Complaint Review: Palisades Collection, Inc.
- Palisades Collection, Inc.
210 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood, New Jersey
- Phone: 201-2220424
- Category: Collection Agencies
1) I don't owe the money
2) Palisades does not have a valid assignment
3) Statute of limitations has passed
Palisades has been trying to play it off like they are within the statute of limitations to collect on this bill and they have lied about when the bills were generated. You should know, there is a four (4) year statute of limitation not six on credit type contracts. However, in my case, its been over six (6) years. And I believe they committed fraud.
You know how I know? The idiots attached a copy of two(2) bills for a single phone number from Verizon to the complaint that had the same date on them. Verizon doesn't send you two (2) separate bills for the same phone number, and the bills were not marked long distance and local. They just had a total, which indicates they are not the true copies of the bills; but rather copies so the true date is earliar than the bills state, which is beyond the statute of limitaton.
I belive Palisades had those bills printed with that date to enable them to file the complaint in court. I assuming if they did this to me, they have done this to many other people. It's simple to find out, if you don't have the old records, call the phone company and try and find out or use common sense like shown above.
I received their amature interrogatory responses, which appears to be drafted by a non-attorney in their office who doesn't have much experience. The demands requested all my addresses, all my utility bills, and all my phone numbers from all my other places I lived for up to six(6) years. I laughed at this ridiculous request. I laughed for two (2) reasons. First, failure to produce these records would most likely end in "preclusion" of the records not a "stricken" answer, and second, the demands were clearly irrelevant and went beyond the boundaries of the interrogatory and complaint. So, I took a pen and in my bad hand writting I sent them this response:
1) REJECTED. Irrelevant and goes beyond the scope of the interrogatory.
This non-lawyer from their office then sent me a second duplicate interrogatory demand. This is clear evidence of naiveness. And again, in my bad hand writing, I sent it back with the following response:
2) REJECTED. Irrelevant and goes beyond the scope of this interrogatory.
I guess she didn't understand what that meant the first time and needed reassurance. Just to make sure it hits home, I've sent it with a five (5) page Interrogatory Request of my own, and this one isn't so amature. In that interragatory, I've requested:
1) Information about the business structure of Palisades Collections
2) Who are the principal onwers?
3) Whether the company is licensed and provide a copy?
4) Whether they have a valid assignment from verizon?
5) How did they obtain the bills, and if they purchased them, for how much?
6) Whether they have ever been sued before, or punished by an administrative agency....etc
You get my drift. I don't play. I'm planning to subpoena Verizon executives for who (1) sign away their rights to the bills, and (2) those who gave them copies of the bills. I don;t know if any did, or if Palisades is just grabbing thse bills from old records. But we will findout soon when I get the Verizon executives in a depositon and drill them.
And if they don't answer my interrogatories correctly, I'm going to file an immediate motion to compel and request sanctions because I believe they committed fraud here in the date of the bills. I will then sue them in Federal Court for fraud and violation of the consumer protection act because I'm going to uncover other victims, which I don't think it would be difficult at all. In fact, if I researched the lawsuits they filed in court, I'm sure I could uncover more bills that were passed the statute of limitation, which will hit them with a charge of abuse of process.
Nevertheless, even if they ever did win, they won't see a dime because I'm a full time student and my family is supporting me. But I'm going to give them a run for their money because I do believe they have committed fraud here.
One thing they don't know about me is that I'm currently suing Paypal, Inc. in New York Supreme Court under Mehmet_vs_Paypal (I gave oral argument against them in front of Judge Barbara Kapnick this past Jan. 23, 2008). You can Google me. And I'm about to pull every piece of hair from their head because I've got 14 years of legal experience and education and I'm about to drop it on them. This is not a lawsuit that ends on the trial level, this is one that will be fought on the appellate level and by the time I finish with them, they would have paid 1000 times what their little fraud might make them.
ssssh...don't say anything. I'll post an update here later.
New York, New York
Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Palisade Collections
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/14/2008 01:54 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/palisades-collection-inc/englewood-new-jersey-07632/palisades-collection-inc-palisades-collections-fraudsters-intentional-misrepresentaton-308920. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here: