Credit Card Companies Must Submit Specific Proofs To Obtain a Judgment Against You in NJ

Capital One Bank, N.A. filed a complaint in the Essex County Superior Court against Palomino, the debtor, demanding $938.81 due from purchases made using her Capital One Visa card. The debtor's answer to the complaint was simply that she did not owe the money as she never had a Visa account. The trial judge granted summary judgment to Capital One Bank. The New Jersey Appellate Court restated the proof required to obtain a judgment on a revolving credit card debt. According to the prior case of L.V.N.V. Funding, LLC v Colvell, in a collections suit on a revolving credit card account, the creditor must set forth (1) the previous balance; (2) identify all transactions and credits; (3) set forth the corresponding interest rates; (4) set forth the balance on which the charge is computed; (5) set forth any other charges; (6) list the closing date of the billing cycle; and (7) provide the new credit account balance. Additionally, these forms of proof must meet federal requirements relating to credit card billing statements under 15 U.S.C. § 1637(b). If you are facing debt collections, you should consult an experienced consumer debt attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on debt collections, consumer fraud, foreclosure, bankruptcy or other consumer debt related matters in New Jersey visit TheNJBankruptcyAttorney. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Consumer Fraud Pleading Requirements

A complaint in Consumer Fraud must set forth claims upon which relief can be granted. Specific requirements include: (1) an assertion of intent to defraud, (2) there were misrepresentations made to the buyer which resulted in financial gain to the seller, and (3) the allegations of fraud must be made with particularity. Failure to meet the requirements will result in a dismissal of the Complaint. In a recent case, homeowners sued a contractor under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (NJCFA) for damages in the amount of $250,000 for monies paid plus the cost of removing the substandard work and were awarded treble damages in the amount of $1,228,603.70. The contractor then filed for bankruptcy and the homeowners filed a complaint in the United States Bankruptcy Court seeking a judgment of nondischargability under Section 523(a)(2)(A) of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The homeowner's Complaint was dismissed for lack of proper pleadings and the contractor was able to obtain discharge of the $1,228,603.70 Judgment. If you are attempting to avoid a debt or someone is attempting to avoid a debt they owe you or you are considering filing a Complaint for Consumer Fraud or facing a Consumer Fraud Complaint, you should consult an experienced attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on consumer fraud, foreclosure, bankruptcy or other consumer debt related matters in New Jersey visit TheNJBankruptcyAttorney. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter.

Failure to Pay According to Plan Does Not Relieve Debtor From Responsibility in NJ

In a New Jersey Bankruptcy, the Debtors reorganized under a plan but failed to pay fees approved as part of the plan. Following the effective date of the approved plan, creditors discovered some cash budgeted for fees under the plan had not been paid. The district Court held that the fees are an administrative expense and necessary condition of the confirmation of the plan. The reorganized debtors could not be excused from payment of the obligation simply because the discharge had occurred. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are a debtor or creditor in a bankruptcy matter, you should consult an experienced bankruptcy attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on foreclosure, bankruptcy or other consumer debt related matters in New Jersey visit TheNJBankruptcyAttorney.com.

NJ Foreclosure Requirements Shift in Bank's Favor

In The case of Washington Mutual Bank v. Roggio, the New Jersey Appellate Court considered the foreclosure of a mortgage originally held by Washington Mutual Bank but held by JP Morgan Chase at the time of the foreclosure action. The Appellate Court held that, a note originally payable to one lender but later endorsed in blank was converted to a negotiable instrument payable to the bearer. Thereafter, future delivery of the mortgage to another institution, in this case JP Morgan Chase, results in receiving institution being in possession properly for purposes of foreclosure on the mortgage. This blog is for informational purposes only and in no way intended to replace the advice of an attorney regarding your specific matter. If you are facing foreclosure, you should consult an experienced attorney immediately in order to protect your rights. For more information on foreclosure, bankruptcy or other consumer debt related matters in New Jersey visit TheNJBankruptcyAttorney.com.