Search for: "Palisades Collection."
Results 81 - 92
of 92
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2008, 12:30 pm
Palisades Collections, LLC v. [read post]
28 Jun 2008, 10:50 pm
In addition, Palisades send the debt out to a collection agency so that the collection agency could attempt to force her to pay the money that a Judge said she did not owe. [read post]
19 May 2008, 5:24 pm
We are often contacted by Alabama consumers who have been sued by a debt buyer such as Palisades or Asset Acceptance or Unifund and for the vast majority of our clients, it is their first experience of any type with a lawsuit. [read post]
28 Mar 2008, 9:31 am
With this said, let's now look at what the SOL is in Alabama for collection suits. [read post]
21 Mar 2008, 6:14 am
As our readers know, the explosion in collection lawsuits against Alabama consumers is staggering. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 9:35 am
As we discussed, the suit is a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) if it is brought after the statute of limitations has expired. [read post]
4 Mar 2008, 6:40 am
The general rule under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is that when a collection law firm and a debt collector (including debt buyers such as Palisades) file a lawsuit beyond or after the statute of limitations, this is often considered a violation of the FDCPA. [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 8:54 pm
Of course, if you have been sued, you should read some of our earlier posts such as: What Happens When You Defeat A Collector In A Collections Lawsuit? [read post]
15 May 2007, 5:42 am
Hundreds and hundreds of Alabama consumers are sued every single month by debt buyers (Palisades, Asset Acceptance, Unifund, etc). [read post]
14 May 2007, 10:00 pm
Even so, the court seems to have given up a number of hostages to fortune: In Thursday’s ruling, the court’s majority said collecting Athan’s saliva from the envelope did not raise the same privacy concerns as would forced collections of blood or urine. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 4:02 pm
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 9:08 am
The Board affirmed the administrative law judge's findings that Respondent Park Maintenance is the alter ego and successor of Respondent Palisades Maintenance; that Respondents Park View Towers, Park Maintenance, and Palisades Maintenance constitute a single employer; that as the alter ego of and single employer with Palisades, Park Maintenance is bound by the collective-bargaining agreement entered into by Palisades and Teamsters Local 11; and that… [read post]
