GRISHAM & KNIGHT

GRISHAM & KNIGHT HOOPER James Hooper Attorney 16-1-204. Defenses based on unclean hands Chattanooga, Tennessee

25th of Apr, 2011 by User415478

James Hooper engaged in unethical behavior as detailed below:
1. On May 27, 2009 Grisham Knight &Hooper sent a debt collection letter to (me)in order to collect an alleged consumer debt in the amount of $21,944.94 on behalf of FIA CARD SERVICES .On May 27, 2009, I promptly requested that they validate this alleged debt by providing me contract and full statements of account attaching a Creditor Statement to be fill out and returned. If a debtor notifies a debt collector within 30 days after receiving notice of an alleged debt, that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector shall cease collection activity until the debt collector obtains and sends verification of the debt to the debtor. 15 USC 1692g(b)
2. Plaintiff attached documentation for verification of the alleged debt to the small claims notice. The documentation included a computer generated itemized statement of the alleged debt and two copies of executed contracts. The attorney didnt include the full agreement or any of the amended terms of the original agreement. Basically this evidence is insufficient and The Federal Truth in Lending Act requires material terms of a credit card relationship to set forth in a written agreement. Federal Law mandates comprehensive disclosure of these terms when the account is opened and when the account is amended. Because these disclosures are required to be in writing and integrated into the account opening process regardless of how the account is opened, the disclosed terms become defacto terms of the card agreement. It is impossible to lawfully establish a credit card account without a comprehensive written document setting forth virtually all of the material terms of the agreement. A Plaintiff cannot recover interest or fees absent proof of an agreement to pay interest or fees. Calculation of interest is usurious- basically they jacked up the interest rate (universal default) and that the interest rate is way above legal limits and also they broke CARD Act of 2009.(TCA 45-13-40)
3. On November 24, 2009 Grisham & Knight Hooper Associates filed a suit in the Hamilton County Session Court, Tennessee (Case No. xxxxxx) on behalf of FIA CARD SERVICES, INC in a sum in excess of 21,944.94 thousand dollars.
4. Previously I received the validation letters from:
A. I am receipt of letter dated 05/08 and 05/07 of 2008 in an attempt to collect a debt from The Client Services. letter dated May 8 of 2008 and in response sent request to validate debt in May 13, 2008 in the amount of $19,830.10. I didnt receive any notice or letter from The Client Services Inc, except the confirmation of receipt letter on May 15, 2008. Defendant had clearly disputed the debt as is shown by the evidence of fact demonstrated in Defendants cover letter sent to the opposing attorneys requesting a Creditor Disclosure Statement to be filled out and returned. B. I received letter dated October 17, 2008 from 2 nd collector Law Offices of Brachfeld to collect a debt in the amount of $ 21,944.94 and response sent on October 29,2008. C. On October 29, 2008 I sent letter to inform Client Services that they are in violation of FDCPA and subject to a fine of $ 1000 for each violation and my emotional distress .The collector added fees without providing any documents.
The collector can't add on any extra fees that your original credit or loan agreement doesn't allow. [15 USC 1692f] 808(1). D. I received a letter dated January 9, 2009 from 3rd collector Buffaloe & Associates to collect a debt and response sent on January 19, 2009 and received no response from Collector.E. I received a letter dated January 22, 2009 from Law Offices of Brachfeld Associates contacting and demanding money as a settlement refusing provide any documents and failed to send a written debt validation notice.
5. On June 29, 2010 Defendant submitted an Answer and Affirmative Defenses as requested by the Session Court. Defendant Submitted requests for documentation in Discovery. Defendant asserted in counter-claim if the Plaintiff is holder in due course of the original instrument who would have personal jurisdiction and standing as legal holders of the debt to bring this action in their own name since Bank of America/FIA CARD SERVICES transferred/assigned or sold to TRAK AMERICA ENTERPRISES, LLC. After receiving letter to collect debt from Grisham & Knight Hooper I called to Bank of America and customer service representative told me We have limited information and you need contact TRAK AMERICA ENTERPRISES, LLC. and which I sent certified letter to TRAK AMERICA ENTERPRISES, LLC and they refused to accept three times. On or about April 25, 2011, I filed and sent complaint to New York Attorney General regarding TRAK AMERICA ENTERPRISES, LLC.
6. Attorney James Hooper has made knowing and intentional misrepresentations or misleading and/or false representations as to the legal status, character, and/or amount of the debt in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692e(2), and in violation of U.S.C.15 1692e(10).
7. On July 8, 2010 I appeared in Session court and stated this court is not ready for trial yet since I didnt receive any response on counterclaim from the Plaintiff. Plaintiff has made no answer to these allegations of material fact which is violation of the law. The Defendant argued that the document they filed is not contract itself with only Defendant information and there is not even showing contract was signed with FIA CARD SERVICES, INC and Attorney James Hooper could not provide valid proof of its claim, nor could it prove that it had defendant's authorized signature agreeing that a claim exists with FIA CARD SERVICES, INC. and the case number XXXXXXXXX shows that trial was held in the absence of Plaintiff; trial with no witnesses or evidence that resulted in a 21,944.00 dollar judgment against me.
8. I notified the Court that present and previous debt collectors refused to validate debt and court doesn't have any jurisdiction over federal issues and also I offered all communication with debt collectors with returned register receipt as evidence and Judge Bales didnt acknowledge.. I asked several times the Court: Can he (Attorney James Hooper) produce his contract to represent the plaintiff as proof he is not engaged in fraud bringing this case for his own gain?
9. No witnesses appeared and testify in this case and Attorney James Hooper is not competent witness who got personal knowledge of the past dealing between me and Creditor.
A party cannot be both witnesses and counsel in the same cause and thus, statements in Plaintiffs complaint by Plaintiffs counsel are alleged, and not evidence adduced from personal knowledge. See, United States v. Lovasco, 431 U.S. 783, 97 S.Ct 2044, 52 L.Ed. 2d 752, Gonzales v. Buist 224 U.S. 126,56 L.Ed 693,32 S.Ct 463, Holt v. United States, 218 U.S. 245,54 L.Ed 1021,31 S. Ct.2, and Trinsey v.Pagliaro, D.C. Pa. 229F.Supp.647.
10. The Court awarded a Plaintiff a judgment against the Defendant based on unverified and undocumented statements of counsel and dismissed Defendants counterclaim.

Track this Report 0 Comment | Post a Comment