.jpg)
New ploy by secured creditors; use 2004 Exams to Harass or At Least Get Debtor's Attention
Documents relating to condition and location of jewelry would be pawn tickets, insurance policy rider specifically covering the item, repair tickets. That way when debtor says "I don't have it in my possession" the alternatives are also covered. 2004 exams do harass the debtor and sometimes get a settlement. It probably works really well if the debtor is not represented.
Margaret Norman, Attny
111 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #355
Manhattan Beach, Ca. 90266
310-376-7873
Fax 310-798-0846
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Steven,
Take a look at the LBR that require a good faith effort to obtain documents following a meet and confer and a declaration in support filed with the motion for 2004.
Lou Esbin
>
> The finance company for a jewelry purchase has used a small law firm to
> notice a motion for a 2004 Exam that simply asks for the credit
> documents that they themselves issued and "documents relating the
> location and condition" of the property" (who creates documents about
> location and condition of jewelry? Dear Diary...today my ring is
> looking tarnished and so I sent it on a world tour because I thought it
> needed a vacation...), and are asking my debtor to appear at some office
> in Tustin for an exam.
>
>
>
> That this is just a collection ploy is obvious, and I have to hand it to
> creditor's attorney, that while heavy handed, it does get attention. It
> is hard to collect on non-vehicle or real property collateral and the
> costs of the effort often exceed the value of the collateral.
>
>
>
> They do have some very general language in the motion itself (a barely
> modified template) and the declaration in support states they have not
> be able to determine location and condition.
>
>
>
> So I guess I'll oppose it and get my client's declaration on the
> condition and location thereby obviating the need for such examination,
> and showing an email that we exchanged trying to negotiate a redemption.
>
>
>
> So this brings me to 2 questions:
>
>
>
> 1. Does anyone have a form or pleading with some P&As that they'd
> like to contribute to this that have some pleading to the judge about it
> being for harassment or improper purposes (as perhaps with an ex-spouse)
> even though it is just for this silly thing; and
>
> 2. If anyone gets a similar 2004 Motion, would you like to have my
> pleading that I put together, with or without the above heavy P&A.
>
>
>
> I'd like for everyone who gets this 2004 Motion to oppose it, and makes
> sure it does not work to reward its authors, if not by this method, then
> by a more passive means if that's your style.
>
>
>
> Law Offices of Steven B. Lever
>
> >
>
> > Steven B. Lever
>
> >( Tel. (562) 436-5456 ext. 1
>
> >( Fax (562) 485-6886
>
> >* sblever@...
>
> > www.leverlaw.com
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
The finance company for a jewelry purchase has used a small law firm to
notice a motion for a 2004 Exam that simply asks for the credit
documents that they themselves issued and "documents relating the
location and condition" of the property" (who creates documents about
location and condition of jewelry? Dear Diary...today my ring is
looking tarnished and so I sent it on a world tour because I thought it
needed a vacation...), and are asking my debtor to appear at some office
in Tustin for an exam.
That this is just a collection ploy is obvious, and I have to hand it to
creditor's attorney, that while heavy handed, it does get attention. It
is hard to collect on non-vehicle or real property collateral and the
costs of the effort often exceed the value of the collateral.
They do have some very general language in the motion itself (a barely
modified template) and the declaration in support states they have not
be able to determine location and condition.
So I guess I'll oppose it and get my client's declaration on the
condition and location thereby obviating the need for such examination,
and showing an email that we exchanged trying to negotiate a redemption.
So this brings me to 2 questions:
1. Does anyone have a form or pleading with some P&As that they'd
like to contribute to this that have some pleading to the judge about it
being for harassment or improper purposes (as perhaps with an ex-spouse)
even though it is just for this silly thing; and
2. If anyone gets a similar 2004 Motion, would you like to have my
pleading that I put together, with or without the above heavy P&A.
I'd like for everyone who gets this 2004 Motion to oppose it, and makes
sure it does not work to reward its authors, if not by this method, then
by a more passive means if that's your style.
Law Offices of Steven B. Lever
>
> Steven B. Lever
>( Tel. (562) 436-5456 ext. 1
>( Fax (562) 485-6886
>* sblever@leverlaw.com
> www.leverlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.