Culik Law Prevails at Trial Against Debt Collector Midland Funding
Midland attempted to introduce evidence that it owned the account at issue, which had been originated by another company. But Midland brought no witness to trial, and none of the assignments identified the particular consumer’s account. It also tried to introduce a business-records affidavit that was created after the lawsuit had been filed, which is usually not admissible evidence.
At trial, Midland Funding was represented by the offices of Lustig, Glaser & Wilson.
Debt buyers and debt collectors often rely on shoddy evidence to try to prove their cases. Because most consumers do not find representation and do not attend trial, debt collectors often win by default.
The court issued a judgment in favor of the consumer, which has the legal effect of the consumer owing nothing to Midland.
[hr margin=”15px 0px 15px 0px”]
Culik Law is a Massachusetts Attorney / Law Firm. The posts on Culik Law’s blog are not intended as legal advice. If you have questions about your particular situation, CONTACT CULIK LAW for a Free Consultation.