Credit Card Arbitration
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 3:29 pm
As I may have mentioned, I infrequently handle credit card arbitrations for one of the large arbitration firms. (Usually, the firm sends me ICANN domain name arbitrations, which are interesting, even challenging.) I received a new credit card file this week, and unlike most arbitrations, the Respondent attempted to defend against the claim. Respondent asserted that he was entitled to copies of the original credit card application under the terms of which he agreed to arbitration; he also asserted that he was entitled to "verification" of the debt. Attached were about 150 pages of case law allegedly dealing with these issues.
Of course, there were a couple of missing elements:
The Respondent ignored the Creditor's filing, which recited the amount of the debt and the existance of the account, and contained the portion of the card-holder agreement which referenced arbitration under Deleware law.
So, while the Respondent demanded documents and evidence of debt, he did not bother to deny that the Creditor's pleadings were in error or otherwise wrong.
What a waste of paper!
I presume someone is selling these packages on the 'Net. So, for those of you who are into "debt elimination," and who lurk here, let this case be a lesson.
If you cannot deny that you signed the agreement and cannot deny that you signed an agreement with an arbititration clause, don't bother with the "demand" for further evidence.
And, if you cannot deny the debt, or at least object to the accurancy of the claimed amounts, don't bother to ask for verification of the debt.
FN. The usual Response to credit card claims received by me (I can only speak anecdotally) is not a denial but a statement that the debtor simply cannot pay for reasons that include health, job loss, etc. Very few "deny" the debt. This is why, of course, that 99% of the credit card arbitrations go in favor of the creditor.
Of course, there were a couple of missing elements:
The Respondent ignored the Creditor's filing, which recited the amount of the debt and the existance of the account, and contained the portion of the card-holder agreement which referenced arbitration under Deleware law.
So, while the Respondent demanded documents and evidence of debt, he did not bother to deny that the Creditor's pleadings were in error or otherwise wrong.
What a waste of paper!
I presume someone is selling these packages on the 'Net. So, for those of you who are into "debt elimination," and who lurk here, let this case be a lesson.
If you cannot deny that you signed the agreement and cannot deny that you signed an agreement with an arbititration clause, don't bother with the "demand" for further evidence.
And, if you cannot deny the debt, or at least object to the accurancy of the claimed amounts, don't bother to ask for verification of the debt.
FN. The usual Response to credit card claims received by me (I can only speak anecdotally) is not a denial but a statement that the debtor simply cannot pay for reasons that include health, job loss, etc. Very few "deny" the debt. This is why, of course, that 99% of the credit card arbitrations go in favor of the creditor.