PATTI- THIS IS YOUR THREAD
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Credit Forum Index ]
Posted by Why Chat (220.127.116.11) on November 01, 2002 at 19:54:32:
In Reply to: reply to kelly...please read posted by patti on November 01, 2002 at 18:47:42:
OK Patti, from now on just post on this thread so we can keep up with things.
Apparently you have 2 debts you are concerned about, 1 from a repo that a suit was filed on and then abandoned and dismissed,the other from a cc debt.
The cc debt one is simple, you send them the SOL letter from my website. That should stop them cold.
The repo one is unfortunately a clssic example of how the scam ca's operate to intimidate people into paying $$ they are NOT legally required to pay at all.
You signed a contract to buy a car,part of the contract included repo rights to the creditor if you defaulted, when the car was repo'd the contract ENDED.
Now you had a new obligation, that is the deficiency, the difference between what the car was sold for at auction and what the pay-off would have been at the time.Let's say you could have paid it off- or redeemed it from repo for $15,000, it sold at auction for $10,000 (including their costs of resale) That left a deficiency of $5,000. that you were legally responsible for IF the repo had been carried out legally with full notices to you and a full accounting.
If it was a LEGALLY carried out repo, they could have file for a deficiency judgment THEN,they had at most 2 years from the time of the LEGAL repo and resale (that gave the deficiency amount= cause of action) to do this. If the repo was NOT carried out in accordance with State laws they had NO legal right to file suit for the deficiency.
Now, what do you need to do now? You can't get back the $$ you paid unneccessarily, however you can send a cease and desist if you are still being bothered for this debt. Along with any cease and desist you should demand validation of the debt, including documentation of the repo, a full accounting of the resale and proof that it was in accordance with State law.
Post a Followup