APPEAL
Judge Broomfield denied my motion for reconsideration and wrote:
"As part of its analysis, the court specifically queried whether Pacific might have an agency relationship with American Agencies. ... The court found that no evidence had been submitted which evidenced an agency relationship between Pacific and American. ... Pacific rebutted the agency relationship theory with the declaration of Zulkifli Iljas ...."
Could somebody please read the Zulkifli declaration and PLEASE tell me where the rebuttal is.
What am I missing?????????
Judge Broomfield wrote in his order to dismiss that I failed to supply any "competent evidence" and no affidavit to substantiate my allegations.
So, I verified my entire complaint, went through my Pac Bell exhibits in detail, spent a few hours getting it notarized, and then I'm told there's nothing new.
If American Agencies wasn't the agent for Pacific Bell, WTF were they doing collecting the Pacific Bell account???? Why am I suing them in this same action? DUH!
I feel like I'm talking to CRAs. How could I prove that they were the agent for Pacific Bell and that they didn't collect without authorization?????
Was I supposed to depose people or have witnesses at the hearing?
And why are the Pacific Bell declarations God's truth and everything I submit is deemed lies?
Well, I think I'll appeal this one. This ain't justice, I don't have the money, time and legal skills to sue in California.
And if I just let it go, the other defendants will pull that same shit. I'm tired of the lies.
PRESS RELEASES
It's about time I get started.
RETALIATION
If anyone has any suggestions on how I can do to Pacific Bell what they did to me, please let me know.
If you read the fax spam comments, you've seen the many ideas about calling the spammers on 800 #s, faxing black paper to waste their ink, etc.
I'm looking for something that'll REALLY cause them problems. I'd like their execs to worry like I did. Nothing criminal, but I'd love to do something that'll leave me saying: "Jurisdiction, jurisdiction!"
They not only sold the account for collection KNOWING that they had failed to credit my check, but they never once apologized and haven't offered one penny to settle.
I'm getting the feeling that Pacific Bell does this all the time. It's their routine.
Well, I'm in no hurry with my retaliation, there is no SOL and no jurisdiction.
I'll try the appeal and the press releases, see how that goes. If I can't find "justice" in the courts, I'm sure somebody will think of something good.
Posted by Christine at February 24, 2004 09:34 PMI empathize with your frustration, but quite clearly AA was *not* an agent of PacBell. That was covered in the court's Order to Dismiss, and I explained in that part of your blog why the court ruled as it did.
I believe I also mentioned you were wasting your time here and would have to sue in California---not said to be "an I told you so" kind of guy, but just to help you focus your battles. You can win this case, but not the way you're going about it. I strongly suggest retaining a lawyer at least as a "legal coach," paying for his or her advice on an ad-hoc basis. You're spinning your wheels here when you could be going forward.
Posted by: OneL at February 24, 2004 09:52 PM
I missed this part of your entry at first glance: "Well, I think I'll appeal this one. This ain't justice, I don't have the money, time and legal skills to sue in California."
I can't say this strongly enough: YOU CAN'T SUE PACBELL IN ARIZONA. No matter how much you want that to be so, that is NOT how personal jurisdiction works. You might as well try to get a judge to throw out the principle of "guilty until proven innocent"---that's how fundamental and unalterable this principle is in the modern US legal system.
If you want me to give you the reasons for why personal jurisdiction works as it does, I will be more than happy to explain it in greater detail. But there's no trick or loophole to let you sue PacBell wherever you want. I'm sorry.
Posted by: OneL at February 24, 2004 09:56 PM
Here's what I don't understand:
Why can I sue American Agencies?
Why was American Agencies not the agent for Pacific Bell?
Posted by: Christine Baker at February 24, 2004 10:16 PM
And, it's really not a good format for a serious discussion here, I'm going to post this at CreditCourt - I'll post the link in a bit.
Posted by: Christine Baker at February 24, 2004 10:18 PM
Ah, that's a different story! The most important thing to keep in mind is that when a party buys a debt from a second party, they do not become the agent of the second party (anymore than I become an agent of Domino's when I purchase a pizza).
If AA had said "Pay me x amount and I'll try to collect this debt for you," then they would have been an agent. But American Agencies puchased the debt from PacBell---it did not act as an agent, rather as a customer.
Now, the core issue---the uncredited payment to PacBell---is the same. It's frustrating, but even though the same core facts are at issue in your AA claim, you need to file a suit with the same core facts in California if you want to nail PacBell (and please believe me---I want you to succeed in your endeavor! I have no love for credit card companies or collectors).
Posted by: OneL at February 24, 2004 10:22 PM
Ok, I posted reposted at CreditCourt http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/3318/3761.html
One of the things I don't seem to get across is that American Agencies DID collect for Pacific Bell until 2/2003 - if Zulkifli didn't lie, but definitely until AFTER I sued them in 2002.
I'm suing American Agencies for the FDCPA and FCRA violations in 2001/2002 PRIOR to the sale. Actually, nothing has happened since the sale, I just have to check my credit report all the time and I can expect American Agencies to sell it to some other collector, who will then report it again.
Anyway, I really appreciate your postings, but it's much easier to have a coherent discussion at CreditCourt.
Also, there are attorneys considering sueing Pac Bell and American Agencies in a class action. I've had numerous complaints now about Pacific Bell moving collections from Am. Ag. to Bay Area Credit and always ignoring any disputes.
Posted by: Christine Baker at February 24, 2004 10:45 PM
Thanks for the link---I'll pop into the forum to continue this.
Posted by: OneL at February 25, 2004 11:32 AM