sercfm

The bank starts out with a credit for the foreclousre amount....The one thing they can not wipe out in FC is the unpaid taxes sewer and water...if the amounts on those exceeed their credi and the amount they can likely move the property for quickly....the actuaries tell them to let it go.

Call and speak to a different rep then.

No...cash means cash. Currency transaction reports are to establish a paper trail. A check is that paper trail.

Also, while my ultimate goal would be to win the motion. A secondary one is to lemonade off defense counsel, but not the judge. They have been playing games for months now and are finally taking this seriously having turned the case over to the firms chair of their ERISA lit Dept. in New York.

No, I have never sent out any letters about recording calls. The call is 100% neutral to my case, I would rather limit the amount of red herrings should this case actually go to trial. My filings, my deps and my rsponses are truthful and consistent. This is a denail of COBRA benefits case where payment was received and mishandled by the TPA (certified receipt of payment). There is no mention of recording calls anywhere in any documents. Federal precedent favors the most restrictive state law. The call originated in a one party state and was recorded in Florida, a two party state.

I'll answer any question you have...I appreciate any input.

They recorded the call, not me. No mention of the recording on the complete transcript. I just want to avoid the motion being frivolous.

They are in Florida. Fedeeral law is one party , but only in the absence of a more restrictive state law.

I called them...no where did they say it may be monitored. The transcript is the actual phone call if recording the call was illegal, the transcript would seem to be the fruit of the forbidden vine. I am Pro Se. The transcript itself is not ultimately damaging but, at trial could easily confuse the issues, that's why I want to do a motion in Limine. I just don't want to aggravate the judge if my position is frivelous.

Questions. I am currently involved in a Fedeal Suit against a company based in Florida. In their response, they attached a beginning to end certified transcript of a call to them taken from a recording. NJ is a one party notification state and Florida 2. Federal law is one party, in the absence of a more restrictive state law. The transcript includes no notification of the recording nor notation of audible beep. The recording was made in Florida. Does Florida's 2 party law control and does Florida recognize a business exception....Thank you.

If the check was paid, you would have it not them. If you paid it later and didn't get back the returned check...you may be out of luck. Posession of the returned check is fairly solid evidence of the returned check.

If the check was paid, you would have it not them. If you paid it later and didn't get back the returned check...you may be out of luck. Posession of the returned check is fairly solid evidence of the returned check.

I think you will live to regret posting internal documents. As far as reporting them...please do. If your state has a strong CEPA statute, you may not even need to resign.

Is it so bad. Have a CITI c/o, well within SOL. With their statement credit it brings the balance down to slightly less than the C/O amount. (and they stop trying to add fees) It's for over 10K so, if I don;t take it, it obviously gets sold to the scumbags at New Century and sued for (creating alot of unneded aggravation) So, I ask, what's the real downside to taking the offer.

If he files BK can't he reaffirm the car crammed down to the actual value of the car today?-