IN THE CHANCERY
COURT FOR ROBERTSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE
MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A.,
Plaintiff,
v. Civ. No. 05-059
XXXXXXXXXXX,
XXXXXXXXXXX,
Defendants.
ANSWER
Come the Defendants and answer the Complaint of Plaintiff as follows:
1. The Defendant acknowledges that they have an account with Plaintiff; however, Defendant disputes that the amount they owes Plaintiff equals the relief sought in the complaint. In particular, the amount sought by Plaintiff appears to include excessive interest charges (the effective annual rate of interest is NOT readily apparent from the documents filed by Plaintiff) and attorney fees designed to exploit profits at the expense of unsuspecting members of the general public.
2. Defendants have rights under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692(g) (2002), that must be respected by this court. In particular, Defendants hereby demand verification of the debt, and a strict accounting of all interest and fees charged by Plaintiff expressed in an effective annual percentage rate, so that they can determine whether the Plaintiff is charging usurious and unenforceable amounts of interest and fees.
3. The Defendants are suffering severe financial hardship but do not wish to file bankruptcy. They have engaged the services of a for-profit consumer advocate organization, Debt XS, which is authorized to attempt settlements of Defendant’s debts on behalf of the Defendant.
Defendants are trying to save up enough through Debt XS to settle this claim out of court.
4. Through no fault of their own and due to expenses and limited income associated with medical conditions beyond their control, Defendants fell behind on her payments to Plaintiff.
5. Defendants have set aside funds each and every month in a fund with DebtXS debt resolution company, but they have insufficient funds as of today to settle this account. If the plaintiff does not cease its collection action, Defendants will be forced to file for bankruptcy, and Plaintiff will receive far less from a bankruptcy trustee than what DebtXS would offer as settlement.
6. Plaintiff, being fully aware of Defendants’ financial situation, could and should have granted Defendant more time to accumulate funds for settlement, as they have been doing business for many years. Instead, Plaintiff refused to work with the Defendants or their representative and proceeded to charge the Defendants more than what they were legally obligated to the Plaintiff.
7. Defendant was hit with unfair surprise by the demand for the bank’s attorney fees. Any contract provision calling for the transfer of attorney fees was buried deep within the legalese of the credit card agreement. Tennessee law requires a prominent display of such terms in boldface to alert consumers to this potential fee transfer, before it can be enforceable in a court of law.
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that judgment for Plaintiff be denied at this time, so that Defendants may have additional time in a sincere attempt to settle this matter and avoid the necessity of filing for bankruptcy.
Respectfully submitted this ____ day of May, 2005.
______________________________________
XXXXXXXXXXX, Defendant pro se
______________________________________
XXXXXXXXXXX
3901 MMMMMMMMMM
Maryville, TN, 37804
865-XXX-XXXX
Certificate of
Service
I certify that a true and exact copy of this Answer was placed in the mail to Ron Cunningham, Finkelstein & Associates, P.O. Box 1, Knoxville, TN, 37901 on May ____, 2005.
______________________________
XXXXXXXXXXX, Defendant pro se
 |
Dr. MICHAEL A. S. GUTH |
|
|
webmaster@michaelguth.com