Open the door for some Class action suits for those who have been there and didn’t get out with our a*s*s.

Wish I would have talked to you 2 months ago. Judge ignored every motion I had... Seemed like S&H would have won even if they didnt show up

Has it even been 20 days yet to file a response? I know it's close, but you might still have time to answer. I can help you!!! Motions don't always work, but Counter-Cross claims do!!! Judges and Lawyers don't like Pro Se parties, and can be biased, as we found out.

I am not an Attorney - I've never had any formal legal training. But I have fought two lawsuits Pro Se (one against Citibank), and helped others that need help. I cannot legally advise you, but I can tell you what I would do if it were me, or what I have learned in my experiences. I have documents, information that might still help you. Please contact me at [email]tlcpetmommy@gmail.com[/email]. I always recommend, taking any documents to a Legal Clinic before serving/filing. I encourage those I help to seek advice from Attorney Legal Clinics.

I really think you are still within the 20 days to Answer the Complaint.

There must be enough of us in Washington who have been served by S&H to start a class action. I believe they regularly serve un-filed summons & complaints on consumers as a scare tactic to get settlement. My wife has been served by them twice in the past and they have never filed the lawsuit. This practice is also specifically forbidden by the FDCPA, section 807, several subsections. If I hadn't demanded that they file the suit, I don't believe they would have - I'm actually doing this for my own educational purposes, so it's not quite as crazy as it sounds - I sent them a letter with a list of demands in it, one of them being a demand to file w/in 14 days and they immediately filed - now you all know that they will, so it may not be an approach you want to take. They didn't answer any of the other demands, they just filed, demanded that I file my answer, then filed the request for summary judgment - also ignoring my first discovery document served on them and my counter-claims, which I find odd, or just sloppy, or maybe they were still rattled since I served them the day after their door bashing in incident...

Ginger Bread Man - thanks for your post here, #2 is absolutely a vital piece for my case, and I'll be using many points from your posts in my request for admissions.

My deadline for filing the response to the motion for summary judgment is this Friday, so any pointers anyone has are certainly appreciated!

Cheers,
-J-

Ginger Bread Man - Please help with details on how I get the Vendor status of S&H...? It seems you are saying we would get that from the OCC, is that correct? I just don't see a link on their site for making that kind of request, unless you mean I somehow do that through filing a complaint?

Thanks!
-J-

This stems from section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (12 USC 45) and was elaborated on by the OCC advisory 2002-3 [URL="http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/advisory/2002-3.txt"]http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/advisory/2002-3.txt[/URL] requires as follows:
* Follow the guidance relating to due diligence in
selecting a third-party vendor, monitoring vendor
performance, and maintaining proper documentation about
vendor management in OCC Advisory Letter 2000-9, "Third
Party Risk," issued August 29, 2000, and in OCC Bulletin
2001-47, "Third Party Relationships," issued November 1,
2001. Appropriate due diligence includes a review of the
competence and business practices of the third party, as
well as the financial capacity of the third party.

* Ensure that contractual arrangements with third-party
service providers protect the bank against risk. For
example, a bank should carefully consider whether a
contract with a telemarketer contains any financial
incentive that could lead the telemarketer to mislead
consumers. As another example, if a telemarketer’s
compensation is based on initial sales, and is unaffected
by whether a consumer subsequently cancels the product or
service, the telemarketer may have an incentive to
mislead the consumer regarding the nature or benefits of
the product or service.

Although a bank is not a debt collector for purposes of the FDCPA in the above-noted circumstances, a bank should keep in mind the standards of the FDCPA so as to avoid allegations that it is engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices within the meaning of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (12 USC 45), as enforced by the OCC through 12 USC 1818.

You should be able to inquiry as public records the vendor status, vendor performance and proper vendor management from the OCC via Rule 5 of the FTC.

? Non Legal opinion: I am sure that you will find that S&H are listed as collection agency rather than official attorneys for Citibank.
? Please, Please get an attorney to help.

Quote:

Quote:

Here is an intresting case against S&H that makes for great reading:

[FONT=Verdana][URL="http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/laws/wsr/2001/11/01-11-132.htm"]http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/laws/wsr/2001/11/01-11-132.htm[/URL]

[URL="http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98004-wa-william-suttell-12585.html"]http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98004-wa-william-suttell-12585.html[/URL]

[URL="http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/636286%20respondent's.pdf"]http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/A01/636286%20respondent's.pdf[/URL]

[URL="http://www.fairdebtforconsumers.com/Washington-Fair-Debt-Collection-Practices-Act.aspx"]http://www.fairdebtforconsumers.com/Washington-Fair-Debt-Collection-Practices-Act.aspx[/URL]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
Citi Defendants admit that "there are no reported Washington
cases construing these definitions" (Brief of Respondent Citi, page 22).
This is therefore an issue of first impression, and should be decided on its
merits, on a full record and not by default. Clearly, the plaintiffs have the
right to have the applicability of the Washington Collectors Act
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]detennined under Washington law.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
For example, to be exempt under RCW 19. 16.100(3)(c), a law
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]firm's trust fund had to "collect debts related to the [law] firm's business".[/SIZE][/FONT]
Trust Fund Services v. Aro Glass Co., 89 Wash. 2d 758, 763, 575 P. 2d
716, 719 (1978). In this case, the law firm collects on behalf of others, not
debts related to its own business, therefore, the exception in RCW
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]19.16.100(3)(c) does not apply.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
Jason Anderson
WSBA#32232
Anderson Law Offices
8015 - 15th Ave NW Ste 5
Seattle, W A 98117
(206) 706-2882
Attorney for Appellant.

Very intresting reading.
[FONT=TimesNewRoman][/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman][URL="http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/lamp/cle/pittman.pdf"]http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/lamp/cle/pittman.pdf[/URL][/FONT]

"Debt collectors employing attorneys or other agents to carry out
debt collection practices that violate the FDCPA are vicariously
liable for their agent's conduct" - Martinez v. Albuquerque
Collection Services, Inc., 867 F.Supp. 1495 (D.N.M. 1994).
[FONT=TimesNewRoman][/FONT]

Remeber the first dunning letter that says: "this account has not been reviewed by an attorney"


Such mass mailings on an attorney’s letterhead violate 15 U.S.C. ?1692e(3). In Nielsen v.
Dickerson,165 the Seventh Circuit held that where the attorney did not make the decision to send
the letter to the debtor, was not professionally involved with the debtor's file, did not exercise
professional judgment, used a form letter, played only a ministerial role in handling responses,
was paid $2.45 per letter, and never took legal action, his conduct was no more than a deceptive
"veneer of compliance" with the FDCPA in violatio of ??1692e(3) and (10).166
166 Also, see: Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., 321[FONT=Courier][/FONT]
F.3d 292 (2nd Cir., 2003) (reversing and remanding dismissal of
?1692e(3) claim).

Ruling on Affidavit's from a third party like CCS USA.

[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/FONT]
Court of Appeals Division II
State of Washington
Opinion Information Sheet

Docket Number: 39209-7
Title of Case: John & Julie Bridges, Appellants V. Discover Bank, Respondent
File Date: 03/02/2010
[SIZE=3] ANALYSIS[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Summary Judgment[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] The Bridges contend that the trial court erred in granting Discover Bank's motion for [/SIZE]
summary judgment. They assert that the trial court improperly considered affidavits and
declarations. They further assert that they raised genuine issues of material fact, precluding
[SIZE=3]summary judgment. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] First, the Bridges argue that the trial court improperly considered the affidavits and [/SIZE]
declarations under CR 56 because they do not contain sworn testimony by competent fact
[SIZE=3]witnesses. CR 56(e) provides in relevant part: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] attached thereto or served therewith. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Furthermore, RCW 5.45.020 provides: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] A record of an act, condition or event, shall in so far as relevant, be competent [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] evidence if the custodian or other qualified witness testifies to its identity and the [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] mode of its preparation, and if it was made in the regular course of business, at or [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] near the time of the act, condition or event, and if, in the opinion of the court, the [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] sources of information, method and time of preparation were such as to justify its [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] admission.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] We review a trial court's decision to admit or exclude business records for a manifest [/SIZE]
abuse of discretion. State v. Garrett, 76 Wn. App. 719, 722, 887 P.2d 488 (1995). A trial court
abuses its discretion when it bases its decision on unreasonable or untenable grounds. Dix v. ICT
[SIZE=3]Group, Inc., 160 Wn.2d 826, 833, 161 P.3d 1016 (2007). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Here, Kiser, Adkins, and Brooks collectively stated in their affidavits and declarations that [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] (1) they worked for DFS, (2) Kiser and Adkins had access to the Bridges' account records in the [/SIZE]
course of their employment, (3) Kiser and Adkins made their statements based on personal
knowledge and review of those records and under penalty of perjury, and (4) the attached account
records were true and correct copies made in the ordinary course of business. The trial court
properly considered the affidavits and declarations, and it did not abuse its discretion by
[SIZE=3]considering the business records.3 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3] Second the Bridges argue that genuine issues of fact preclude summary judgment here. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]We agree. [/SIZE]

Recent finding: here is a case where Citibank SOLD the account to S&H.
SOLD - Let that sink in for a minute. S&H collecting debts as Citibank that they bought?

[URL="http://moneycentral.msn.com/community/message/thread.asp?board=AskACreditCounselor&ThreadID=1570577&BoardsParam=threadnext%3D1"]http://moneycentral.msn.com/community/message/thread.asp?board=AskACreditCounselor&ThreadID=1570577&BoardsParam=threadnext%3D1[/URL]

HI Gingerbread man, would you please clarify how one does NOT have an Account with Citibank as implied in the summons. I was sued by Citibank also, in my first lawsuit.

We had disuputed the statement and asked for authenticated documentation, which of course they never provided. My letter is almost verbatim to the FCBA as to what constitutes a valid Billing Error Dispute. Of Course their Attorney in my state, alleged it wasn't a valid Billing Error dispute.

They immediately closed our account. and everything else against FCBA. But that is beside the point in a way, and it is after the 1 year window, to file a lawsuit against them. I didn't know then, to do Counter=Cross claims, Like I do now.

But I've not actually been told or heard that, one doesn't have an account with Citibank, as implied/alleged in the Summons.

Is this anything to do with Citibank being under Citigroup, and perhaps the original agreement (which changed several times in the course of the account), is with Citigroup vs Citibank?

The other question I have, is in regards to their Affidavit, their Attorneys in other states use, as well as in Washington state. There's a line where the representative of Citibank puts their name stamp. (Two lines I believe).

How can a so called document with blank lines, that anyone could put a name stamp on (it could be Lawyers legal assistant, for all the consumer knows) be a legal document? Because they notarize it? But yet no where does it state - Personal Knowledge by the person/representative, who put their name stamp and signature on it.

I also know of another case back East, where an Attorney, signed an Affidavit as to having personal knowledge, as to accounting records of Citibank. This was attached to the served victim's Complaint. That was a complete new one to me.

If one signs such an affidavit, even Plaintiff's Attorney, then does it not make them a party, that is able to be put under oath on a witness stand in Court, by the defendant, to testify in "Citibank's" case?

And would that not make the Attorney, have a conflct of Interest, in this particular instant case?

I'm really interested for your reply to my questions.

Thank you in advance for your help on this.

Gingerbread I opened the link above my last post - it opened up to a question re: B Of A, not Citibank. And it was in regards to a Credit score problem, when account had been charged off by B of A, and transferred to S & H.

I must have missed something, b/c I didn't see where S & H actually purchased the alleged debt; but it was moreless implied, as to be the case.

Thank you.

Hello! I was/am in the same EXACT situation as Duke. I have been served by Suttell & Hammer with Citibank for $4000 and I am with Persels & Associates as well. I sent Persels all the papers S&H served me with and went through all the motions and ended up having to go to a judgment hearing. The judge was VERY nice and asked the attorney for S&H if he would like to talk to me to try and work out a payment plan and the attorney flat out said "Since she is working with Persels I legally CAN NOT talk to her because of a certain article and Persels will come back and get me for that, as well as, turn me into the WA state bar. They have done this to me before." The judge said I was pro se and I could represent myself but the attorney still refused. The attorney sat there and bashed Persels and the attorney I have been working with the whole time. So after all that the judge didn't want to continue and said he wanted to have a conference call with me, the attorney, himself, and my attorney from Persels. So we did that and Persels said I was pro se and that they could talk to me for negotiation purposes and that was the end of the call. So I got a letter from the judge saying he denied their judgment hearing for all the late fees and penalties because he did not provide an original signed contract from Citi but granted a judgment on the original owed amount. So now I sit here and wait to see what happens. I have not heard anything since May. These attorneys at S&H are rude and are not willing to work with anything or anyone. Does anyone know what will happen next? I am currently not working because we have two sons and can not afford the day care and my husband goes to school full time. Our only income is financial aid.

Quote:

Quote:

I have gotten 2 fake pleas from Suttell. 8-10 months later, they filed a complaint with the Court. (Kent) I lost that. They just did another one last week. I filed a motion for dismissal and Notice of Appearance This debt had been to another Law Firm in Georgia who took it to National Arbitration. Chase then dismissed the Arbitration claim. 1 day after filing my Motion and Notice of Appearance, the Judge granted a default without Suttell even filing a motion. Was I wrong in filing for Dismissal? I think I might have hung myself. And how long after Judgement do they start the collection process. 1/3 of my income is Social Security Disability that my ex-partner gets monthly. I know they cant touch that. What can I do. I cant afford a lawyer. I could probably only give 500.00 up front. Suttell has well over a hundred cases in Superior Court with Chase and FIA Card Services. I cant have my wages garnished. But they have to leave me enough to live on correct? Could Suttell be doing this to destroy my credit?
Can somebody please give me some advice. I am at my with end.

I need help with Suttell and Hammer. They're killing me. Any Lawyers out there that want to stick it to them. I've got an Arbitration thrown out by Chase bank thru Hanna and then being sued by Chase thru Suttell for the same thing a year later. Judgement against me, how long and what can they do? 1/3 of my Income is Social Security Disability my partner gets...

I found this in the King County Local Court Rules:

“LCR 58( c) Judgment On Promissory Note. The Court Will Sign NO JUDGMENT Upon A Promissory Note Until The ORIGINAL NOTE HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COURT" (emphasis added)


I've had a couple of people well versed in debt matters tell me that a credit card agreement includes a promissory note, so by the Superior court's own rules, they should not be able rule on a collection case until they've seen the original CC agreement.


Ginger Bread Man - does that agree with your knowledge?

Suttell and Hammer are going down. There will be a class action law suit filed against them for their tactics. I wont say who is filing this suit, but I am part of it and apparently so are dozens more....this will be fun.....stay tuned
I just had a judgement vacated because Suttell failed to inform me of action they took AFTER I filed a notice of appearance. The Judge personally mailed me a copy of the order.

Is arbitration an option with these lepers? They have done the same to us, ignored our requests for information, continually sent bogus forms. We filed a notice to appear prior to them filing a lawsuit, now we are looking at a court date and of course they failed to recognize any of our attempts to contact them to find out the situation with this system.

My recent dealings with S & H have been resolved to my satisfaction in the end. They filed suit on me after I elected arbitration. After I filed my claim in arbitration, the OC contacted me and we worked out a settlement and S&H had to dismiss the cause of action. With my spouse, they did the same thing, only somehow managed to get it all the way to a summary judgement. However, we have now successfully managed to have the summary judgement vacated and the cause of action dismissed. Hopefully, the OC will see how slimy they are and drop them as business associates.

Pickles

I am in a similar boat. I've called Citibank twice asking if they're the Plaintiff in my case, and they have both times said they are not. They have given me the phone number of S&H as the owners of said account number. I have been in court once with S&H. I told the judge that Citibank has twice told me they are not suing me, and are not the plaintiff. The judge said to S&H attorney and me, "work it out between you." The so-called attorney left the courtroom and I followed her and said, ???let's talk??? as per the judge's directive. She refused to talk to me.
This story gets long, and is strange and interesting. But cutting out some of the middle, I've received wads more more paperwork from S&H: Motion to Strike my Counterclaims ??? while in the same wad of papers billing me $200.00 for filing fee for counterclaims ??? and Motion for Summary Judgment (court date in Clark County: 9-17-10). I've talked with half a dozen attorneys, none will got to court with me - this without even discussing fees. All the attorneys I've talked with just want me to file bankruptcy. I don't want to go to court without attorney, but if I can't get one, what to do?
Two different attorneys on the NACA site are putting together class action suits against S&H. But neither will help me. They both wanted all my info without ANY reciprocity, including NO discussion regarding proceeds from the class action suit, if won. They're all looking pretty much like "bottom feeders" at present.
I would love to know more articulate details about how ???Pickles??? above arrived at their surprisingly positive results. Apparently it revolved around arbitration. I wonder if it???s too late for me to try same?

-J- Replied on 08-16-2010, 09:18 PM

Sub:
I found this in the King County Local Court Rules:

“LCR 58( c) Judgment On Promissory Note. The Court Will Sign NO JUDGMENT Upon A Promissory Note Until The ORIGINAL NOTE HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COURT" (emphasis added)

Check out these J. You will find if you research the case on the AXE man (David Florer)
Case #09-2-36894-5 that it was billed as a commericial case and it lacked all the requirements of LCR 55. Closely read the docs for this case. You will be suprised.


LCR 55(b) Entry of Default Judgment. No default judgment shall be granted except upon proof satisfactory to the court. The court shall require at least the following to be on file with the motion for default judgment, unless otherwise excused by the court for good cause:
LCR 55(b)(1) On assigned causes of action, a copy of the assignment instrument
LCR 55 (b)(4) On causes of action based on open account where the complaint is not specific, the last written statement of account sent to the debtor setting forth current charges and credits and the dates thereof and a statement of any interest or surcharges which are included;

Dear "in the same boat.".
I am truly sorry that you are experiencing these issues.
It has become very evident that S&H are not just “Lawyers for the OC” on any of the accounts that they are suing on. They will perform all bad things that a Collection agency will perform. Please keep trying to get a lawyer and don’t go it alone, but if you have to go it alone take all the local reporters from every newspaper, TV, Internet blog, 20/20, anyone that is willing to come along. Make sure that you request a court reporter and make sure that everyone in the universe that can be there to witness the event can be there.
Politely request as much discovery as you can, at least a signed contract that they are alleging, or some signed Credit card receipts.

The federal Truth-in-Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. ? 1601 et seq imposes a comprehensive scheme for the regulation of credit card accounts. These disclosure requirements are virtually all encompassing. The precise content and format of the disclosures that must be made in connection with every credit card application is dictated in great detail by ? 1637 of the Act and the implementing regulations found at 12 C.F.R. 225.5-225.16.
The federal Truth-in-Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. ? 1601 et seq The Act defines the manner and timing of such disclosures regardless of the manner in which the credit card offer is made, whether it is made by mail, by telephone, in a Catalog, magazine or other publication, or over the internet. 15 U.S.C. ? 1637(c)(1)-(7). Additional disclosures are required in monthly statements, 12 C.F.R. 226.7, when certain terms of the account agreement are changed, 12 C.F.R. 226.9(c), and before the card renewal date, 12 C.F.R. 226.9(e).

Have you tried talking to Marlene Wenger of Winlock?
[email]Marlene@wengerlawps.com[/email]
(360) 269-6917

I am not sure if she is licensed in OR. But she may have some really great contacts that are licensed.

Baxter and Baxter is pretty big in OR. They have won plenty of these type cases with REALLY Big payouts.
http://www.baxterlaw.com

I hear you about the Lawyers just wanting you to BK out, and put money in their pockets. But keep looking there may be an honest lawyer left out there somewhere.

Our thoughts and prayers are with you.

Here is some last advice.

File a complaint at the Office of the comptroller of the Currency. They govern National banks like Citibank, Chase, etc.

Make sure that you file against Citibank (the plaintiff) and that they are represented by S&H of WA.

If Citibank is truly not suing you they will not lie to the OCC.

If they are indeed suing you the S&H are handling money for Citibank and therefore must be in compliance with an act called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This requires that money in the possession or control or owed to a Publicly held companies (like Citibank) must have some control over where and how they are handling money.

Since S&H are in the direct flow of money from customer to Citi there must be SOX compliance at least on the CITI end of the equation.

http://oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/OSPS/docs/pubs/appends/appendg.pdf Shows that the state of Oregon sees S&H as a valid collector of money GAWM Put this information in your OCC complaint.
WA also sees them as a collector.

I would be interested in joining a class action against Suttell & Hammer. They apparently received a default judgment against me, for which I was never properly served. I also found out that they harassed my former neighbors at all hours of the day and night, asking for my whereabouts. How can they have gotten a judgment against me if they don't even know where I now live?

I'll bookmark this thread and check in periodically.

I just received a S&H judgement against me today and when I looked up the case no. in the online Pierce Co. system, the records indicate I was served a summons on 10/3 however; no summons was ever served upon me regarding this case.

I am looking into vacating the judgement based on improper service and would absolutely be interested in joining a class action suit against this company.

Will also bookmark this site.

I just received summons from S&H and after checking with King County, it's not on the record yet. I wonder, if I should even care about it since I will be filing bankruptcy anyway?

Please, please, please advise me!!! I am not sure what to do. I have just been served with a summons today and I only have about 9 days to deal with it. I don't even know where to begin. I don't have number on the Summons, so I am not even sure how I should approach filing the claim! I am really scared and don't quite know what to do. After reading the message board I realize that I should send in my response to the court, but how do I do that if I don't know how to prove where it is supposed to go? And I know I am to send them a response as well, but how should I do that, and how can I prove I sent it? Someone out there please answer me!!!

Looks like these crooks have changed names and moved shop once again. This is the 3rd or 4th time they've restructured and moved recently. They now seem to be in the old Seattle Tower downtown operating as 'Suttell Collection Services".

Persels and Associates are dirt bags. They tell you to stop paying your creditors and leave everything to them and then you end up getting sued by Suttell and Hammer or Plovie Law or Bishop and White. Maybe you should stop trying to pawn your responsibilities off and just pay yor bills, then you won't have to worry about the legalities surrounding process service.

Quit being scared and pay your bills

DW and I have dealt with S&H before..using an attorney, who was darned near free, he negotiated a lump sum settlement, saving us thousand$. The reason: I am on Social Security and DW worked part time for minimum wage. Our attorney argued successfully that S&H could not legally go after
us because we were so poor. We were, in his legal words, "non-judgmental" or had nothing to go after. S&H settled out of court for 30 cents on the dollar.

Fast forward to today: DW lost her job, her boss sold the business and laid everyone off. She had severe medical problems--a gall bladder operation followed by a brain operation. We managed to keep all of the "secured" debts paid in full, each month, but had to let the credit cards slide a bit.

All of the money that we had coming in, was my SS check. We prayed every day for help. We are not overly religious people, but one day the phone rang...it was the bank that holds our home mortgage!! They wanted to refinance our house to a fixed rate, 15 year mortgage at 5% PLUS pay off DW's car AND a 5 K$ personal loan that we had through them!! Our monthly payments got reduced by 395 dollars per month. Now we are doing better.

Then we get a letter from S&H seeking a payment on one of our behind bills..of course they want all of it, right now. I gotta call that lawyer...

Does any of this sound familiar?? I wondered about that MInn. deal.

I just got served yesterday from Suttel and Hammer. Have been doing some research on the net and they don't sound on the up and up. It almost looks like they took the information in the summons off my credit report then put in all the legal stuff.

Many of you have asked about how I make money on the Internet. This is how.

:eek:Whatever you do don'y ignore this. Go to the court and show it to them in the clerks office. Save all evidence and turn it in to the court make copies send them to Suttell and Hammer