New Century Financial Services, Inc. Debt Collection Complaint

New Century Financial Services, Inc. Debt collection department,

Credit card Taking/threatening an illegal action Seized/Attempted to seize property Georgia

In - -, the offices of - - -, - seized my assets in - - - on behalf of - - - - assignee of New Century Financial Services , Inc - - with an alleged judgment from - -. Multiple phone calls to validate debt was not returned with any written documentation of debt, Their office simply stated on the phone that the matter was an issue related to a judgment entered in - - and gave me the case file to get my own documentation. I later learned the judgment was vacated in - and I had the judgment vacated again in -. The plaintiff pursued the matter after the second vacated judgment even though it knew it had not provided any documentation to the validity of the debt after 2 months of legal action. They sought and were rewarded additional time by the courts to delay my proper remedy by the court which incurred - trips more than necessary t defend the matter and to obtain satisfaction in regards to my counterclaim. Although I submitted all documentation necessary to prove that I had actual damages, the plaintiff lacked any meritorious defense the judge determined that the


in -. Secondly, the collection agent pursued legal action without any consultation about the debt with consumer prior to seizing assets. Third, the seizure of assets was committed using FALSE information obtained from ecourts - system which validated a history of a judgment but not the status of the judgment. The assignee did not validate the debt by requesting history of payments or original documentation of contractual obligation prior to seizure. Fourth, Plaintiff submitted a false document as authentic in the submission of the restraining notice to the - legal offices which is a violation of New York State Criminal Law. Fifth, the plaintiff 's attorney, - - -, -, which acted as the Collection agent committed an act of fraud and a violation of professional conduct by not validating the status of the judgment since the ecourts - system stated to " See File '' for status of the original judgment. It was within their purview to validate prior to proceeding with legal action. Finally, the judgment was vacated twice by the court after multiple attempts to validate the authenticity of debt. The vacated stated was granted on -/-/- and - -. The plaintiff had ample time and opportunity to reduce the injury to defendant by doing proper processing of the court case 's documentation instead they requested two adjournments to prepare for the case which further injured the defendant by requiring multiple visits to an out-of-state- court to provide defense for her suit against the illegal actions of the plaintiff.