Sued over a Citibank account? First check who the plaintiff is.

The Michigan complaints Brian shows attach none. They say an agreement was delivered to you and that, to the best of Citibank’s knowledge, you have it. The South Carolina complaints in his files attach the last account statement and no agreement. In one Washington case, Citibank produced an unsigned agreement in discovery. Brian’s view is that a form agreement is not yours. He says to ask for the version that applied to you. Depending on your state, the court rules may require the complaint to attach the agreement.

The Michigan complaints Brian shows say you failed to object to the accuracy of the billings sent to you. Brian reads that paragraph as aimed at the Fair Credit Billing Act. Under that law, you dispute a billing error in writing within 60 days of the first statement that showed it. The card issuer must acknowledge it within 30 days and resolve it within two billing cycles. Brian’s notes say those duties bind the card issuer, which is Citibank and not a later debt buyer. A dispute letter you sent at the time is a dated record that you objected.

It is paragraph 8 of the Michigan complaint. It makes an account stated claim. Brian’s notes give the Michigan rule: an account becomes stated when you agree to the sum, or when you do not object within a reasonable time. In his reading, a plaintiff uses the claim to avoid proving the terms of the written agreement. His answer is a counter affidavit that disputes the balance. The rule for an account stated depends on your state.

The Michigan and South Carolina complaints in Brian’s files carry a notice saying they come from a debt collector. In the one Washington complaint in Brian’s files, the notice names the plaintiff’s attorneys as the debt collectors. A bank that collects its own debt is generally outside the FDCPA. The FDCPA’s notice rule does not apply to a formal pleading. Brian still uses the notice. His notes say the law firm keeps it there to protect itself. He answers it with a validation letter to Citibank.

Citigroup’s annual report for 2015 said Citigroup moved card receivables into two trusts and kept servicing them. The same report said the trusts were consolidated, so the receivables stayed on Citigroup’s balance sheet. Brian argues that a trust can hold your balance. He asks Citibank to show an assignment of your account to the trust and back. In one Washington case, Citibank answered every securitization question by calling itself the original and current creditor. Brian’s reply in a forum thread says most of the court cases on this argument are negative.

Partly. Court records name Citibank as the original creditor in Cavalry and Velocity cases. Citibank bills of sale in Brian’s files show sales to other buyers. The buyer has to prove the sale included your account. This site has pages on seven debt buyers, Cavalry and Velocity among them. The hub lists all seven.