Playing dirty, good idea or bad one ??

[tst888]

this is just a thought and not sure I'd even try it but wanted to run it by those on the board.

in dealing with CA's and the CB's, we send everything CMRR so that we have proof.....however, all the correspondence I ever get back is just regular mail. What proof is there that it was actually sent or that I recieved it? see what I'm getting at ?

so let's say I receive a response on a DV letter and let's assume it's valid. What if I just continue ahead with the follow up and then the ITS as if I never got their validation.

I'm thinking that worst case scenario they'll have to send it again CMRR and I've lost nothing. If they don't, I can threaten lawsuit if no delete.

the only drawback I can see is that this could really piss of some CA's or CB's which may not be in my best interests.

what are your thoughts or experiences ?

[workinninetofive]

I would not p- someone off who has fully validated. They will resend you the info.. and bring all info to court. It would be your word against theirs. The judge is likely to believe that they had the info (as they do in court). Remember, your the underdog. Also, if you really want to settle this matter... your really not gonna get anywhere like that. They may not want to settle or may not agree to delete it upon payment.

[tst888]

that makes total sense which is why I probably would not try this, just brainstorming.

on matters that actually do get to court, do CA's actually send somebody across the nation to appear in a small claims court over a $1000 listing? or do they hire somebody out in your city locally and then countersue you for lawyer/court costs ?

[workinninetofive]

I know, sometimes we all feel desperate. :wink:



I've heard they will hire someone locally to represent them.

[ocn2000]

Also remeber, when YOU mail anything, you damn near have to have a video tape of someone receiving it in order to prove it, but a company or goverment agency only has to SAY they mailed you something in order to be taken at their word!!!!

[GreatGadsby]

yeah something about them not haveing to prove that they sent it, only that they had reasonable measures in place to have it sent.

[tst888]

I'm not really planning on trying to deny that they sent something but it does kind of seem like BS that they only have to SAY they sent it.

[GreatGadsby]

oh I agree! complete and utter BS.

[divemedic]

What is worse, they don't even have to say they sent it. They only have to say they have a procedure where it was probably sent, in order to prove you got it.