Thomas & Thomas Attorneys At Law Refusal To Answer Questions Regarding Subject Matter Newport, Kentucky

10th of Oct, 2011 by User319515

I (Alleged Defendant) wish to make it known that these questions were not frivolous but most important to my (Alleged Defendant) defense. The questions were concerning the following:
1. Why, according to my (Alleged Defendant) understanding, did the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank) make it sound as if I (Alleged Defendant) failed to issue the minimum monthly payment from the beginning?
2. Had this been so, no minimum monthly payment made to the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank), then why did the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank) allow me (Alleged Defendant) continual usage of the account in question over an extended period of time?
3. I (Alleged Defendant) also wish to inquire as to why the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank), after having charged off the account in question on March 17, 2009, (date set forth in document(s)received from the court) waited until September 15, 2011, (date on same document(s) received by me (Alleged Defendant) on September 17, 2011) to file with the court?
4. In regard to the Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) claim number 7, which reads as follows:
The Defendant owes Plaintiff the principal sum of $1,180.23, with accrued interest in the amount of $617.55 through June 19, 2011, plus interest on the principal balance at the statutory rate per year and cost.
Leads me (Alleged Defendant) to inquire as to whether the lengthy period between charge off and court filing, as mentioned in my (Alleged Defendant) inquiry number 3, was to possibly inflate the balance of the account in question?
5. As most persons are aware, a contract must be signed by two (or more) parties / all parties concerned in order to be valid. Therefore, I (Alleged Defendant) wish to inquire as to why the Authorized Personnel having signed for the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank) and what date did said Authorized Personnel sign the contract?
6. Also, I (Alleged Defendant) am inquiring as to why the complete omission of the fact that I (Alleged Defendant), at the Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) request, tried on various occasions to resolve this situation with the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank) but unfortunately to no avail, not on my (Alleged Defendant) part but rather because of the Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) own refusal to come to a working commitment on on the part of the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank)?
7. With all due respect, I (Alleged Defendant) then requested that any and all charges, including but not limited to, stated in Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) claim number 7 (see my (Alleged Defendant) question number 4) be dismissed. In closing, I (alleged Defendant) also requested, along with a valid copy of a valid contract signed and dated by proper Authorized Personnel for the Plaintiff (Capital One Bank), full and complete disclosure(s), as required by law, under penalty of perjury. My (alleged Defendant) next step was to have all papers notarized by a legally licensed Notary Public before sending them by Certified Mail to the Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) attorneys and the Court, both of whom received the questions / requests on September 30, 2011 (according to Certified Mail receipts). On October 8, 2011, I (Alleged Defendant) received another mailing from the Plaintiff's (Capital One Bank) attorneys containing neither answers to my (Alleged Defendant) questions nor a copy of a valid contract as I (Alleged Defendant) had requested. Rather, it contained more forms for me (Alleged Defendant) to fill out, along with copies of document(s) like the same as had already been received from the Court. This leads me (Alleged Defendant) to question why I (Alleged Defendant) should have to keep filling out forms and / or answer more questions while my (Alleged Defendant) questions and requests go unanswered / unfulfilled and apparently avoided?

Track this Report 0 Comment | Post a Comment