Quote: Why couldn't the servicer just print out a loan payment history or just contact the previous servicer and get whatever they have as well? I don't see the difficulty here in fact my servicer has done that quite easily.
It seems that you either didn't bother to read or fail to understand and appreciate Mr. Roper's other threads on this subject.
The loan payment history is not evidence without someone to authenticate it. (Of course it COULD be evidence if you FAIL TO OBJECT!) The person authenticating the document must be a person who can testify as to the authenticity of the the record. What person employed by the successor servicer is qualified and has the requisite personal knowledge of the records to authenticate a business record for a predecessor?
Who can say whether the figures are CORRECT?
Suppose that you were on trial for murder. Joe JONES was working as a cashier on the date that you came into the Firewater Liquor Store and shot the store's stock clerk Rob EVANS dead when you didn't like the way he looked at you during a holdup. Before you shot Rob EVANS, you used your credit card to buy some whiskey.
After the holdup and the killing and after picking you up out of the lineup, Joe JONES moved to Alaska. Before departing, he leaves me a note saying "Steve Anderson is guilty of murder". JONES asks me to go to court and testify against you. After all, I am the new cashier! That makes me a great witness, doesn't it?
Are you OK with me coming to your trial and testifying "Steve Anderson is guilty of murder!"?
I would hope that your attorney W.E. CHEATHAM, of Dewey, Cheatham & Howe would immediately Object:
Cheatham: "Objection, ka's testimony is conclusory!"
When the D.A. asks me:
"How do you know Mr. Anderson is guilty, ka?"
I will answer:
"Well I have this note right here from Joe JONES, my predecessor as cashier. He was there at the holdup and this note say 'Steve Anderson is guilty of murder'."
Cheatham: "Objection, Hearsay!"
The D.A. then asks that Joe JONES' note be admitted into evidence.
D.A.: "Your Honor, I respectfully request that Mr. Joe JONES' note to ka be admitted into evidence."
Cheatham: "Objection. My client has a Constitutional right to confront and impeach witnesses against him."
D.A.: "ka, do you have any other records which would put Mr. Anderson at the scene of the crime?"
ka: "Why, yes. We have a copy of this credit card receipt showing that Mr. Anderson bought his whiskey from our store just before the murder."
Cheatham: "Objection, Hearsay."
D.A.: "Why is it hearsay?"
Cheatham: "Because ka didn't work in the store at the date of the transaction and wasn't present when the transaction took place. How can he possibly authenticate the receipt?"
Court: "ka, How do you know that Mr. Anderson was the person who presented the credit card and signed that receipt?"
ka: "Joe Jones TOLD ME SO."
Court: "Objection sustained."
To any extent that you conclude that you can get away with murder, and find this possibility to be distasteful, consider the possibility that you have been charged with this crime because someone else used your stolen credit card that day and YOU ARE COMPLETELY INNOCENT. Are you OK with someone lacking any personal knowledge of the crime or of the transactions coming into court and authenticating documents about which he lacks any personal knowledge?
The right to confront witnesses against you is generally a right in criminal rather than civil settings. But you have other due process rights.
Mr. Roper's suggested defenses have been extremely effective in cases throughout the country.