Institutional Betrayal: How the commoners are abused by King Lee P. Rudofsky and other judges

“The term institutional betrayal refers to wrongdoings perpetrated by an institution upon individuals dependent on that institution, including failure to prevent or respond supportively to wrongdoings by individuals committed within the context of the institution.” – Jennifer J. Freyd, PhD.

“Institutional betrayal harms in at least two distinct ways: pragmatic and psychological.” id.

“Institutional denial plays a crucial role in institutional betrayal. One particularly pernicious form of denial is DARVO — Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender” id.

Let SouthPark explain DARVO to you here.

I filed a complaint against Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC for making a triple digit number of phone calls to me in regard to an alleged 10-year-old debt. PRA refused to tell me anything about what was allegedly purchased on a credit card account opened by someone in my name in 2001 that PRA agrees was never in default before the 2010 purchase. When I filed suit, PRA said their investigation was complete, the balance was zero and the account closed.

PRA expected me to drop my suit or settle for $1,000. When I didn’t, PRA claimed the debt was cancelled or waived by them. But they did not issue an I.R.S. cancellation of Debt form 1099-C.

They also altered phone records generated by their company and their internal company contact records. The discrepancies between the records and the audio tapes of some of the phone calls was glaring.

Judge Lee P. Rudofsky, a Trump appointee, allowed PRA to file the pertinent documents under seal.

Then the federal judge, who is nearly impossible to fire, misquoted me to support his contention that I owed the debt.

Many months later, Judge Rudofsky said the misquotation was an error, but that the actual quotation supports his contention even more. I ran the quote by ChatGBT’s OpenAI. AI is not perfect, but it is a language-based application and is particularly good at reading comprehension. (Lee went to Harvard and is probably almost as good at analyzing language as AI, which makes his miscomprehension rather suspect.)

The legislature doesn’t distinguish between making annoying calls to people who don’t owe a debt and people who do owe a debt. Judge Rudofsky doesn’t seem to care what the legislature codified. He calls an FDCPA claimant a dead beat and denies them a jury trial. He says there cannot be statutory damages because there is no actual harm in the plaintiff being told she owes a debt, even if there was no debt owed.

I will report to the CFPB about the ordeal PRA and Judge Rudofsky put me through. I would like to appeal the decision granting summary judgment to the debt buyer. If you are willing to reimburse me for some of the actual costs I have already paid, which is in excess of $10,000, please contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com. Your generosity will make it possible for me to ask the Eighth Circuit to unseal the business records and help me expose both the PRA Group, Inc subsidiary and the betrayer of the public faith, Judge Rudofsky.

bohemian_books@yahoo.com