You are on page 1of 5

CITY COURT CITY OF SCHENECTADY COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY

Cavalry SPV I, LLC, As Assignee of GE Money Bank , Plaintiff, v. John Doe, Defendant. ANSWER

Court Index No. ####

DEFENDANT JOHN DOE, as an for an Answer to the Complaint states as follows: 1. 2. Denies knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations in 1 & 2 of the Complaint. Denies the allegations of 3 8 of the Complaint.

DEFENDANTS 1st AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Plaintiffs assignor, GE Money Bank allegedly purchased the putative account from Lowes Companies, Inc. (Lowes). At the time of any alleged breach of contract on the putative account, Lowes would have been the original creditor. (EXHIBIT A) Lowes Corporation is a North Carolina corporation. (EXHIBIT B) The statute of limitations for revolving credit card accounts in North Carolina is three (3) years. N.C. Gen. Stat. 1-46 et. seq. More than three (3) years has elapsed since the alleged breach of contract occurred. The Plaintiffs complaint and cause of action are thus time-barred in New York. See Portfolio Recovery Associates v. King, 14 NY3d 410 (2010) and Windsearch v. Delafrange, 90 AD3d 1223 (3rd Dept. 2011).

9.

Because the Plaintiffs complaint is time-barred, the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate this matter.

DEFENDANTS 2nd AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

10.

Defendant is not in default to Plaintiff on the alleged account, nor to Plaintiffs assignor.

DEFENDANTS 3rd AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


11. Even if Defendant was in said default to Plaintiff or Plaintiffs assignor, Plaintiffs assignor has received payment on the account from third parties, to include private, institutional, corporate investors, pension funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, mutual funds, lenders and insurers, securitizers, depositors, sponsors, special purpose vehicles (SPV), underwriters, trusts and/or trustees, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the U.S. Treasury Department, and/or other parties, both public and private.

DEFENDANTS 4th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


12. Since the Plaintiff lacks standing, there is no justiciable controversy between the parties to be adjudicated by the Court, and the Court thus lacks jurisdiction over this matter.

DEFENDANTS 5th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13. Plaintiff's claims are barred by Payment, Anticipatory Repudiation, Accord and Satisfaction, Statute of Frauds, Failure of Consideration.

DEFENDANTS 6th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


14. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of Laches, Waiver, Estoppel.

DEFENDANTS 7th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


15. Plaintiff's claims are barred by Plaintiff's conduct including fraud, misrepresentation, unlawful conduct, coercion, and/or promissory estoppel.

DEFENDANTS 8th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


16. Plaintiff failed to mitigate damages.

DEFENDANTS 9th DEFENSE PLAINTIFF LACKS CAPACITY TO SUE


17. The Plaintiff lacks the legal capacity to sue because the real party in interest is a Qualified Special Purpose Entity Trust (QSPE Trust), a foreign trust engaging in trust business without authorization from the New York Secretary of State.

DEFENDANTS 10th DEFENSE DENIAL OF AUTHORITY TO SUE


18. The Plaintiff does not have the authority to sue in a representative capacity because the Plaintiff is not the Trustee of the QSPE Trust.

DEFENDANTS 11th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM


19. Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim or cause of action against defendant upon which relief may be given.

DEFENDANTS 12th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE USURY

20.

The Plaintiff has attached to its complaint a statement seeking to collect on a loan with a rate greater than SIXTEEN percent (16%) per annum, in violation of N.Y. Gen. Oblig. Law 5-501. Accordingly, the alleged contract would be illegal and void. N.Y. Gen. Oblig. Law 5-511.

DEFENDANTS 13th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE


21. Plaintiff has failed to comply with the federal Truth in Lending Law.

DEFENDANTS 14th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

22.

Plaintiff is in violation of or has failed to comply with New York General Business Law 601 (8). DEFENDANTS 15th AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

23.

Defendant reserves the right to add additional affirmative defenses revealed through the course of discovery.

WHEREFORE, Defendant JOHN DOE prays for a decision, order and judgment dismissing the Plaintiffs complaint in its entirety with prejudice, and for whatever other relief this Court deems just, equitable, right and proper. Dated: May 20, 2013 .. John Doe, Defendant Address Phone No. VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SCHENECTADY SS.:

JOHN DOE, being duly sworn, deposes and says that deponent has duly read the foregoing Amended Answer dated May 20, 2013, and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to deponents own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters deponent believes it to be true. This verification is made by deponent pursuant to CPLR 3020. The grounds for deponents belief as to all matters not stated upon deponents personal knowledge are based upon matters of public record and knowledge, the deponents records and the plaintiffs records, and the records of third parties.

____________________________ JOHN DOE Sworn to before me on May 20, 2013 ___________________________________ Notary Public State of New York