Help with Weltman,Weinberg and Reis

You don't owe them anything they played your debt off for probably $100.00 you signed a agreement with the original credit card company not with LVNV FUNDING

Long sigh, so much to unpack .....

1)  Ms. "KY call" made no mention of LVNV in her brief remark, three years and change ago.
2)  The remark is so brief that you cannot know from a blind distance what she does or does not owe.
3)  "Liss Bliss" did have a very different issue involving LVNV about five weeks later.
4)  Is having "played your debt off" like when a televised award winner at the dais won't shut up and must be shooed away by a music cue and a lady in an evening gown?
5)  I could go on at length explaining why you don't need a prior agreement with a debt buyer to owe or be sued by one. As it happens, I touched on that topic twice in reply to Bliss on the same page, and -- oh, lucky you -- I later devoted a whole paragraph three years ago next week to debunking some other person peddling similarly hazardous views.

https://800notes.com/forum/ta-1dca23ad2240d24 ... 784162456687145

Well I am fed up with them, do if u know the name of an attorney that wouldn't cost me an arm or a leg I would like his or her telephone number

You do realize that you're replying to a five and a half year old post, right?
Also, asking for attorney references on an anonymous forum is risky at best.

I'm afraid your request is much too broad and unspecific. I see a low chance that you and Stranger live in the same state. The typical attorney is licensed to operate in one state only. In New England, covering two or three is more common. You also give no hint of whether you want to become a plaintiff or defend a collection suit in progress, or both.

Consumer attorney shopping is somewhat like buying new pants. You need to evaluate your investment and be sure of a proper fit. This is a field loaded with lazy paper pushers who only know how to file bankruptcies and cut "half price" deals with collectors. The object of enforcing consumer law is to make the rogue company pay, not you.

The National Association of Consumer Advocates (NACA.net), Avvo, and Justia each run attorney directories. They are largely promotional vehicles and shy on detail like the phone book and need to be viewed with salt grains in hand. But you'll have some names to start with and plug into searches of your state court dockets. Ideally you want to find someone who has actually left her office for debt defendants and plaintiffs with FDCPA and FCRA claims, and has fought the collectors to a standstill.

Talking of FDCPA claims, billing is less of a worry. That law has a unique cost-shift provision, forcing the loser company to pay all the legal costs incurred by a winning consumer plaintiff. Overall, working on contingency, with little or no retainer, is common practice for this attorney category.

I know this thread is from years ago...hoping you’re still able to respond.   I co-signed on a car in 2014 for a friend.  April 2015 was the last time this person made a payment, and took the car across the county (Arizona—I live in Indiana).  May 2015 I received a letter from the bank stating a payment was missed. I called the bank directly (because the person I co-signed for was not returning my calls) the bank told me they actually talked to this person and they are making a payment.  I said great...fast forward to August 2015 the bank calls me and says the payments have not been made since April 2015 and the person is no longer carrying insurance on the car so the bank is having to pay for that too.  First I had heard of this.   The payments and insurance was so far behind at that point i couldn’t catch it up.  I pleaded with this persons family to let me know where he is so I could get the car.  About 6 months later he visited family in Indiana, his son called me and let me know where the car is.  The bank repossessed it at that time.  February 2019 I received a letter from WWR Addressed to My first name and the person who had the cars last name.  That has never been my name...they said if I didn’t respond they would enforce legal obligations.  I called them back.  The car was purchased for 14,414 dollars...the balance due was 26,683 dollars.  I told them I could pay 2000 and that is all I could do.  The man on the phone said he would discuss this with his partners and call me back.  I didn’t heard a thing from them until 10-2019 when I got another letter, this time stating the balance was 18k.  This letter didn’t state anything about legal action.  I would like some advice on how to proceed...the letters have all come to me with an incorrect last name.  A name that has never been my name.  I also live in Indiana.  From what I can tell WWR does not have an office in Indiana...can they still sue me?
I did receive a certified letter in 2016 from someone, can’t remember who but I think it was the bank...but it was addressed to this name that is the incorrect last name so I refused the letter and would not sign it...please help.  Looking for any advice

So, have you read the other posts in this thread to find answers to your questions?  Have you consulted an attorney, because it looks like you have legal problems and will certainly need one.  No one here will give you legal advice and that is what you are asking for.

You co-signed a loan for a not-so-good friend who stiffed you. Surprise!  It's unfortunate that you were naive enough to do this, but your best bet is probably to consult with an attorney who specializes in cases such as this.  Bankruptcy may be in your future.  Expensive lesson learned.

This will be educated guesswork since I have no background in sharing debt burdens. What I can do is suggest ways to start building a defense platform.

WWR is trying to collect from a fictional person. You're not required to forgive their hassling you as some clerical error. When drafting the FDCPA, Congress was deadly serious about assuring that debt collectors made accurate claims against the correct persons. In your place I'd have more or less told WWR that the person they seek can't be found in your house. (... or really any other) I don't know if some dippy clerk at the bank or WWR thought you were married to the cosigner or simply got sloppy, but this is not something I'd let slide.

Assuming that WWR ever gets around to correcting your name, I think they need to start over with a new dunning letter with the usual boilerplate about your dispute rights. I also think that offering payment was an error. You don't have to help the opposition with establishing your liability. Nothing prevents your written dispute next week, but of course it would land without the means to force debt validation.

You also don't know or indicate if the original bank still owns this old car note. The weirdo floating balance suggests to me a quite arbitrary calculation often seen from junk debt buyers.

} said if I didn’t respond they would enforce legal obligations
Most letter recipients would parse that as a threat to sue, though "enforcement" can just as easily mean "we'll send you more scary letters". If the February letter was the first ever, there's a chance WWR's little dance around lawsuit intent created illegal "overshadowing" of your various FDCPA rights, which should have been articulated right there.

} WWR does not have an office in Indiana...can they still sue me?
If you review this thread long enough you'll bump into my mention of their vaunted "attorney network". It's routine for lawyers to hire each other across state lines; far as I know they don't have to disclose that relationship to defendants. For some reason the courts don't have a problem with that secrecy.

I would want a true copy of the loan contract in front of me ASAP, and to comb it for anything useful. Maybe there's a way to close the account if the lender has kept it alive, for the purpose of escaping the contract. This won't erase liability but can stop the bleeding, anyway. The terms could also have something to say about the controlling state law, aiding a Statute of Limitations defense. I don't think you'll have one in Arizona until next Spring. Indiana's Promissory SoL is much longer. But conflict between the contract and the states can alone frustrate that legal "enforcement".

I presume that on the signing date you had no expectation of contributing to loan payments, much less being shackled to 100% of a fattened balance. On paper, collectors will say, you knew this could happen if your pal bailed on the bills like a coward. Functionally you aren't the signer who caused the problem. I recall some "community property" state law provisions in which an ex-spouse may catch a break by verifying just who was running up or from the debts. It's a long shot to find anything similar for a cosigner context.

Im a single mom of 2 . With a 16 year old  who is pregnant.  Target has a claim against me.  This company took my entire wages no  means to survive.  By law only a percent is allowed. They can't take 100 percent of someone wages.  Head of household with two dependents one on the way. This is illegal.  Please help us

Speak with an attorney.  NO ONE here can offer legal advice.

I'm not sure when this thread turned into the debtor defense advice column, but I'm forced to agree with MJG. Half of your too-brief remark is devoted to a form of "victim impact statement", which isn't helping anyone who may investigate the issue. You don't even bother to connect the Target claim with activity from Weltman, and no, this is not implied.

I'd agree that every state has some cap on wage garnishment and asset seizure, often begging for legislative reform. There could be more denial of your rights happening than you realize. I think a sit-down with a professional who can tease out the full story is in your best interest. I've already put in my three cents on lawyer shopping on this same page. (Gosh, lookit that, almost four years ago. Where has the time gone?)

I always thought that Federal Law @ 25% of disposable income overcame State Law.  Was I wrong in this assumption?

The court is supposed to work the math to arrive at the least painful wage garnishment. So that might be up to the 25% or whatever amount exceeds thirty times federal minimum wage. (... a picky detail which I confess to forgetting until review tonight) Federal law is the final backstop but I think it's better to point to state first. I see many states merely echo Federal but others grant a bigger discount either in the percentage deal or the wage multiplier or both. When the state offers the cheapest option, that's what should apply. Insert disclaimer here about how we're discussing only ordinary non-governmental consumer debt.

I got curious and sampled some state cap variations from Nolo's roundup:
- Iowa takes the stock Federal rules but limits each creditor annually on a sliding scale based on income.
- Massachusetts starts the bidding at 15% of gross or disposable minus 50x either Federal or state minimum wage.
- New York holds the percentage deal to 10% gross, else it's 25% of the disposable income above 30% of minimum wage. Says Nolo, "If your disposable income is less than 30 times minimum wage, it cannot be garnished at all". Dayy-umm!

After those calculations there could still be room to discuss petitions for some hardship exemption, which I imagine would interest Ms. Rosa and other judgment debtors who feel suffocated.