Answer Amended

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.December 7, 2020

BARRON & NEWBURGER, P.C. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 200V37391 6 Santa Clara - Civil A. Villanuev TIMOTHY P. JOHNSON (BAR NO. 66333) Electronically Filed BARRON &NEWBURGER, P.C. by Superior Court of CA, 1970 OLD TUSTIN AVENUE, SECOND FLOOR County of Santa Clara, SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705 on 7/1 2/2021 12:12 PM TELEPHONE: (714) 832-1 170 Reviewed By: A. Villanueva FACSIMILEI (714) 832-1 179 case #Zocv37391 6 E-MAIL: tjohnson@bn-lawyers.com Envelope: 6825947 Attorneys for Defendants Velocity Investments, LLC and Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DAVID CHAI, individually and on behalf of Case No. 20CV3739 1 6 all others similarly situated, (Unlimited Civil Case) Plaintiff, vs. VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a New FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO Jersey limited liability company; VELOCITY COMPLAINT BY VELOCITY PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC., a Delaware PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC. corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants. Defendant Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc. (“Defendant”) submits its First Amended Answer t0 Plaintiff’s Complaint as follows: Pursuant t0 the California Code of Civil Procedure § 431.30, Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every allegation contained in said Complaint, and the whole thereof, and further denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in any sum 0r sums whatsoever, or at all. FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT _ 1 _ Case N0. 20CV373916 BARRON & NEWBURGER, P.C. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendant asserts the defense 0f setoff against Plaintiff. Where two opposing claims arise out 0f separate transactions between the same parties, “setoff’ is the equitable right of one party to offset his debt by the amount of its claim against the other party. “The right 0f setoff (also called offset) allows entities that owe each other money t0 apply their mutual debts against each other, thereby avoiding the ‘absurdity of making A pay B When B owes A.” Citizens Bank ofMaryland v. Strumpf, 516 U.S. 16, 18 (1995), quoting Studley v. Boylston Nat’l Bank, 229 U.S. 523, 528 (1913). SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The letter that is the subject of this lawsuit was sent t0 Plaintiff inadvertently did not contain a notice required by the California Fair Debt Buying Practices Act (“CFDBPA”). That error occurred as a result of a computer programming error. A computer system was in place t0 avoid the error that occurred in this case, but due t0 the programming error, the letter was sent Without notice required by the CFDBPA. The omission of the required notice was not intentional and only resulted from a bona fide error despite the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted t0 avoid the omission 0f the notice. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that Plaintiff takes nothing in this action; that the Court award Defendant its reasonable fees and costs, and that it be granted all such other and further relief, at law or in equity, as to which it may be justly entitled. Dated: July 12, 2021 BARRON & NEWBURGER, P.C. By /s/ Timothy P. Johnson TIMOTHY P. JOHNSON Attorneys for Defendants Velocity Investments, LLC and Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc. FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT -2- Case N0. 20CV373916 BARRON & NEWBURGER, P.C. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF 0F SERVICE BY MAIL C.C.P. §1013(a), C.R.C. 2003(3), 2005(1) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County 0f Orange, State 0f California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 1970 Old Tustin Avenue, Second Floor, Santa Ana, California 92705. On July 12, 2021, I served the foregoing document described as FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT BY VELOCITY PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC. on all interested parties in this action by: placing _ the original _ a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: X BY E-MAIL addressed as follows: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com; raeon.r0ulston@sjconsumerlaw.com; matthew.salmonsen@sjconsumerlaw.com _ BY MAIL: I am "readily familiar" With the film's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U. S. Postal Service 0n the same day With postage thereon fully prepaid at Santa Ana, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that 0n motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date 0r postage meter date is more than one day after date 0f deposit for mailing in affidavit. _ BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I enclosed said document(s) in an envelope 0r package provided by the overnight service carrier and addressed t0 the persons at the addresses listed in the Service List. I placed the envelope 0r package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or regularly utilized drop box of the overnight service carrier or delivered such document(s) to a courier or driver authorized by the overnight service carrier to receive documents. L STATE: I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State 0f California, that the foregoing is true and correct. FEDERAL: I declare that I am employed in the office of a member 0f the Bar 0f this Court, at Whose direction the service was made. EXECUTED on July 12, 2021, at Santa Ana, California. /s/ Timothy P. Johnson_ TIMOTHY P. JOHNSON FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT -3- Case N0. 20CV373916