Preview
Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575)
Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622)
Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854)
CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC.
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104
San Jose, California 95112-4610
Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100
Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190
Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant
MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC Case No. 16-CV-300096
(Unlimited Civil Case)
Plaintiff,
DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER
MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
DEEMING UNANSWERED REQUESTS
Defendant. FOR ADMISSION AS ADMITTED AND
FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
[Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280]
Hearing Date: June 6
Hearing Time: 9:00 a.m.
Hearing Dept.:
Hearing Judge: Peter H. Kirwan
Hearing Location: 161 North First Street
San Jose, California
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION.
I, Fred W. Schwinn, declare as follows:
I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the courts of the State of
California and am a shareholder in the law firm Consumer Law Center, Inc., attorneys of record for
Defendant/Cross-ComplainantMARIA ANTONIA CANUL (“CANUL”).
I have personal knowledge of the following facts, and if called as a witness, I could
and would competently testify thereto.
DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096
REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS
On February 19, 2019, I served by first-class mail on Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC (“VELOCITY”), the following described set of Requests for
Admission:
REQUESTING PARTY: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
RESPONDING PARTY: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
SET NUMBER: ONE
A true and correct of the Requests for Admission (Set One) is attached hereto as
Exhibit “F” and is incorporated herein by this reference.
The deadline for VELOCITY to respond to the Requests for Admission (Set One
was March 26, 2019.
MEET AND CONFER EFFORTS
On April 20, 2019, I sent an email to Matthew J. Kumar, counsel for VELOCITY in
this matter, requesting responses to CANUL’s Requests for Admission (Set One). I also requested that
VELOCITY serve its code-compliant, verified responses on or before April 30, 2019. A true and
correct copy of my April 20, 2019, email to Mr. Kumar is attached hereto as Exhibit “E.” As of the date
of this declaration, I have received no response from Mr. Kumar to this email.
VELOCITY has failed to serve any response whatsoever to the aforesaid Requests
for Admission (Set One) within the time permitted by law; and said time has not been further extended
by agreement of the parties or order of the Court.
Because VELOCITY has failed to respond to the aforesaid Requests for Admission
Set One), or serve objections thereto, the requested admissions should be deemed as admitted for all
purposes in this action.
DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096
MONETARY SANCTIONS
As a result of the said refusal to properly respond or comply with the Requests for
Admission (Set One) in the matter, the party I represent has incurred and will incur reasonable costs
and attorney’s fees in connection with this motion and the hearing thereon.
The hourly billing rate for attorney time expended by myself is $650.00. I have
expended 1.0 hours in preparing the forgoing motion and related documents. These hours do not
include the time I will be required to expend in preparing a reply in support of this motion and to attend
the hearing. At present, I anticipate that I will expend approximately 1.0 hours for these additional
tasks. Additionally, the party that I represent has incurred $60.00 in court filing fees and $7.52 in
electronic filing fees for the filing of this motion. Accordingly, while more precise proof of my attorney
fees and expenses will be set forth in my reply in support of this motion, the party that I represent
requests monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,367.52 in this matter.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed this 7" day of May, 2019, at San Jose, California.
/s/ Fred W. Schwinn
Fred W. Schwinn
DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096
DISC-020
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address) FOR COURT USE ONLY
t~- Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575)
Consumer Law Center, Inc.
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104
San Jose, California 95112-4610
retePHone no: (408) 294-6100 raxno. Ontonap:(408) 294-6190
fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional)
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
street aooress: 191 North First Street
maine avoress: 191 North First Street
city ano zip cove: San Jose, CA 95113
srancr name: Downtown San Jose
SHORT TITLE:
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC v. MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION CASE NUMBER:
[QQ Truth of Facts [J Genuineness of Documents
Requesting Party: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL 16-CV-300096
Responding Party: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
Set No.: ONE
INSTRUCTIONS
Requests for admission are written requests by a party to an action requiring that any other party to the action either admit or deny,
under oath, the truth of certain facts or the genuineness of certain documents. For information on timing, the number of admissions a
party may request from any other party, service of requests and responses, restrictions on the style, format, and scope of requests for
admission and responses to requests, and other details, see Code of Civil Procedure sections 94-95, 1013, and 2033.010-2033.420
and the case law relating to those sections.
An answering party should consider carefully whether to admit or deny the truth of facts or the genuineness of documents. With limited
exceptions, an answering party will not be allowed to change an answer to a request for admission. There may be penalties if an
answering party fails to admit the truth of any fact or the genuineness of any document when requested to do so and the requesting
party later proves that the fact is true or that the document is genuine. These penalties may include, among other things, payment of
the requesting party's attorney's fees incurred in making that proof.
Unless there is an agreement or a court order providing otherwise, the answering party must respond in writing to requests for
admission within 30 days after they are served, or within 5 days after service in an unlawful detainer action. There may be significant
penalties if an answering party fails to provide a timely written response to each request for admission, These penalties may include,
among other things, an order that the facts in issue are deemed true or that the documents in issue are deemed genuine for purposes
of the case.
Answers to Requests for Admission must be given under oath. The answering party should use the following language at the end of
the responses:
| declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing answers are true and correct.
(DATE) (SIGNATURE)
These instructions are only a summary and are not intended to provide complete information about requests for admission. This
Requests for Admission form does not change existing law relating to requests for admissions, nor does it affect an answering party's
right to assert any privilege or to make any objection.
REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
You are requested to admit within 30 days after service, or within 5 days after service in an unlawful detainer action, of this Requests
for Admission that:
1. EQ] Each of the following facts is true (if more than one, number each fact consecutively):
[X] Continued on Attachment 1
2. [XJ] The original of each of the following documents, copies of which are attached, is genuine (if more than one, number each
document consecutively):
EX] Continued on Attachment 2
Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) b
Ao. (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) Page 1 of 1
Form Approved for Optional Use REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ‘ode of Civil Procedure,
Judicial Council of Californi CeB Essential > .4a
tT ine {§§ 94-95, 2033,010-2033.420, 2033,710
DISC-026 [Rev. January 1, 2008] ceb.com {2\Forms"
Attachment 1
Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a “debtor” as that term is
defined by Cal. Civil Code § 1788.2(h).
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is a “debt collector’ as that
term is defined by California Civil Code § 1788.2(c).
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is a “debt buyer” as that term is
defined by California Civil Code § 1788.50(a)(1).
The financial obligation alleged to be owed to Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY
INVESTMENTS, LLC, by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a
“consumer debt” as that term is defined by Cal. Civil Code § 1788.2(f).
The financial obligation alleged to be owed to Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY
INVESTMENTS, LLC, by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a
“charged-off consumer debt” as that term is defined by California Civil Code § 1788.50(a)(2).
On a date after August 13, 2014, LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, removed the financial
obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL,
from its books as an asset and treated the alleged debt as a loss or expense.
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, purchased the financial
obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL,
ona date after January 1, 2014.
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, repurchased the financial
obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL,
ona date after January 1, 2014.
Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC’s collection of the alleged debt
in this action is subject to the California Fair Debt Buying Practices Act, California Civil Code
-l-
§§ 1788.50-1788.64, pursuant to California Civil Code § 1788.50(d).
10. On or about September 20, 2016, Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS,
LLC, caused the collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” to be filed against
Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL.
11 The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is a true and correct copy of the
original.
12. The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is genuine.
a
13 The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is admissible at trial without objection.
14 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, regularly filed collection
Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1.”
15 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 20 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
16. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 30 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
17 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 40 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
18 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 50 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
19 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 60 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
-2-
present.
20. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 70 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
21 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 80 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
22 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 90 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
2
3 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in
the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 100 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the
present.
24 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $100,000 or
greater.
25 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $1,000,000
or greater.
26. The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $5,000,000
or greater.
27 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is
$10,000,000 or greater.
28 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is
$50,000,000 or greater.
-3-
Attachment 2
29. Exhibit 1 —- Complaint for Money filed on September 20, 2016.
-4-
NT Ty
1 MATTHEW J. KUMAR, ESQ. Bar No. 283521
ALI FARZIN, ESQ. Bar No. 278564
2016 SEP 20 A 8 Su
2) LAW OFFICE OF RORY W. CLARK,
A Professional Law Corporation
33 14900 Magnolia Blvd. #55997
ShAG itt
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
4
Attor eys for Plaintiff
Intemal File No. V1500062
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, SANTA CLARA “LIMITED CIVIL"
|
F
1
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, CASE NO.
LEGTSIGDSE
i
Plaintiff,
122 COMPLAINT LOR MONEY.
VS OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT, AND
2 MONEY LENT,
MARIA CANUL, (COMMON COUNTS),
DECLARATION OF VENUE
and DOES IJ through X, inclusive,
= DEMAND AMOUNT:
15
Defendants. $4,792.47
16
5
VW
PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. §169: AND CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1788.17,
18 UNLESS YOU, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS ANTER RECEIPT OF NOTICE,
DISPUTE THE VALIDITY OF THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF,
i9 THE DEBT WILL BE ASSUMED FO BE VALID BY THIS DEBT
COLLECTOR. IF YOU NOTIFY THIS DEBT COLLECTOR IN WRITING,
20 WITHIN THE THIRTY DAY PERIOD THAT THE DEBT OR ANY PORTION
THERESO: IS DISPUTED, THIS DEBT COLLECTOR WILL OBTAIN
23 VERIFICATION OF THE DEBT OR A COPY OF A JUDGMENT AGAINST
YOU AND A COPY OF SUCH VEREFECATION OR JUDGMENT WILL BE
MAILED TC YOU BY THIS DEBT COLLECTOR. UPON YOUR WRITTEN
REQUEST WITHIN THE THIRTY DAY PERIOD, THIS DEBT COLLECTOR
23 WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE NAME AND ADDRESS Ol" THE
GRIGINAL CREDITOR,
IF DIFFERENT FROM THE CURRENT CREDITOR.
2:2 4
<1
25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY [> GIEE
THIS COMMUNICATION IS AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANY
INFORMATION PROVIDED MAY BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. THIS
COMMUNICATION IS FROM A DEBT COLLECTOR.
THE STATE ROSENTHAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACF
AND THE FEDERAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT
REQUIRE THAT, EXCEPT UNDER UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES,
COLLECTORS MAY NOT CONTACT YOU BEFORE 8 A.M. OR AFTER 9
P.M. THEY MAY NOT SARASS YOU BY USING THREATS OF VIOLENCE
OR ARREST OR BY USING OBSCENE LANGUAGE. COLLECTORS MAY
NOT USE FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS OR CALL YOU AT
WORK IF THEY KNOW OR HAVE REASON TO KNOW THAT YOU MAY
NOT RECEIVE PERSONAL LLS AT WORK. FOR THE MOST PART,
COLLECTORS MAY NOT TELL, NO'THER PERSON, OTHER THAN YOUR
ATTORNEY OR SPOUSE, ABOUT YOUR DEBT. COLLECTORS MAY
CONTACT ANGTHER PERSON TO CONFIRM YOUR LOCATION OR
ENFORCE A JUDGME FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT DEBT
10 COLLECTION ACTIVITES, YOU MAY CONTACT THE FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION AT 1-877-FTC-HELP OR WWW.ETC.GOV.
“exetaesrtied
ii
12 Plainiif, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC (“Plainiif”) alieges against Defendants, MARIA
CANUL and DOES I thr: X, inclusive, (“Defendant”) as follows:
13
L ‘That Plaintiff is now and was at all times mentioned 2 Limited Liability Company
i4
authorized to do and engaged in doing business in the State of California.
15
22. That Defendant is a natural person currently residing in the State of California, to
16
whom Plaintiffs assignor extended credit.
li
3 That the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
18
otherwise, of the defendants named in this action 2s DOES I through X, inclusive, are unknown to
19
Plaintiff who therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this
20
Complaint to show their true names and capacities when they have been ascertained. Plaint is
21
informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of these fictitiously named defendants is
22
23
24
-2-
2:
25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged, and that plein s damages as
hereir eged were prox etely caused by their conduct.
CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §§1788.50-1788.64
4. Plainti a or after January 1, 2014, purchased a consumer credit account that is the
basis of this action. purchase of said debt is thereby subject io Civil Code $$1788.5! -1788.64.
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1788.58():
(1) Plaiz adebtd yer,
(2) LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION issued and/or serviced a loan for funds on behalfof
Defendant to be elecironi: iy transferred to the bank account of Defendant's choosing. Plaintiff
i0 alleges cn infonnaticn and belief, Defendant eccessed those funds and used, or otherwise authorized
it its use, for the acquisition of goods, services, balance transfers, and/or other cash withdrawals.
12 During that time, Defendant had access to review and view detailed aciivity of the account, the
133 balance due, any accrual of fees, terest, payments, and/or the application of each of those items =
14, the account. Defendant then failed to make the regular payments whea due thereby causing a default.
18 in the repayment of the account. Thereaiter, Plaintiff thea received all of the rights, titles to, and
16 interest in said credit account.
17 (3) Plaii {fis now the sole owner of the debi at issue, orhas the authority io assert the rights
18 of all owners of the debi.
i9 (4) The debt balance ai charge-off was $4,792.17. Plaintiff does not seek or add any post-
20 charge-off ‘erest or fees.
—
De SSS
22
23
24
3.
2:25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
i (6) The nai dan address of the charge-off creditor at the time of charge-off is:
LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, 71 Stevenson Si. Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94105. The
3 charge-off creditor's account number associated with the debt is KXX2945.
3)
(7) The name and Jasi known address of the Defendant as they appeared in the charge-off
creditor's records prior to the sale of the debt MARIA CANUL 35 S. 1STH ST. #2 SAN JOSE,
CA 95112.
{8} The names and addresses of ail persons or entities that purchased ihe debt ater charge-
8 off are as follow FELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, PO BOX 788 WALL, NI 07719.
(9) Plaintiff has complied with California Civil Code § 1788.52.
10 Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the document
Lt described in Ca nia Civil Code § 1788.52(b).
12
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
13 {Open Boole Accouat - as to ail fendants)
j4 6. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates in this cause of action the allegations of
1S Paragraphs 1 through 5, inclusive.
4
6 “ That hin the last four years, LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION and Defendant
1? established an Open Book Account for accountnumber XXX2945 arising from a written agreement.
18 Said Open Book Account reflected-all debits and credit inconnection with the aforementioned
1 99 account, and was kept in permanent form in ihe regular course of business by LENDINGCLUB
20 CORPORATION. As of its final entry, said Open Book Account provided that Defendant was
ebige sthemumiro£ 479221; ie papmrents/ered) i E80.002|
22 have since been posted to the subject account, leaving a total outstanding principal balance due of
23 $4,792.17.
24
oe
25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
SECOND CAUSE OF CTION
@Mfoney Lent- as to ali Defendants)
& Plaintiff: alleges and incorporates in this cause of action the allegations of
Paragraphs J through 5, inclusive.
9. That within the past four years, Defendant became indebted to Plaintiff's
assignor Zor money leat to Deferdant at his/her specific request, and which Defendant agreed
os
to repay. Defendant received funds from Plain assignor, but did not repay as promised.
Defendant has retained the sums rightfully belonging to Plaintiff's assignor in the amount
8
of $4,792.17. Although demand has been made, no part of that sum has been paid except for
the amount of $0.00, representing a payment
or credit on said account. This results in a total
10
outstanding principal balance due of $4,792.17.
il
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants, and each of them as follows:
12
AS TG ALL CAUSES OF ACTION:
13
Principal in the sum of $4,792.17;
14
Costs of suit incurred ia this action; and
15
Such otber and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
16
7
Law OrFice oF Rory W. CLARK,
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
18
19
ALIFAI
20 Attomeys far Plaintiff
21
22
23
24
-5-
25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
does not supsont this wersicn of rat Bxplos 80 UPI ie te latest version for3 Inet raxpe Joora: de
Ne
ut
Utilifes
® Welcome Antsonyl
Acsour:
H:
Miew Fu
Investing
Dersonal Loans
How If Works
About Us
Trut hin Lending Disclosure
Truth in Lending Disclosure Statement
Lender
WebBank
6446 South Wasatch Boule
200
Lake City T84124
Borrow
Metia
35 CANUL
35s, 15th
San Jose, CA $5112
Ann enlege Re
The gost of your veditasa yearly mate
12.58%
ance Charge
‘The dollar amount the credit will cost you
$2,064{2)
Amount Financed
Tne amount of credit gravided 4o you or on your behatl
$14.400(6;
Toiz! of Payments
amount you will have paid when you hava made all scheculed payments
$17,364{e)
You: neni schedule will be as follo.
Number of Amount
payments When payments are due
)
35 $482.22 diFirst paymantis
f each mor
due on 7/12/12, and each sub went paymentis due monthly (ter on the sane
$482.80._Last payment p.due-on Blt ee —-—
ae
Late chee: iFyaur faunentanites
aller your (5 GeV grace period. joU willbe chaiged a la‘e [es eaual to lbs crealer ot
00% of ths fale payment amount or $15. This fee is charged only ence par lata payment.
Prepayment potiey: ¥ you pay off y loanin advarce, you vill not be charged a penalty. In the event ofa prepayment. you will
not be eniitled to a refund of ariy pald finance chatges or other fees,
See yout borrower membership and foan agreements for any additional information about nonpayrient, default, or
other matters related fo your loan.
means estimate
B
#Pe
Kems marked (e} will decrease If you receive fess than 100% Regardless of the ultimat amount of the loan, your
APRwil of change. Subject to your right to cancel, any unsecured loan will issue if Itis at least 60% funded by the and
of the listing paried.
Total Amount Requ: ted: $15,000.00
pdirgCius Fee 600.00
Total Amount Ret ad: $14,400.00
Unsucce: ful paym er nt Whena ymert fails ard is re} led by your k, you wi? ba charged an Ursuccessful Payment Fee of
315 toc ‘et ine cost Lending Club irs on the transection.
chat mpt to callect a mort en considered a separate trans o ‘ion, so an Unsuccessiul Payment Fee will bs asse: ed
jo; each falled attempt.
Cr ck Prot sing Fee. I'youelect ta mm a ymants by check, will be & $15 processi jee by payment.
You are nof required to complete this agreement merely because you have received these disclosures or signed a
borrower membership agreement.
71 Stevenson Stiest, Suite 500
San isco, CA 94135, USA,
° ome
© About Lis
° Careers
Follow us:
cy
Affilictes
liate
Davalos:
Agreaments
Erospenitis
Terms of Use
Ss ings
Statistics
Views Fu
® Copyright 2608-2075. Allrights reserved. Equal Housing Lender
borrower
Wc_laswit02-prod
on am =
SSS Se Se
DECLARATION GF VENUE
I, the undersigned, declare:
1 Lam on of the attorneys for Plaintiff in this action.
4 a2, The above-entitled action is subject to the provisions of Code of Civil
Procedure Sectica 395{b).
33 Upon information and belief, venue for this action is proper in the above-
titled Court because ai the commencement of this action, one or more of the named
Defendants resided in this Judicial District.
44 ff called as a witness, I would competently so testify.
10 { declare undez penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
1 foregoing is true and correct.
122
i33 Executed on SEP 07 2016 , at Sherman Oaks, California.
ld
1S Law OFFICE OF Rory W. CLARK,
A PROFESSIONAL Law CORPORATION
16
7
ALIFAR
18 Attorm ys Fe aintife
19
20
21
22
23
24
-6-
25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY
POS-030
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address). FOR COURT USE ONLY
Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575)
Consumer Law Center, Inc.
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104
San Jose, California 95112-4610
‘TELEPHONE NO. (408) 294-6100 Fax No (optonay: (408) 294-6190
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional) fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
STREET ADDRESS: 191 North First Street
MAILING ADDRESS: 191 North First Street
CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Jose, CA 95113
BRANCH NAME. Downtown San Jose
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
CASE NUMBER:
PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL - CIVIL
16-CV-300096
(Do not use this Proof of Service to show service of a Summons and Complaint.)
am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. | am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing
took place.
My residence or business address is:
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104
San Jose, California 95112-4610
On (date): February 19, 2019 | mailed from (city and state): San Jose, California
the following documents (specify):
Requests for Admission (Set One)
[2] The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mail - Civil (Documents Served)
(form POS-030(D)).
4. | served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check one):
a. [2] depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid.
b. [&] placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with this
business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is
placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in
a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
5. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows:
a Name of person served: Matthew J. Kumar
b. Address of person served:
FarMar Law Group, PC
14900 Magnolia Boulevard, #55997
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
(} The name and address of each person to whom | mailed the documents is listed in the Aftachment to Proof of Service
by First-Class Mail-Civil (Persons Served) (POS-030(P)).
| declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Date: February 19, 2019
Ered W. 7 Sch inn (SBN 225575) b
A
TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM)
Form Approved for Optional Use PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL - CIVIL Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 1013, 10132
Judicial Council of Califor wy courtinfo.ca.gov
POS-030 [New January 1, 2005) (CER? Essential (Proof of Service)
ceb.com 2\Forms"
Fred W. Schwinn
From: Fred W. Schwinn
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 5:59 PM
To: matthew@farmarlaw.com
Cec: Raeon R. Roulston
Subject: Velocity Investments, LLC v. Canul - Santa Clara Case No. 16-CV-300096
Counsel:
On March 25, 2019, we granted your client, Velocity Investments, LLC, an extension of time to April 9, 2019,
for its responsive pleading to the Class Action Cross-Complaint for Statutory Damages, and for code-compliant
and verified discovery responses, and for its document production. As of the date of this email, no responsive
pleading has been filed with the Court or received by this office. As such, your client is in default.
Additionally, Velocity Investments, LLC, has waived its right to object to any of our client’s Interrogatories,
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290(a), Request for Production of Documents, pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure § 2031.300(a), and Requests for Admission, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §
2033.280(a). Accordingly, we now demand that Velocity Investments, LLC, serve code-compliant responses,
without objections, to our client’s Demand for Copy of Items of Account, Form Interrogatories-General (Set
One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), Request for Production of Documents and Electronically Stored
Information (Set One), and Requests for Admission (Set One) for delivery to our office on or before April 30,
2019. Failure to respond to our client’s discovery requests may necessitate the filing of a Motion to Compel,
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2030.290(b) and 2031.300(b), and/or a Motion to Deem Admitted,
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280(b). This will only serve to escalate the cost of this matter for
your client.
Thank you.
Fred W. Schwinn
Consumer Law Center, Inc.
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 <--Please note our new address.
San Jose, CA 95112-4610
Phone (408) 294-6100 x111
Fax (408) 294-6190
fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com
Notice: This message, and any attached file, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. The information herein may also be protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the
original message. Thank you.
>a ihe
Preview
Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 San Jose, California 95112-4610 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant MARIA ANTONIA CANUL SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC Case No. 16-CV-300096 (Unlimited Civil Case) Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER MARIA ANTONIA CANUL DEEMING UNANSWERED REQUESTS Defendant. FOR ADMISSION AS ADMITTED AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC [Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280] Hearing Date: June 6 Hearing Time: 9:00 a.m. Hearing Dept.: Hearing Judge: Peter H. Kirwan Hearing Location: 161 North First Street San Jose, California AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION. I, Fred W. Schwinn, declare as follows: I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the courts of the State of California and am a shareholder in the law firm Consumer Law Center, Inc., attorneys of record for Defendant/Cross-ComplainantMARIA ANTONIA CANUL (“CANUL”). I have personal knowledge of the following facts, and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify thereto. DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096 REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS On February 19, 2019, I served by first-class mail on Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC (“VELOCITY”), the following described set of Requests for Admission: REQUESTING PARTY: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL RESPONDING PARTY: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC SET NUMBER: ONE A true and correct of the Requests for Admission (Set One) is attached hereto as Exhibit “F” and is incorporated herein by this reference. The deadline for VELOCITY to respond to the Requests for Admission (Set One was March 26, 2019. MEET AND CONFER EFFORTS On April 20, 2019, I sent an email to Matthew J. Kumar, counsel for VELOCITY in this matter, requesting responses to CANUL’s Requests for Admission (Set One). I also requested that VELOCITY serve its code-compliant, verified responses on or before April 30, 2019. A true and correct copy of my April 20, 2019, email to Mr. Kumar is attached hereto as Exhibit “E.” As of the date of this declaration, I have received no response from Mr. Kumar to this email. VELOCITY has failed to serve any response whatsoever to the aforesaid Requests for Admission (Set One) within the time permitted by law; and said time has not been further extended by agreement of the parties or order of the Court. Because VELOCITY has failed to respond to the aforesaid Requests for Admission Set One), or serve objections thereto, the requested admissions should be deemed as admitted for all purposes in this action. DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096 MONETARY SANCTIONS As a result of the said refusal to properly respond or comply with the Requests for Admission (Set One) in the matter, the party I represent has incurred and will incur reasonable costs and attorney’s fees in connection with this motion and the hearing thereon. The hourly billing rate for attorney time expended by myself is $650.00. I have expended 1.0 hours in preparing the forgoing motion and related documents. These hours do not include the time I will be required to expend in preparing a reply in support of this motion and to attend the hearing. At present, I anticipate that I will expend approximately 1.0 hours for these additional tasks. Additionally, the party that I represent has incurred $60.00 in court filing fees and $7.52 in electronic filing fees for the filing of this motion. Accordingly, while more precise proof of my attorney fees and expenses will be set forth in my reply in support of this motion, the party that I represent requests monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,367.52 in this matter. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 7" day of May, 2019, at San Jose, California. /s/ Fred W. Schwinn Fred W. Schwinn DECLARATION OF FRED W. SCHWINN Case No. 16-CV-300096 DISC-020 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address) FOR COURT USE ONLY t~- Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Consumer Law Center, Inc. 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 San Jose, California 95112-4610 retePHone no: (408) 294-6100 raxno. Ontonap:(408) 294-6190 fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional) ATTORNEY FOR (Name): MARIA ANTONIA CANUL SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA street aooress: 191 North First Street maine avoress: 191 North First Street city ano zip cove: San Jose, CA 95113 srancr name: Downtown San Jose SHORT TITLE: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC v. MARIA ANTONIA CANUL REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION CASE NUMBER: [QQ Truth of Facts [J Genuineness of Documents Requesting Party: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL 16-CV-300096 Responding Party: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC Set No.: ONE INSTRUCTIONS Requests for admission are written requests by a party to an action requiring that any other party to the action either admit or deny, under oath, the truth of certain facts or the genuineness of certain documents. For information on timing, the number of admissions a party may request from any other party, service of requests and responses, restrictions on the style, format, and scope of requests for admission and responses to requests, and other details, see Code of Civil Procedure sections 94-95, 1013, and 2033.010-2033.420 and the case law relating to those sections. An answering party should consider carefully whether to admit or deny the truth of facts or the genuineness of documents. With limited exceptions, an answering party will not be allowed to change an answer to a request for admission. There may be penalties if an answering party fails to admit the truth of any fact or the genuineness of any document when requested to do so and the requesting party later proves that the fact is true or that the document is genuine. These penalties may include, among other things, payment of the requesting party's attorney's fees incurred in making that proof. Unless there is an agreement or a court order providing otherwise, the answering party must respond in writing to requests for admission within 30 days after they are served, or within 5 days after service in an unlawful detainer action. There may be significant penalties if an answering party fails to provide a timely written response to each request for admission, These penalties may include, among other things, an order that the facts in issue are deemed true or that the documents in issue are deemed genuine for purposes of the case. Answers to Requests for Admission must be given under oath. The answering party should use the following language at the end of the responses: | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing answers are true and correct. (DATE) (SIGNATURE) These instructions are only a summary and are not intended to provide complete information about requests for admission. This Requests for Admission form does not change existing law relating to requests for admissions, nor does it affect an answering party's right to assert any privilege or to make any objection. REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION You are requested to admit within 30 days after service, or within 5 days after service in an unlawful detainer action, of this Requests for Admission that: 1. EQ] Each of the following facts is true (if more than one, number each fact consecutively): [X] Continued on Attachment 1 2. [XJ] The original of each of the following documents, copies of which are attached, is genuine (if more than one, number each document consecutively): EX] Continued on Attachment 2 Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) b Ao. (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) Page 1 of 1 Form Approved for Optional Use REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ‘ode of Civil Procedure, Judicial Council of Californi CeB Essential > .4a tT ine {§§ 94-95, 2033,010-2033.420, 2033,710 DISC-026 [Rev. January 1, 2008] ceb.com {2\Forms" Attachment 1 Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a “debtor” as that term is defined by Cal. Civil Code § 1788.2(h). Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is a “debt collector’ as that term is defined by California Civil Code § 1788.2(c). Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is a “debt buyer” as that term is defined by California Civil Code § 1788.50(a)(1). The financial obligation alleged to be owed to Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a “consumer debt” as that term is defined by Cal. Civil Code § 1788.2(f). The financial obligation alleged to be owed to Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, is a “charged-off consumer debt” as that term is defined by California Civil Code § 1788.50(a)(2). On a date after August 13, 2014, LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, removed the financial obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, from its books as an asset and treated the alleged debt as a loss or expense. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, purchased the financial obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, ona date after January 1, 2014. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, repurchased the financial obligation alleged to be owed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, ona date after January 1, 2014. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC’s collection of the alleged debt in this action is subject to the California Fair Debt Buying Practices Act, California Civil Code -l- §§ 1788.50-1788.64, pursuant to California Civil Code § 1788.50(d). 10. On or about September 20, 2016, Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, caused the collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” to be filed against Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL. 11 The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is a true and correct copy of the original. 12. The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is genuine. a 13 The collection Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is admissible at trial without objection. 14 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, regularly filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1.” 15 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 20 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 16. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 30 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 17 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 40 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 18 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 50 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 19 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 60 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the -2- present. 20. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 70 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 21 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 80 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 22 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 90 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 2 3 Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, filed collection Complaints in the form of Exhibit “1” against at least 100 Californians from September 20, 2015, through the present. 24 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $100,000 or greater. 25 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $1,000,000 or greater. 26. The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $5,000,000 or greater. 27 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $10,000,000 or greater. 28 The net worth of Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, is $50,000,000 or greater. -3- Attachment 2 29. Exhibit 1 —- Complaint for Money filed on September 20, 2016. -4- NT Ty 1 MATTHEW J. KUMAR, ESQ. Bar No. 283521 ALI FARZIN, ESQ. Bar No. 278564 2016 SEP 20 A 8 Su 2) LAW OFFICE OF RORY W. CLARK, A Professional Law Corporation 33 14900 Magnolia Blvd. #55997 ShAG itt Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 4 Attor eys for Plaintiff Intemal File No. V1500062 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, SANTA CLARA “LIMITED CIVIL" | F 1 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, CASE NO. LEGTSIGDSE i Plaintiff, 122 COMPLAINT LOR MONEY. VS OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT, AND 2 MONEY LENT, MARIA CANUL, (COMMON COUNTS), DECLARATION OF VENUE and DOES IJ through X, inclusive, = DEMAND AMOUNT: 15 Defendants. $4,792.47 16 5 VW PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. §169: AND CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1788.17, 18 UNLESS YOU, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS ANTER RECEIPT OF NOTICE, DISPUTE THE VALIDITY OF THE DEBT, OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, i9 THE DEBT WILL BE ASSUMED FO BE VALID BY THIS DEBT COLLECTOR. IF YOU NOTIFY THIS DEBT COLLECTOR IN WRITING, 20 WITHIN THE THIRTY DAY PERIOD THAT THE DEBT OR ANY PORTION THERESO: IS DISPUTED, THIS DEBT COLLECTOR WILL OBTAIN 23 VERIFICATION OF THE DEBT OR A COPY OF A JUDGMENT AGAINST YOU AND A COPY OF SUCH VEREFECATION OR JUDGMENT WILL BE MAILED TC YOU BY THIS DEBT COLLECTOR. UPON YOUR WRITTEN REQUEST WITHIN THE THIRTY DAY PERIOD, THIS DEBT COLLECTOR 23 WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE NAME AND ADDRESS Ol" THE GRIGINAL CREDITOR, IF DIFFERENT FROM THE CURRENT CREDITOR. 2:2 4 <1 25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY [> GIEE THIS COMMUNICATION IS AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED MAY BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. THIS COMMUNICATION IS FROM A DEBT COLLECTOR. THE STATE ROSENTHAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACF AND THE FEDERAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT REQUIRE THAT, EXCEPT UNDER UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, COLLECTORS MAY NOT CONTACT YOU BEFORE 8 A.M. OR AFTER 9 P.M. THEY MAY NOT SARASS YOU BY USING THREATS OF VIOLENCE OR ARREST OR BY USING OBSCENE LANGUAGE. COLLECTORS MAY NOT USE FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS OR CALL YOU AT WORK IF THEY KNOW OR HAVE REASON TO KNOW THAT YOU MAY NOT RECEIVE PERSONAL LLS AT WORK. FOR THE MOST PART, COLLECTORS MAY NOT TELL, NO'THER PERSON, OTHER THAN YOUR ATTORNEY OR SPOUSE, ABOUT YOUR DEBT. COLLECTORS MAY CONTACT ANGTHER PERSON TO CONFIRM YOUR LOCATION OR ENFORCE A JUDGME FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT DEBT 10 COLLECTION ACTIVITES, YOU MAY CONTACT THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AT 1-877-FTC-HELP OR WWW.ETC.GOV. “exetaesrtied ii 12 Plainiif, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC (“Plainiif”) alieges against Defendants, MARIA CANUL and DOES I thr: X, inclusive, (“Defendant”) as follows: 13 L ‘That Plaintiff is now and was at all times mentioned 2 Limited Liability Company i4 authorized to do and engaged in doing business in the State of California. 15 22. That Defendant is a natural person currently residing in the State of California, to 16 whom Plaintiffs assignor extended credit. li 3 That the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or 18 otherwise, of the defendants named in this action 2s DOES I through X, inclusive, are unknown to 19 Plaintiff who therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this 20 Complaint to show their true names and capacities when they have been ascertained. Plaint is 21 informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of these fictitiously named defendants is 22 23 24 -2- 2: 25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged, and that plein s damages as hereir eged were prox etely caused by their conduct. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §§1788.50-1788.64 4. Plainti a or after January 1, 2014, purchased a consumer credit account that is the basis of this action. purchase of said debt is thereby subject io Civil Code $$1788.5! -1788.64. PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE §1788.58(): (1) Plaiz adebtd yer, (2) LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION issued and/or serviced a loan for funds on behalfof Defendant to be elecironi: iy transferred to the bank account of Defendant's choosing. Plaintiff i0 alleges cn infonnaticn and belief, Defendant eccessed those funds and used, or otherwise authorized it its use, for the acquisition of goods, services, balance transfers, and/or other cash withdrawals. 12 During that time, Defendant had access to review and view detailed aciivity of the account, the 133 balance due, any accrual of fees, terest, payments, and/or the application of each of those items = 14, the account. Defendant then failed to make the regular payments whea due thereby causing a default. 18 in the repayment of the account. Thereaiter, Plaintiff thea received all of the rights, titles to, and 16 interest in said credit account. 17 (3) Plaii {fis now the sole owner of the debi at issue, orhas the authority io assert the rights 18 of all owners of the debi. i9 (4) The debt balance ai charge-off was $4,792.17. Plaintiff does not seek or add any post- 20 charge-off ‘erest or fees. — De SSS 22 23 24 3. 2:25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY i (6) The nai dan address of the charge-off creditor at the time of charge-off is: LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, 71 Stevenson Si. Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94105. The 3 charge-off creditor's account number associated with the debt is KXX2945. 3) (7) The name and Jasi known address of the Defendant as they appeared in the charge-off creditor's records prior to the sale of the debt MARIA CANUL 35 S. 1STH ST. #2 SAN JOSE, CA 95112. {8} The names and addresses of ail persons or entities that purchased ihe debt ater charge- 8 off are as follow FELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, PO BOX 788 WALL, NI 07719. (9) Plaintiff has complied with California Civil Code § 1788.52. 10 Attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the document Lt described in Ca nia Civil Code § 1788.52(b). 12 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 13 {Open Boole Accouat - as to ail fendants) j4 6. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates in this cause of action the allegations of 1S Paragraphs 1 through 5, inclusive. 4 6 “ That hin the last four years, LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION and Defendant 1? established an Open Book Account for accountnumber XXX2945 arising from a written agreement. 18 Said Open Book Account reflected-all debits and credit inconnection with the aforementioned 1 99 account, and was kept in permanent form in ihe regular course of business by LENDINGCLUB 20 CORPORATION. As of its final entry, said Open Book Account provided that Defendant was ebige sthemumiro£ 479221; ie papmrents/ered) i E80.002| 22 have since been posted to the subject account, leaving a total outstanding principal balance due of 23 $4,792.17. 24 oe 25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY SECOND CAUSE OF CTION @Mfoney Lent- as to ali Defendants) & Plaintiff: alleges and incorporates in this cause of action the allegations of Paragraphs J through 5, inclusive. 9. That within the past four years, Defendant became indebted to Plaintiff's assignor Zor money leat to Deferdant at his/her specific request, and which Defendant agreed os to repay. Defendant received funds from Plain assignor, but did not repay as promised. Defendant has retained the sums rightfully belonging to Plaintiff's assignor in the amount 8 of $4,792.17. Although demand has been made, no part of that sum has been paid except for the amount of $0.00, representing a payment or credit on said account. This results in a total 10 outstanding principal balance due of $4,792.17. il WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants, and each of them as follows: 12 AS TG ALL CAUSES OF ACTION: 13 Principal in the sum of $4,792.17; 14 Costs of suit incurred ia this action; and 15 Such otber and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 16 7 Law OrFice oF Rory W. CLARK, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 18 19 ALIFAI 20 Attomeys far Plaintiff 21 22 23 24 -5- 25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY does not supsont this wersicn of rat Bxplos 80 UPI ie te latest version for3 Inet raxpe Joora: de Ne ut Utilifes ® Welcome Antsonyl Acsour: H: Miew Fu Investing Dersonal Loans How If Works About Us Trut hin Lending Disclosure Truth in Lending Disclosure Statement Lender WebBank 6446 South Wasatch Boule 200 Lake City T84124 Borrow Metia 35 CANUL 35s, 15th San Jose, CA $5112 Ann enlege Re The gost of your veditasa yearly mate 12.58% ance Charge ‘The dollar amount the credit will cost you $2,064{2) Amount Financed Tne amount of credit gravided 4o you or on your behatl $14.400(6; Toiz! of Payments amount you will have paid when you hava made all scheculed payments $17,364{e) You: neni schedule will be as follo. Number of Amount payments When payments are due ) 35 $482.22 diFirst paymantis f each mor due on 7/12/12, and each sub went paymentis due monthly (ter on the sane $482.80._Last payment p.due-on Blt ee —-— ae Late chee: iFyaur faunentanites aller your (5 GeV grace period. joU willbe chaiged a la‘e [es eaual to lbs crealer ot 00% of ths fale payment amount or $15. This fee is charged only ence par lata payment. Prepayment potiey: ¥ you pay off y loanin advarce, you vill not be charged a penalty. In the event ofa prepayment. you will not be eniitled to a refund of ariy pald finance chatges or other fees, See yout borrower membership and foan agreements for any additional information about nonpayrient, default, or other matters related fo your loan. means estimate B #Pe Kems marked (e} will decrease If you receive fess than 100% Regardless of the ultimat amount of the loan, your APRwil of change. Subject to your right to cancel, any unsecured loan will issue if Itis at least 60% funded by the and of the listing paried. Total Amount Requ: ted: $15,000.00 pdirgCius Fee 600.00 Total Amount Ret ad: $14,400.00 Unsucce: ful paym er nt Whena ymert fails ard is re} led by your k, you wi? ba charged an Ursuccessful Payment Fee of 315 toc ‘et ine cost Lending Club irs on the transection. chat mpt to callect a mort en considered a separate trans o ‘ion, so an Unsuccessiul Payment Fee will bs asse: ed jo; each falled attempt. Cr ck Prot sing Fee. I'youelect ta mm a ymants by check, will be & $15 processi jee by payment. You are nof required to complete this agreement merely because you have received these disclosures or signed a borrower membership agreement. 71 Stevenson Stiest, Suite 500 San isco, CA 94135, USA, ° ome © About Lis ° Careers Follow us: cy Affilictes liate Davalos: Agreaments Erospenitis Terms of Use Ss ings Statistics Views Fu ® Copyright 2608-2075. Allrights reserved. Equal Housing Lender borrower Wc_laswit02-prod on am = SSS Se Se DECLARATION GF VENUE I, the undersigned, declare: 1 Lam on of the attorneys for Plaintiff in this action. 4 a2, The above-entitled action is subject to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure Sectica 395{b). 33 Upon information and belief, venue for this action is proper in the above- titled Court because ai the commencement of this action, one or more of the named Defendants resided in this Judicial District. 44 ff called as a witness, I would competently so testify. 10 { declare undez penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 1 foregoing is true and correct. 122 i33 Executed on SEP 07 2016 , at Sherman Oaks, California. ld 1S Law OFFICE OF Rory W. CLARK, A PROFESSIONAL Law CORPORATION 16 7 ALIFAR 18 Attorm ys Fe aintife 19 20 21 22 23 24 -6- 25 COMPLAINT FOR MONEY POS-030 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address). FOR COURT USE ONLY Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Consumer Law Center, Inc. 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 San Jose, California 95112-4610 ‘TELEPHONE NO. (408) 294-6100 Fax No (optonay: (408) 294-6190 E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional) fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com ATTORNEY FOR (Name): MARIA ANTONIA CANUL SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA STREET ADDRESS: 191 North First Street MAILING ADDRESS: 191 North First Street CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Jose, CA 95113 BRANCH NAME. Downtown San Jose PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: MARIA ANTONIA CANUL CASE NUMBER: PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL - CIVIL 16-CV-300096 (Do not use this Proof of Service to show service of a Summons and Complaint.) am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. | am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing took place. My residence or business address is: 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 San Jose, California 95112-4610 On (date): February 19, 2019 | mailed from (city and state): San Jose, California the following documents (specify): Requests for Admission (Set One) [2] The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mail - Civil (Documents Served) (form POS-030(D)). 4. | served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check one): a. [2] depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid. b. [&] placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. 5. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: a Name of person served: Matthew J. Kumar b. Address of person served: FarMar Law Group, PC 14900 Magnolia Boulevard, #55997 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 (} The name and address of each person to whom | mailed the documents is listed in the Aftachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mail-Civil (Persons Served) (POS-030(P)). | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: February 19, 2019 Ered W. 7 Sch inn (SBN 225575) b A TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) Form Approved for Optional Use PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL - CIVIL Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 1013, 10132 Judicial Council of Califor wy courtinfo.ca.gov POS-030 [New January 1, 2005) (CER? Essential (Proof of Service) ceb.com 2\Forms" Fred W. Schwinn From: Fred W. Schwinn Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 5:59 PM To: matthew@farmarlaw.com Cec: Raeon R. Roulston Subject: Velocity Investments, LLC v. Canul - Santa Clara Case No. 16-CV-300096 Counsel: On March 25, 2019, we granted your client, Velocity Investments, LLC, an extension of time to April 9, 2019, for its responsive pleading to the Class Action Cross-Complaint for Statutory Damages, and for code-compliant and verified discovery responses, and for its document production. As of the date of this email, no responsive pleading has been filed with the Court or received by this office. As such, your client is in default. Additionally, Velocity Investments, LLC, has waived its right to object to any of our client’s Interrogatories, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290(a), Request for Production of Documents, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.300(a), and Requests for Admission, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280(a). Accordingly, we now demand that Velocity Investments, LLC, serve code-compliant responses, without objections, to our client’s Demand for Copy of Items of Account, Form Interrogatories-General (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), Request for Production of Documents and Electronically Stored Information (Set One), and Requests for Admission (Set One) for delivery to our office on or before April 30, 2019. Failure to respond to our client’s discovery requests may necessitate the filing of a Motion to Compel, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2030.290(b) and 2031.300(b), and/or a Motion to Deem Admitted, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280(b). This will only serve to escalate the cost of this matter for your client. Thank you. Fred W. Schwinn Consumer Law Center, Inc. 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 <--Please note our new address. San Jose, CA 95112-4610 Phone (408) 294-6100 x111 Fax (408) 294-6190 fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com Notice: This message, and any attached file, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information herein may also be protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete all copies of the original message. Thank you. >a ihe