Courts Help Portfolio Recovery Associates: Here is help for You
Portfolio Recovery Associates is not slowing down.
Even as the stock of parent company PRA Group, Inc. plummets, the debt buyer is dialing for dollars.
It took me filing a lawsuit for violation of the FDCPA and intrusion on seclusion for me to convince Portfolio to quit their incessant calling.
It didn’t end well for me. Judge Rudofsky said no reasonable juror could think that the debt collector’s calls were too annoying. PRA got a judgment for over $8,000 to reimburse their costs of defending themselves. Judge Rudofsky said that even though that is more than my annual income, I didn’t list my expenses, so it wasn’t unjust to make me pay the equivalent of a year’s pension to the billion-dollar company. Easy for him to say, living off a six-figure government job.
But, don’t give up. In a different jurisdiction, for similar conduct, PRA was hit with an $82 million jury verdict. Other pro se litigants are making leeway. And Portfolio Recovery did make a $5,000 Offer of Judgment to me – I just went all in and the dealer pulled PRA’s card off the bottom of the deck.
I hope this document showing a Portfolio Recovery Associates call log, charge off data compiled and contact log will help you convince your judge not to let the defendant cover-up similar documents in your case.
Judge’s Pet, PRA Group (PRAA), Owner of Unethical Debt Collector, Stock is Stuck!
When I filed my lawsuit against Portfolio Recovery Associates in 2021, its parent company PRA Group, Inc’s stock was selling around $20 per share. Today it sold for $13 plus change.
I don’t mean to be a schadenfreudist, but watching PRAA’s stock nosedive genuinely made my day. Maybe true schadenfreude is about undeserved suffering — and this isn’t that. This is earned misery. PRAA is a pet litigant of Federalist Society cabalist Judge Lee Rudofsky, and if justice exists, this is just the beginning of their bad news.
Attorney Knows Better Than to Confirm Info — Even When Caller Has Accurate Private Details. But According to Judge Rudofsky and the Eighth Circuit, You’re Supposed to Cooperate Anyway
Portfolio Recovery Associates, the Nation’s second largest debt buyer, made 100s of phone calls to me before I agreed to confirm (or deny) my identity, birthdate and address. After I confirmed my name and birthdate and denied the address they had was one I was familiar with, they told me that I owed $2,297.63 but not by whom, on what, where, or when the account they purportedly purchased was used.
I sued PRA.
The CFPB had already obtained a consent agreement against the debt collector against making phone calls exactly like this one. A couple years after I filed my suit, Portfolio Recovery stipulated to an order to pay another $24 million for continuing to make the harassing collections.
Judge Lee P. Rudofsky threw my suit out on summary judgment. He said it was not more than an acceptable annoyance for a debt collector to make repeated calls if the recipient refused to confirm personal information about themselves on a recorded line. The Eighth Circuit confirmed. SCOTUS denied writ of certiorari to review the orders. (Steve Lehto, at 5:20 of the YouTube video said, “so I said, ‘just so you know, I find this entire phone call annoying’, and I hung up on her.”)
The courts also allowed the supposed evidence that their decision was based on to be kept under seal. I can tell you that the evidence provided did not show that I owed PRA any money and did not show that my estimate of the number of calls made was inaccurate. This begs the question, why would PRA want to keep the records of my account confidential if I begged to have the records made public?
I can’t answer Steve Lehto’s question, but agree with him whole-heartedly that a caller has no right to demand confirmation of identity or anything else. (At 10:10, Mr. Lehto said, “in fact, I didn’t even confirm some of the things that she asked me.”
I pointed out to Judge Rudofsky that the Fourth Amendment of that pesky Constitution forbids demands for identification. The judge said the 4th amendment only applies to government intrusion. By that reasoning, there is separation of church and state, but it is perfectly fine for an individual to tie you to a rock and force you to profess faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior before the tide comes in. – Well, that is hyperbole. A more literal analogy is that Portfolio Recovery Associates can call you as often as they want if you let the calls go to voicemail and once every three days for answered calls, indefinitely, until you state on a recorded line that Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior. (For me, that is a true statement, but I don’t think I should have to confirm my faith on a recorded line, nor wear a Star of David on my sleeve.)
And isn’t it interesting, when I said that I could not confirm the address they had on file, PRA went ahead and discussed the alleged debt with me anyhow?
A Document Portfolio Recovery Associates Did Not Want You To See
In going through the record, looking for documents that the federal district court in Arkansas and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered me to destroy, I found one for which secrecy was denied. Praise the Lord!
Maybe reading it will give you ideas about how to approach your own suit against PRA for making annoying and harassing phone calls to you. I am not an attorney and I lost my case, but sometimes we learn more from other people’s mistakes and we can prepare for the expected attack by the defense.
I will go into detail after my mandatory assignments are complete. For now, even reading the first few pages, it is clear that Judge Lee P. Rudofsky lied when he said that I agreed that I owed the debt.
“No reasonable juror can conclude there was a debt from Hammett to PRA.” – Paragraph 11
“PRA still produced no account level documentation for the alleged debt and I have no record of my Capital One account opened in 2001 other than the unsupported conclusion of PRA.” – paragraph 14
Feel free to contact me in the comments, or by email to bohemian_books@yahoo.com. Enjoy the FREE Doc of the Day:
Eighth Circuit Accepts Documentation Supplied By Untrustworthy Company
I tried to use that order in my case against Portfolio Recovery Associates. District Court Judge Rudofsky said it was not relevant. Just because PRA violated hundreds of thousands of other consumers and agreed to pay $24,000,000 in restitution and fines didn’t mean the documents they produced in my case were inaccurate, according to the big business puppet judge.
Judge Rudofsky forbid me from taking the case to a jury. The Eighth Circuit affirmed his orders.
Judge Rudofsky said I cannot disclose what is in any of the “evidence” presented by the debt collector. I can tell you it was not accurate.
Judge Rudofsky said the debt collector did not need a copy of a credit card agreement between the original creditor and me. He said there was no need for the alleged account to be referenced on a bill of sale or any other documentation. There was no credit card agreement. There was no link between a purchase made by PRA and the account associated with me.
How do you know I am telling the truth?
If I committed perjury when I made these same claims all the way up to the Supreme Court, you better believe there would be perjury charges filed against me.
Since our judges are essentially tyrants, there is a chance one will collude with a prosecutor and kangaroo court me into jail. But it would be a lot harder than what was done to me in civil court. I would be entitled to counsel, instead of representing myself. The sealed documents would be exculpatory evidence and it would be awkward for a judge to deny me the right to show the public the evidence. It would look even worse than the Star Chamber in which Judge Rudofsky ordered me to pay a full year of my pension to the billion dollar company to reimburse for the cost of their defense.
Hopefully, you have an honest judge in your case. The Arizona lawyer in the video above should be right. You should be able to use the stipulated order against Portfolio Recovery Associates to beat prosecution by them and to win an FDCPA or invasion of privacy case against them.
Do me a favor please. Don’t settle for $5,000. One jury on a similar case to mine decided PRA should pay $82,000,000 in punitive damages. And even that didn’t slow them down.
The Court and Big Business Billionaire Defendant Allowed to Discuss Sealed Documents on Public Record: Mums the Word for Pro Se Plaintiff
In a case against the most annoying and offensive debt collector, Portfolio Recovery Associates, Judge Lee P. Rudofsky made it clear that the pro se plaintiff, me, was not allowed to discuss sealed documents on the public record.
After Judge Rudofsky finally recused himself, the fresh judge reiterated the threat of sanctions for disclosure of sealed evidence.
But Judge Rudofsky and Portfolio Recovery Associates repeatedly violated their own call for the cone of silence.
Here is a copy (that you can download for free) of plaintiff’s deposition redacted by Portfolio Recovery Associates. They were supposed to redact mentions of the sealed documents – but they didn’t.
For example, look at page 77, line 7. PRA attorney James Trefil of huge defense firm Troutman Pepper starts discussing Exhibits 9, 10 and 11. PRA marked those “CONFIDENTIAL” and filed under seal. There is one short redacted section, then Mr. Trefil asks about the specific data from Exhibit 9.
That is not keeping sealed documents confidential.
Worse, Portfolio Recovery disclosed what was supposedly on a document I designated as “CONFIDENTIAL”. On page 116, line 17. Mr. Trefil: “For the record, this is a confidential document.
This is plaintiff’s credit report. Are you familiar with this document?” His next sentence: “Do you see where says it Midland Credit [?]”
Wow! That is not keeping it confidential. And without seeing the entire document, it is misleading. But Mr. Trefil on behalf of Portfolio Recovery Associates did not stop at just insinuating there were debts showing on my credit report.
“So what debt of yours does Midland Credit Management hold?”
“None [!]”
“It’s showing up on your credit report.”
Liar! “It says, ‘The listing of a company’s inquiry in this section means that they obtained information from your credit file in connection with an account review or other business transaction with you. These inquiries are not seen by anyone but you. They will not be used in scoring your credit file except insurance companies may have access,’ blah, blah, blah about the insurance companies. So I don’t know why they made a soft inquiry, but Portfolio Recovery also made a soft inquiry and it’s on the same report, isn’t it?”
“I don’t see Portfolio on this report. I might just be missing it.”
“Did I give you both? I got two — I contacted all three credit agencies, but I only got two reports back and I don’t think this is the one that has Portfolio Recovery on it. I think it’s the other one. Yeah, Portfolio Recovery made a soft inquiry on November 1, 2019. So Midland just is like Portfolio, a –“
“My question is what debt of yours does Midland hold?”
“None that I’m aware of.”
“All right. But you acknowledge they are showing up on your credit report?”
“As a soft inquiry.”
“Understood.”
“They’re allowed to — anybody can look me up. In fact, that might be the way that companies like Portfolio Recovery find their marks is they go in and they look at people’s credit reports and then they contact them and say, hey, you owe us $2,297.63. How do you want to pay for that? And they have — because they have access to these credit reports, they have a whole mess of information about you, so they’re –“
Trefil interrupted my lecture. “What about Enhanced Recovery Company?”
“Same thing. I have no clue who they are. I don’t have any debt, and so they could look.”
“So it’s your sworn testimony here today under oath that you currently have no delinquent debt?”
“I am not aware of any delinquent debt. I have found out –” Another interesting topic comes up from this statement, which will be discussed in a later post. For now it segues into more of the defense divulging what was in its own confidential documents.
“You sound an awful lot like the Capital One representative who wasn’t aware of any mistakes.”
“That what?”
“In the affidavit of sale, [Exhibit 11] you were complaining that the Capital One representative was saying he wasn’t aware of any mistakes in the records that they were giving.”
So here, PRA is telling the public what was said in the “CONFIDENTIAL” affidavit of sale.
In a bigger picture, Judge Rudofsky told the public what was supposedly said in the confidential, sealed documents. He represented that I agreed to owing the debt. He represented that there was accurate records that showed PRA did not call an annoying or harassing number of times. He said that the evidence under seal was so strong, no reasonable juror could disagree with him.
If we were playing poker, I would say PRA bluffed, then Judge Rudofsky as the casino forced me to fold my hand for a manufactured reason, allowing PRA to avoid showing its hand.
The Eighth Circuit upheld that dishonest service and the United States Supreme Court denied my petition for writ of cert and did not mention my motion to unseal the documents on the docket. 24M44.
Here is the motion that was labeled a motion to seal and was “granted”. Despite the record appearing to grant the motion in full, SCOTUS did not unseal the documents. The highest court in the country behaved as if the motion did not request unsealing and ignored the request.
Repeat Offender Portfolio Recovery Associates Celebrates Victory After SCOTUS Denies Cert
Others have had victories against Portfolio Recovery Associates in lawsuits for the violation of the FDCPA.
Unfortunately, most victims settle for $5,000 or so. See this news video about one recent “victory”.
I refused to settle for $5,000. Trump nominee Judge Lee P. Rudofsky granted PRA summary judgment against me, so I end up with nothing and even have to pay PRA’s costs.
This is a pattern for Judge Rudofsky. If an alleged debtor has no legal obligation to pay the alleged debt, Rudofsky will call a case against PRA for invasion of privacy or violation of the FDCPA a “victory lap” and dismiss the case. As in my case, he is known to manufacture evidence that the debt was actually owed.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals wrote one paragraph addressing Judge Rude’s order for summary judgment. Their words elicited a vision of Pinocchio standing on the stage, applauding himself and the audience. “Yes! Yes! Everything He said is right! Nothing Laura said is right. That is our omniscient opinion.”
My petition for writ of cert to SCOTUS was denied. (About 0.0001% of Pro Se petitions are granted, so it was no surprise.)
Would I hold out for more than $5,000 next time? Damn straight I would! First, now I can file a complaint to the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights. Also, a billionaire is not going to feel a $5,000 damage award. It is not a win if it doesn’t hurt them.
Should I Sue the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court?
Love Advocate Lucinda!
Here is the comment I left on her YouTube channel:
Thank you. I have brought 1983 cases against clerks and court reporters. They all end in the “trash can” so to speak. My latest issue is with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States. The clerk did not post a copy (link) of a 10-page motion to file sealed documents and immediately unseal them. The motion was docketed as a motion to seal only. The docket said, “Motion Granted”. I posted the sealed documents on my blog. 11 days later, the opposing party asked to “take down” my blog and sanction me and order me to pay their attorney fees. I had to write and paper file my response on Christmas week. The District Court Judge said he read my blog and recused himself. The fresh judge only took my blog down for about a week and there were no other sanctions or attorney fees. It seems like the judge reading my blog without notifying me first and giving me an opportunity to object is evidence of embroilment in the case. Judge Lee P. Rudofsky said reading my blog was the cause of his recusal not evidence that I was right about his bias against pro se litigants. SCOTUS is discussing my petition for writ of certiorari, 24-6113 and hopefully will address the docket issues with motion 24M44 also, tomorrow, February 21, 2025. Hopefully I will not need to sue the Clerk of the Supreme Court.
What to Watch for When Portfolio Recovery Associates Forces You to Litigate
A viewer on my YouTube channel, @LauraLynnHammett, said he was getting sued by Portfolio Recovery Associates and didn’t know what to do yet.
Here is my reply:
Look at my blog www.court-corruption.com. There are many stories about the CFPB orders against Portfolio Recovery Associates and free downloadable documents.
The key is that they win by default 90% of the time. Show up to court. Respond timely to their complaint. If you are allowed discovery, ask them to produce old account level documentation from the time your account was at zero until the present balance. Inspect their affidavits to determine if the person who is swearing has actual first-hand knowledge about whatever they are testifying about. Ask for a copy of the original credit contract. They could not produce a contract in my case and Judge Lee P. Rudofsky gave them a pass, but I hope the US Supreme Court looks at my case and overrules Judge Rudofsky and the Eighth. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE. I am sharing my own experience, and I did score a 162 on the LSAT, a low ivy league score, so I am confident I understand what I read and have good reasoning.
Will the Supreme Court Grant Petition for Writ of Cert to this Pro Se Plaintiff?
This petition gets discussed on February 21, 2025.
Over a decade ago, I petitioned the Supreme Court for writ of cert to discuss the inhumane custody orders that destroyed my children’s childhoods. My plea fell on deaf ears.
The reason I even bother to incur the expense in time and money to ask to be the rare pro se litigant to be heard is because it is a requirement in the process of reaching the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner.
My earlier petitions were denied by SCOTUS, but years later the U.N. asked people to write letters about injustice against abused women and children in the “family courts”. (I am an outspoken advocate of equal time co-parenting and hate when women like Crystal Lynn Strelioff cry wolf, as it makes it easier for bad judges to allow for actual abuse.)
Here is the letter I wrote. I will add that my younger son’s life ended three weeks ago. The autopsy is not complete, but it appeared Buddy did not intend to die from the use of a housemate’s prescription drugs. My husband consoles me by saying Buddy finally has peace.
A Higher Law 