Debtconsolidationcare: Internet's first get-out-of-debt community
473,117 members

Internet's first get-out-of-debt community 472,096 members


Debt Consolidation Forums Collection agencies and creditors

Help in dealing with SUTTELL & HAMMER, P.S.



Unregistered

Sub: Help in dealing with SUTTELL & HAMMER, P.S.
Fri, 26/02/2010 07:40

They said they are collecting 1100+ for a Capitol One credict card debt that I owe.
I sent 2 debt validation letter through registered mail one after another in 30 days(2nd one 30 day after the first one with no response) requesting they validate the debt, I have not received any paperwork or information.
Today, I received a "Summon" from who I would presume is a process server that handed me a summon after I signed a paper.
There is no case date, nor case number on that summon, in that summon they said they have filed a law suit, and I have 2 week to respond, the summon says it's from the King County Superior Court.
Also in that summon they said that I am a service member, or the dependent of one(I am not) and that I am married(I am not)
My question now is what do I do next?
Since there isn't a case number or court date, who do I write to?
The Collection Agency or the Court?
would I require a lawyer for a debt of this size?
And if I respond, how do I respond, is there a format to respond to?

THank you for the help.

Information on them is this
http://www.sos.wa.gov/corps/search_detail.aspx?ubi=602312491
https://fortress.wa.gov/dol/dolprod/bpdLicenseQuery/lqsLicenseDetail.aspx?SessID=2240&RefID=1140850



Top menu: 
Debt Collectors
Article Rating: 
paulmergel
paulmergel


Posts: 15334
Credits: 126534.28475864

Sub: #4 [QUOTE=Anonymous;659476]Wow Paul. I really hope you're not an atFri, 02/26/2010 - 07:40



[QUOTE=Anonymous;659476]Wow Paul. I really hope you're not an attorney who is licensed to practice law in WA.

First, take a look at Washington Superior Court Rule 3 which states that a cause of action can be commenced either by service of process or by filing. "[A] civil action is commenced by service of a copy of a summons together with a copy of a complaint, as provided in rule 4 or by filing a complaint. CR 3(a) (emphasis added). The happening of either [service or filing] begins the time period within which a defendant must answer or be subject to default. Johnson v. Asotin County, 3 Wash.App. 659, 477 P.2d 207 (1970); see also CR 4(b)(2) which states, "If you fail to appear and defend, judgment will be rendered against you, according to the demand of the complaint, which has been or will be filed with the clerk of court (emphasis added).

Rule 12(a)(1) requires a defendant to serve an answer within 20 days after the summons and complaint have been served upon him. See CR 12(a)(1). Pursuant to Rule 55, a plaintiff may move the court for an entry of default judgment if the defendant has not complied with rule 12. See CR 12(a)(1).

If the defendant fails to appear or plead within the time required after an action has been commenced against him, the plaintiff may move the court for default judgment. See CR 55.

I appreciate that you are trying to help, but you should really leave the issuing of this type of procedural advice to attorneys who are competent in the matter.

Also, you have no evidence that this law firm even violated the FDCPA, let alone did so willfully as you claim in this post. Nothing indicates that the law firm continued to engage in collection activities after validation was requested.[/QUOTE]

oh really.filing suite after validation was requested isn't a violation?i'm talking about the OP.not the shill.the OP requested validation as soon as they got the collection letter.show me where it states that anybody can file suite after validation was requested.they did violate the FDCPA doing that.again i was referring to the OP,not the shill.check out the entire thread before casting stones.in fact thread closed......

giving hope to the hopeless,help to the helpless,and hap to the hapless.


Unregistered

Sub: #5 Quote:Originally Posted by paulmergelyou don't respond.go to NACThu, 02/25/2010 - 21:52



Quote:
Originally Posted by paulmergel
you don't respond.go to NACA.NET and find a consumer attorney that will work on a contingency basis.once you do that let the attorney contact them.they willfully violated the FDCPA,and should sued for it.do that,and collect 1,000.00.

Wow Paul. I really hope you're not an attorney who is licensed to practice law in WA.

First, take a look at Washington Superior Court Rule 3 which states that a cause of action can be commenced either by service of process or by filing. "[A] civil action is commenced by service of a copy of a summons together with a copy of a complaint, as provided in rule 4 or by filing a complaint. CR 3(a) (emphasis added). The happening of either [service or filing] begins the time period within which a defendant must answer or be subject to default. Johnson v. Asotin County, 3 Wash.App. 659, 477 P.2d 207 (1970); see also CR 4(b)(2) which states, "If you fail to appear and defend, judgment will be rendered against you, according to the demand of the complaint, which has been or will be filed with the clerk of court (emphasis added).

Rule 12(a)(1) requires a defendant to serve an answer within 20 days after the summons and complaint have been served upon him. See CR 12(a)(1). Pursuant to Rule 55, a plaintiff may move the court for an entry of default judgment if the defendant has not complied with rule 12. See CR 12(a)(1).

If the defendant fails to appear or plead within the time required after an action has been commenced against him, the plaintiff may move the court for default judgment. See CR 55.

I appreciate that you are trying to help, but you should really leave the issuing of this type of procedural advice to attorneys who are competent in the matter.

Also, you have no evidence that this law firm even violated the FDCPA, let alone did so willfully as you claim in this post. Nothing indicates that the law firm continued to engage in collection activities after validation was requested.


Unregistered

Sub: #6 As I previously mentioned I emailed the Washington State AttorneWed, 02/10/2010 - 07:02



As I previously mentioned I emailed the Washington State Attorney Generals Office to ask why wasn't federal law upheld in my case and why Suttell & Hammer did not need a collection agency license (they specialize in collections and even give classes via the Washington State Bar Association [which they charge for - of course]).
I have heard back from the Washington States Attorney Generals Office & the DOL. The response from DOL is on there face book page. Below is the response(s) from the AG's office:
'Subject: Your letter to the Attorney General - CCTN 179491
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:03:30 -0800
From: [email]MichelleF@ATG.WA.GOV[/email]
To: jjta800@*******
CC: [email]govswebmail@iq.wa.gov[/email]

.ExternalClass p.ecxMsoNormal, .ExternalClass li.ecxMsoNormal, .ExternalClass div.ecxMsoNormal{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Tim es New Roman','serif';}.ExternalClass a:link, .ExternalClass span.ecxMsoHyperlink{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}.ExternalClas s a:visited, .ExternalClass span.ecxMsoHyperlinkFollowed{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}.Ex ternalClass p.ecxMsoPlainText, .ExternalClass li.ecxMsoPlainText, .ExternalClass div.ecxMsoPlainText{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.5pt;font-family:C onsolas;}.ExternalClass p{margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';}.ExternalClass span.ecxPlainTextChar{font-family:Consolas;}.ExternalClass span.ecxEmailStyle20{font-family:'Eras Medium ITC','sans-serif';font-variant:normal !important;color:black;text-transform:none;font-weight:normal;font-style :normal;}.ExternalClass span.ecxEmailStyle21{font-family:'Cambria','serif';color:#1F497D;}.Exter nalClass span.ecxEmailStyle22{font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif';color:#1F497D;}. ExternalClass span.ecxEmailStyle23{font-family:'Cambria','serif';color:#1F497D;}.Exter nalClass span.ecxEmailStyle24{font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif';color:#1F497D;}. ExternalClass span.ecxEmailStyle25{font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif';color:#1F497D;}. ExternalClass .ecxMsoChpDefault{font-size:10.0pt;}@page Section1{size:8.5in 11.0in;}.ExternalClass div.ecxSection1{page:Section1;}
Sent on behalf of Robert Lipson, Senior Counsel
[COLOR=#1f497d] [/COLOR]
Dear ************:

I am Bob Lipson, Senior Counsel in the Consumer Protection Division of the Washington Attorney General's Office. Your email of January 14, 2010, to the Governor’s Office was referred to the Attorney General’s Office and to me for a reply.

First, please understand this office does not and cannot by law represent you or give you legal advice. So nothing I say should be viewed as legal advice to you or relied upon by you to address any personal legal situation. By law, I can only represent the state and its agencies. For information about how you should deal with your specific situation, consult your own lawyer.

Second, I am not going to comment on any ruling made by Judge ***** in your case.

Our office can, however, provide the public with some general information regarding some aspect of the law and how it works, and it is within that limited context that I answer your email. As a general proposition, state courts apply and enforce state laws. Federal courts apply and enforce federal laws. As I am sure you are aware, federal courts are an entirely different judicial system and are distinct from state courts. Sometimes but not often (and I avoid a long lecture here on when this happens) one of the courts can apply the law of the other, but as a general rule this is not the case, and I suspect that may have been what happened with your experience.

For example, although you did not say your case was a debt collection case involving a collection agency, I believe that was inferred from your email. The state Collection Agency Act, RCW 19.16, does not have a validation requirement in it. Only the federal statute dealing with debt collection agencies, 15 USC 1692, has a validation requirement. So if you were asking the court to give you some relief based on the collection agency’s requirement to validate the debt upon a timely request by you, then you were relying solely on federal law. And if that was so, then it is not surprising that a state court would not hear your argument based on a law that it does not have jurisdiction over.

Your email also implies a larger question: “laws are laws and so why don’t all courts give effect to all laws, so that any court is a good as another to hear anything?” That actually is a fair question, and books have been written about the subject. In a nutshell, the answer all has to do with the way our two-government system (state and federal) was established originally and has been maintained ever since.

I hope this has been helpful at least to some extent.


Yours,

Bob Lipson
Senior Counsel

Washington State Attorney General's Office
800 5th Ave., Suite 2000
Seattle, Wa. 98104
206-389-2513

[COLOR=#1f497d]Emailed by:[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#009900]Michelle Ferazza [/COLOR][COLOR=#009900]|[/COLOR][COLOR=#009900] [/COLOR][COLOR=#009900]Legal Assistant[/COLOR][COLOR=#009900][FONT=Bodoni MT][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#595959]Washington State Attorney General's Office [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#595959]Consumer Protection Division[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#595959]800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000 | Seattle, WA | 98104[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#595959]Phone: (206) 464-6491 | Fax: (206) 587-5636[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#595959]Email: [/COLOR][COLOR=#1f497d]michellef@atg.wa.gov[/COLO R]
[COLOR=#595959] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#1f497d]NOTICE:[/COLOR][COLOR=#1f497d] This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you know or believe that you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#1f497d] [/COLOR]
[COLOR=#1f497d] [/COLOR]
From:[FONT=Tahoma] [email]govswebmail@iq.wa.gov[/email] (imailagent) [mailto:govoutbound@iq.wa.gov]
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:13 AM
To: ATG WWW Public Records Requests
Subject: 981202 - response (Intranet Quorum IMA00339394)[/FONT]



Generated from CSU Office of the Governor Created on 1/15/2010 8:10:20 AM
IQ - Intranet Quorum Mail Stop: 40002
WF#: 981202


REFERRAL DIRECTIONS


Referred To: Attorney General -

Routing
Instructions: Please respond to constituent with any information you may have. Thank you.

Action: Respond as you deem appropriate (letter;

CC's:

Message: What are your thoughts on consumer Protection Laws and why they are not enforced in Snohomish County Superior Civil Court? I was in Snohomish County Civil Court today. The Judge does not address Consumer Protection Laws - and will not enforce Federal Laws. Debt validation is not enforced within his (Judge ***** in Snohomish County Civil Court) Court. Why is this? Isn't a Judge supposed to enforce both Federal and local laws? You can validate this by looking at my case file

Referral Date: January 15, 2010

Due Back: 2/4/2010 8:08:49 AM

Send Questions
and Response To: Lindsey Rice - govswebmail@iq.wa.gov




Now I only send this as proof of what happened as per your request. Not to hinder any other consumer that is currently working with Suttell & Associates (aka; Suttell & Hammer).
I say again - Go to the NACA.net website and contact an attorney in your area to assist you. I tried to do this without any help. I hired a local attorney that specialized in family law with a 1500.00 retainer which did not help me at all. It wound up costing me 700.00 just to have him write a response. Whereas if I had only gone to NACA.net and hired an attorney that SPECIALIZED in consumer protection laws, I would have won my case.

Below is what I received via email also from the AG's office regarding Washington Sytate Licensing requirements for attorneys that are debt collectors:

'Subject: Your comment about debt collectors on All Consuming
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:06:29 -0800
From: [email]AllConsuming@ATG.WA.GOV[/email ]
To: JJTA800@********

Thank you for reading All Consuming. I read your comments about attorneys and debt collectors.
Our office is prohibited from providing you with a legal analysis of the[FONT=Arial][/FONT] law or how it may apply to the specific example you provided. However, I can tell you that there are many types of professionals who attempt to collect debts who are not required to be licensed; attorneys are among them.

RCW 19.16.100
Definitions.


(3) "Collection[FONT=Arial][/FONT] agency" does not mean and does not include:

(c) Any person whose collection activities are carried on in his, her, or its true name and are confined and are directly related to the operation of a business other than that of a collection[FONT=Arial][/FONT] agency, such as but not limited to: Trust companies; savings and loan associations; building and loan associations; abstract companies doing an escrow business; real estate brokers; property management companies collecting assessments, charges, or fines on behalf of condominium unit owners associations, associations of apartment owners, or homeowners' associations; public officers acting in their official capacities; persons acting under court order; lawyers; insurance companies; credit unions; loan or finance companies; mortgage banks; and banks;

--

When an attorney is a 'debt collector' (as per there own documents) and not a 'collection agency' the attorney is not held accountable for consumer protection law violations (both local and federal) within civil court. As the presiding judge stated 'They always act like attorneys in my court". Why is this?

Reminder: Comments made to the All Consuming blog are not processed by our Consumer Resource Center as formal complaints. To be eligible for our informal mediation service and share your complaint with the Consumer Protection Division, you must submit a written complaint online at http://atg.wa.gov/FileAComp laint.aspx. You may also call our Consumer Resource Center for assistance between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. weekdays at 1-800-551-4636. Callers from outside Washington may call 206-464-6684. The Attorney Generals Office does not confirm which companies we are investigating or whether we are considering launching a formal investigation.
Sincerely,
Kristin Alexander
Seattle Media Relations Manager and All Consuming Blog Moderator
Washington State Attorney General's Office
allconsuming@atg.wa.gov
www.atg.wa.gov/allconsumi ng.aspx
Subscribe to Attorney Generals Office news releases via our listserv or ..'

Now you may not agree with this - but this is what I have received in writting via email.
I am not an attorney - just a consumer that has been racked over the coals by the washington state legal system.
I do not want to be judged by you, I have already been judged by the courts. I only asked your advise in this forum - I thought that it was a support site whereas consumers are able to share there stories as to what had happened to them so people can learn from it.


unclewulf
unclewulf

Posts: 3111
Credits: 31386.35

Sub: #7 Prove it.Tue, 02/09/2010 - 16:00



[QUOTE=Anonymous;651727]In Washington State Civil court (which is what Suttell & Hammer file in) the attorneys for the plaintiff send a summons to the defendant.
In criminal court the defendant receives the summons from the courts but we are discussing financials which are primarily heard in Civil court.
You can send a debt validation letter and you are right - this is SUPPOSED to be upheld under Federal law. Unfortunately, that did not occur during my trial. I did explain the federal law but the judge just smiled. The attorney explained to me (after the fact) that if I had made this request as a 'Discovery motion' during the trial (discovery is upheld under WASHINGTON STATE law) then the judge would have been obligated to uphold it.
However - obviously I listened to your crap advise and you were WRONG!!!
I was just trying to give advise to help other people that may be going thru this!
Going thru this C**P was bad enough - but to have to put up with your C**P is just wrong!!![/QUOTE]

Well, well. You certainly talk one hell of a fight. Nice try.

I will expect links to Washington State law (credible sources only, please) supporting your assertions. In particular, a link to the Washington statute that states how FDCPA doesn't apply.

Now, scroll back up to post #29, and look what I told you there:

[QUOTE=unclewulf]After a suit has been filed, you can still ask for validation in discovery, but it's an unnecessary hassle.[/QUOTE]

Please don't blame us for your lack of reading comprehension.

Wulfisms: my blog

The four 'no's of dealing with collectors:
No validation? No payment. No way! No kidding!!

Tellin' you all the zomby troof
Here I'm is, the zomby woof
[Frank Zappa, 1988 - R.I.P.]


Unregistered

Sub: #8 In Washington State Civil court (which is what Suttell & Hammer Tue, 02/09/2010 - 15:08



In Washington State Civil court (which is what Suttell & Hammer file in) the attorneys for the plaintiff send a summons to the defendant.
In criminal court the defendant receives the summons from the courts but we are discussing financials which are primarily heard in Civil court.
You can send a debt validation letter and you are right - this is SUPPOSED to be upheld under Federal law. Unfortunately, that did not occur during my trial. I did explain the federal law but the judge just smiled. The attorney explained to me (after the fact) that if I had made this request as a 'Discovery motion' during the trial (discovery is upheld under WASHINGTON STATE law) then the judge would have been obligated to uphold it.
However - obviously I listened to your crap advise and you were WRONG!!!
I was just trying to give advise to help other people that may be going thru this!
Going thru this C**P was bad enough - but to have to put up with your C**P is just wrong!!!


unclewulf
unclewulf

Posts: 3111
Credits: 31386.35

Sub: #9 duplicate post - sorry...Sat, 01/30/2010 - 03:08



duplicate post - sorry...

Wulfisms: my blog

The four 'no's of dealing with collectors:
No validation? No payment. No way! No kidding!!

Tellin' you all the zomby troof
Here I'm is, the zomby woof
[Frank Zappa, 1988 - R.I.P.]


unclewulf
unclewulf

Posts: 3111
Credits: 31386.35

Sub: #10 [QUOTE=Anonymous;519556]I contacted an attorney and he was very Sat, 01/30/2010 - 03:07



[QUOTE=Anonymous;519556]I contacted an attorney and he was very helpful explaining what I did not see.

Apparently the debt validation letter is not prevalent when requested prior to the case being filed with the courts.
The debt validation letter needs to be requested after the suit has been filed and after the defendant has responded to the court and to the plaintiffs attorneys (you need to send these to both the plaintiff and to the court clerk - make sure that they are filed in your case file as soon as you can) and within whatever time frame the summons gives you.
Please note:
Whatever you do - DO NOT CALL THE PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEYS - GET EVERYTHING IN WRITING!!! and never admit to anything!!!!
I guess that here in Washington State the plaintiff has six years to file with the courts after they have originally served you the summons. This summons does not need a case number because it is all up to the plaintiff and when they decide to file the case.

The attorney does not need to be licensed with the washington state department of licensing with a collection agency license. There is a loop hole in washington state law that allows this.
Assett Acceptance is also not licensed as a collection agency (or for that matter - anything in Washington State) and I have an outstanding question with the washington state department of licensing asking if this is acceptable - but have not heard an answer back yet.
I have contacted the washington state attorney generals office and they cannot help if the case has already been completed (you have seen the judge and he said 'the plaintiff has proven there case and will be allowed the summary judgement...' or something to this affect). But they tried to reassure me that a complaint has been entered in my name and if there is ever any future litigation they will let me know about it.
The letter I sent to the governor was forwarded to the attorney generals office (and I can guess what will happen with that...)
I still have not heard back from my senator (Val Stevens) or my legislator (Dan Kristiansen) yeah - I will not be voting for either of these two again!!!
I have noticed after sitting in court for quite a few days - if you show up in court you can attempt to explain your case - but the judge will not give you legal answers - this is why you need to have an attorneys help.
Please do go to court so if they try the old - 'well the plaintiff is located in *whatever* state then can we please have the maximum interest and penalties that *whatever* state will allow?' You can explain that you have 'never been to that *whatever* state and you have no idea what there interest and penalties are. You have never left your state...' etc etc. (They can add on thousands with this little trick)
Give as much information on paperwork to the case file (file it with the court clerk and keep a copy for yourself) as you can so there are not any questions. Make sure that everything has been admitted to the courts at least a week prior to the hearing - if you are not able to do this then bring at least 4 working copies to the hearing and give one to the judge and to the plaintiff.
Suttell and Hammer (formerly known as Suttell and Associates) have a bad tendency to not let anyone know (and this is legal - amazing isn't it? *dripping in sarcasm*) when a hearing has been set. You can monitor your case on the courts.wa.gov website - http://www.courts.wa.gov/ this site is only for washington state.

Basically - the best advice as soon as you receive the original summons is to go to the NACA.net website, obtain an attorney closest to your location so together you can both go over the respective State laws and you can understand your rights.[/QUOTE]

This flunks the sniff test. Massively.

Requesting validation after a suit has been filed is worse than useless. Ideally, you need to request validation of any alleged debt withing thirty days of the collector's first contact with you. This is founded in federal law (FDCPA), found at 15 USC 1692, et seq. As such, it supersedes Washington state law. After a suit has been filed, you can still ask for validation in discovery, but it's an unnecessary hassle. Requesting validation immediately upon first contact from a collector can prevent the case from ever reaching the courts, and give you a powerful defense if it does get that far.

A summons is issued by the court, after a case has been filed. If nothing's been filed, then there's nothing to summon you to.

I cannot help but wonder at this point whether you are confused, uninformed, or intentionally misleading. Perhaps you could clear this up for me?
-

Wulfisms: my blog

The four 'no's of dealing with collectors:
No validation? No payment. No way! No kidding!!

Tellin' you all the zomby troof
Here I'm is, the zomby woof
[Frank Zappa, 1988 - R.I.P.]


Pages

Add new comment

Full HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question (Case Insensitive) is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Share post


Page loaded in 1.410 seconds.