Very interesting.

Recently I have a friend who faxed a copy of this Miskin letter on behalf of Common Collection to me for help. I wonder if we can verify this person's signature here. I suspect we probably end up having 20 different versions of it.

Perplexed what Raymond is referring to is that in criminal court one must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, in civil court it is decided on a balance of probabilities.

Your goal would be to challenge the information presented by the plaintiff and to introduce your own documentation to tip that balance.

Raymond

How the heck do you prove 51%? In other words what measurement do you use to say that anyone actually has 51% worth of material. What constitutes 51%? Perhaps I am not "getting it".

P.S. Angella earlier earlier remarked about checking the staute of limitations to see if a debt hasn't expired.

That's very true. Much or perhaps most of the debt that's being bought in Canada has passed its limitation period. Almost ALL debt buyers like PMS or ARO WILL lie through their teeth in trying to convince you the debt is not stats barred, when in fact it is. Since you're in Ontario, that period is 2 yeras for most unsecured consumer debt that went into default after Jan. 1, 2004.

Ray

ER, NO!

All civil actions require that you prevail over the defendant. That is, the plaintiff must show at least 51% or more why their case is stronger than the defendant's. Remember O.J. Simpson.

Of course, if they sucker you into allowing a default judgement, or you sucker yourself into one by not showing up, the creditor will still have to show the judge proof of the debt. ie. account agreement, old invoices and statements etc.

Ray

This Joel Miskin creature working on behalf of MJR can sue and does sue and does not need to prove anything to the court. The reason why he should not collect is left up to the alleged debtor. The court system sucks.

Basically what it comes down to is anyone can sue anyone with or without proof of a debt owing. Heads up everyone!

thanks for the response Ray.. and a big hello to Monty...

Ray, can you ask Monty for my contact info, and then send me that doc with Miskin's signature on it please.. even scan and email if you can.

I've read the several entries re the laywer letter and am confused about one of the notes. It seems to say that Total Recovery or the Mississauga firm have now BECOME known as Common Collection... I suspect I have read this wrong...

did I?

I am most interested in getting the contact info on the fellow's blog re Miskin and also your comment Ray about lawyers CONTRACTING OUT THERE NAMES TO COLLECTION AGENCIES.

Is there a blog on this subject or any materials you can refer me to re this "CONTRAACTING OUT"

I'd love to sink my teeth into that if it is in fact provable that it is happening.

cheers

BA

Thanks, but this is not my site; it belongs solely to Monty Loree. I'm just a guest on it like you are and so I can't facilitate forwarding any letters sent via the forum to you; Monty would have to do that.

I did have some letters from 2 guys and 1 girl sent from a "Joel Miskin LLB" who claimed he was acting on behalf of MJR Collections in Mississauga, Ont. I thought I threw them out last month, but upon checking my file cabinet, I still have one left. It is a letter SIGNED BY MISKIN to a lady that I was trying to help at the time. The threatening missive was sent back in March, 2006 and it bears the letterhead:

"Joel Miskin LLB, Barrister and Solicitor, 7033 Telford Way, Unit 17-18, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5S 1V4."

That, of course, is the address of MJR Collections. Furthermore, it lists his phone number as (905) 671-4151 ext. 2209 or 1-877 669-4935 (which, again, is MJR's phone number). When you call that extension, you get an assistant who goes by the name of Joseph - if my memory serves me correctly. The Law Society of Upper Canada (as you can see from their website) only lists one "Miskin" as a member and that is:

"Joel Sydney Miskin, 65 Bevshire Circle, Thornhill, Ont."

Probably, like Mark Silverthorn, they contract out their name for a fee to collection agencies to use, and quite possibly, he has never set foot on the property.

Blogger Darryl Cattle excoriated MJR for sending out (what he thought were) bogus collection letters under the name of "Joel Miskin, LLS." He believed they were trying to pass off a law student as being a full lawyer on staff. I retorted that I didn't know what he meant - the only lawyer's letters I've seen from MJR had the letterhead of "Joel Miskin, LLB", not "Joel Miskin, LLS". What the purpose of Cattle's attempted disection was, I can't say, since a collection agency doesn't need a lawyer on staff to sue someone.

In any event, if you want a copy of the one letter I have left with Miskin's signature on it and the personal info whited out, I can send it. Don't worry about the stamp.

Ray

Hello Ray, been a long time since I have graced your great site.

Re lawyer's letters and Mr Miskin in particular,

I would be most interested in getting a readable copy..not a retyped one, of any collector letters sent out by Miskin and signed by him.

Ray, can you facilitate forwarded these to me if readers send in their letters.

They can of course whiten out any personal info if they wish.

Thanks,

and cheers to all

BA

Well, MJR has, or least last year, had a guy by the name of Joel Miskin, LLB working on their behalf as a solicitor. That's what they used on their letterheads. Whether "Joel Miskin" is the same as "Joel Sydney Miskin" is immaterial, because if "Joel Miskin" isn't a lawyer, then someone's in a lot of trouble.

As bad and mindless as MJR is, even they wouldn't be stupid enough to pull something like that. However, check it out, and if the Joel Miskin, who identifies himself as a solicitor for MJR, isn't the same as "Joel Sydney Miskin", ask the LSUC why there aren't 2 "Miskins" listed.

But, as far as your account goes, what difference does it make if Joel Miskin is a lawyer or a carpenter? Anybody can sue or anyone - you don't have to be a lawyer to do that?

As for paying a bill twice, why would you do that? Surely, not just to appease MJR? You must have gotten the settlement agreement in advance before paying through a credit proposal outfit, and after having paid, you must have received a statement of some sort or receipt. Are you sure the credit proposal people paid the CTC or MJR?

Ray