consumer - UTPCPL suit v. bank - expired SOL - default judgment v. bank - motion to open denied
Gorden v. Discover Bank – ED Pa. – April 8, 2015
Consumer/debtor sued Bank after credit Bank’s credit card case against her was dismissed on statute-of-limitations grounds. Bank failed to answer the complaint and a default judgment was entered. Bank sought to have the judgment opened, claiming that it never got the complaint.
The court rejected the bank’s motion, noting that the “Complaint was served at an Ohio address from which Discover initiates most, if not all, of its collection actions nationwide, including the underlying suit that was brought against Plaintiff here. Although the record unambiguously confirms delivery to that address, Discover maintains that it never received the Complaint, and further contends that, although it operates its credit card and other lending businesses nationwide, it only “does business” from a single branch location in Greenville, Delaware.
The court stated that it was “satisfied that service here met the requirements of Ohio law, and the requirements of due process, and see no purpose to be served in requiring a consumer to navigate a labyrinth of complex corporate agreements as a prerequisite to filing a countersuit alleging improper debt collection practices. Accordingly, the Motion to Vacate will be denied.”