plaintiff (debt collector) violated terms of summons
Date: Fri, 03/22/2013 - 22:42
plaintiff (debt collector) violated terms of summons
The plaintiff is Barclays Bank Delaware. The name listed as attorney is Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore, LLC.
I am from Chicago and after doing some googling it seems like this law office is really sketchy.
Anyway, I got a summons issued on 3.7.13. The return date is 4.1.13. According to the notice on the back of the summons, the plaintiff has to select a return day "not less than 28 days...after issuance of summons."
I'm no rocket scientist, but I'm pretty sure that's less than 28 days. I'm guessing I shouldn't just ignore this, but I'd rather not waste a trip downtown and pay filing fees when the summons appears to be invalid in the first place.
i thank you if you've read this far, so, any suggestions?
I am from Chicago and after doing some googling it seems like this law office is really sketchy.
Anyway, I got a summons issued on 3.7.13. The return date is 4.1.13. According to the notice on the back of the summons, the plaintiff has to select a return day "not less than 28 days...after issuance of summons."
I'm no rocket scientist, but I'm pretty sure that's less than 28 days. I'm guessing I shouldn't just ignore this, but I'd rather not waste a trip downtown and pay filing fees when the summons appears to be invalid in the first place.
i thank you if you've read this far, so, any suggestions?
Minor technicality....they
Minor technicality....they will just re-issue and start all over again.
Do you have any valid defense against the debt?
