The bankruptcy was in 1999 chapter 7. But the student loans were not included in that. I mentioned it because the same attorney that processed the bankruptcy negotiated the modified agreement with the lender (Direct Loans at that time).
I am getting my ex wife to sign an affidavit that establishes that was never in agreement with her acting on my behalf and that she was not qualified or competent to act on my behalf. I am also going to put together an affidavit that establishes that I attemted to have ACS restore my modified agreement plan in august of 2005. And that they were aware of the fraudulent signature and refused to fix it. I didn't pay as an agreement, I payed because I felt trapped. Also, I can prove that the consolidation worsened my financial situation. I am now aware of a doctrine of lender's liability that obligates the lender to act in the best interest of a borrower. failure to do so, is actionable as predatory lending. So I'm not charging anyone with fraud or forgery. I'm saying that the missing element of the contract nullifies the contract and that the lender was negligent and liable for securing the loan without my consent or best interest. Please review this video by Carl Person. It has inspired me to do some research, but I still have doubts about the advice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CWIIGwyKTI
Thank you for your very informative discussion. I think you have given me valuable advice and I plan on rating you with excellent feedback. I have one quick thing to point out. The case you refer to seemed to fail ratification where repudiation was expressed. I have always claimed that I contacted ACS immediately as soon as I became aware of the agreement my ex wife made. The person I contacted convinced me that the bureaucracy was too big and powerful for me too deal with. I continued to repudiate with sluggish payments, using up all of my forbearance and deferment. I am guilty of allowing myself to be bullied by a big bureaucracy and not fighting back like a brave red blooded American should. I think a jury could sympathize with me. You do... Right?
Thanks. I have a familiar feeling that I had in 2005. I feel like I'm defeated before I ever started. That doesn't mean I was I wrong then, and it doesn't mean that I'm wrong now. The difference is that then, I wasn't in the corner that I'm in now. I guess I was willing to put up with a world of "ordinary people" that promise to lower payment, but quadruple it instead, and that will enforce a loan no matter how illegal it is, and that will qualify a borrower with a fresh bankruptsy, because they don't care if I default. In fact, they want me to, because I will be their slave for life if I do. Yeah, I paid the bill. Maybe I really deserve everything they want to do to me I guess. After all, they are good people. I'm just a guy trying to avoid paying for all the service that have provided me. I am probably getting in their way of all the valuable contribution they make to society. Or maybe, someone needs to finally get fed up with the banks producing nothing but debt. That is really their product. They take people as their resource, and run us through their production processes and magically create debtors. For who? Society? Hell no! They have us all by the balls, and I am finally ready to stand up to they sneaky tyranny called student loans. I may not be able to get anyone to stand with me right now. Carl Person won't. He's too busy for me. But he is right. They can't sell my blood yet. I will remain confident that someone will see it my way and get fed up with me, and use their expertise as a weapon against the billionaires who want to sell my blood and yours. And they will do anything to take our livelyhood because we will let them. I let them in 2005, so therefore, I should let them do it to an ever increasing extent. Wow, sorry for the rant. I am really sick of this world of "ordinary people". I'm hopeful that I can compel some people to stop being ordinary. Thanks for listening, and thanks for your expert advice.
One last reply. Just yes or no. Were they in the wrong in 2005.. ACS?
I won't reply to the answer, so just wanted to say thanks again sir.
If the lender induced your spouse to sign the note on terms that were inferior to the terms you already had, or they induced your spouse to sign your name on the note without your consent, then that would have been wrong, in my opinion.Best wishes.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).