Lowball settlement offers are useful because ...

Posted by begoodorelse (172.148.114.182) on December 04, 2003 at 19:17:42:

In Reply to: Re: Striking back at JBC, Absolute, US Financial Recoveries, AND Byck!! posted by scott on December 04, 2003 at 18:47:47:

... as I should have made plain: one, CAs never accept them anyway because they are so arrogant, and two, even though FDCPA doesn't, the North Carolina unfair trade statute requires a "reasonable settlement effort" before suing if you want the CA to get dinged for attorney fees too. If they pass up an opportunity to kill the case for peanuts, it's doom on them when the judge finds out. So far, the only time I actually settled with a CA was for, ah, substantial bucks. Even in that case, I rather would have hauled the lot of them into our friendly local courthouse and had the time of my life barbecuing them before a jury, but the client needed the money more than I needed the entertainment.

The only two life forms on whom I have no mercy whatsoever are batterers and bill collectors. I garontee, everything I do in a collection case is calculated to make them hurt the most possible. Yes I did plan to complain to all applicable Bars, but didn't know you had to go to Essex Co. for JBC, in FL and NC all complaints are centralized. Suit will be filed not only before Christmas, but next week! I'm a regular dang Santa Claus, I am. Thanks for everything Scott.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup