|
Loco179 posted:I did a debt validation letter for a apartment debt. By licensed to collect, do you mean licensed to practice law? Because if you owe me a debt, I don't have to be "licensed" to attempt to collect it from you, nor does a collection agency I hire to collect the debt up until a lawsuit is filed. If you're talking about attorneys, that and the statute of limitations will come up if they sue you in court. In the meantime, the FDCPA doesn't require that information be given to you, unless there's a particular law in your state that requires it.
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2009 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
Wet Fifty posted:I recently got hit with a judgment in the amount of close to $1,300 for an unpaid credit card debt from 2003. Where can I find the SOL for the state of Utah to determine if they have not fallen out of time? Also, according to their letter, they are demanding damages of 560.05 plus interest of 758.43 at a rate of 25.9% annum. They also tacked on 250.00 in attourney's fees. When did they file the case? If that was after the statute ran, then it was too late. It's not based on the judgment date. So 2003 to 2009 is six years, depending on the exact dates within those years. It's based on your last payment I believe, so make sure you're looking at the correct dates. Also, at least where I am, attorney fees are added to the judgment by statute along with court costs and fees. Interest is governed by the terms of your agreement until there is a judgment, and then statutory interest kicks in on that. I assume this was a default judgment. What you probably need to do is file a motion to reopen the judgment and state why you missed the court date (e.g., you didn't know about it until you got the judgment, or whatever) and argue that the statute had run so you can't have judgment against you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2010 15:40
|
|
|
Grammar Fascist posted:CubsWoo, I have a debt from 2004 from Paypal and in December received a letter from a collection agency about it. I sent them a debt verification letter and just received a letter back (postmarked on day 28). What does this letter need to include to have fulfilled their statutory obligations? I had requested a lot of information in my letter (like proof that the statute of limitations had not expired, proof that they are licensed to collect debts in my state, etc.), but none of this is included. Their notice also says that my response is required within 10 days (I requested 30 days in my letter to them). What should my next steps be? I'm pretty sure they're not required to give you a lot of that information. Debt collectors don't have to give you whatever random things you demand to see. What's required is proof of the debt in the form of invoices or whatever, and the name of the original creditor, if any. Maybe the law in your state requires that, but I'm fairly certain the FDCPA does not.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2010 16:02
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:I just recorded a call from a debt collector who called my mother for like a 15 year old debt who threatened (among other things) to have her arrested and to sue her for everything she owns. I almost got her to threaten me, but she stopped short, only going so far as to say that "I'll be sorry". I can't wait to count up the number of violations in that one phone call LOL. It's money time. I hope you live in a state where it's legal to record a phone call without the other party's consent...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2010 15:36
|
|
|
Bookish posted:In Michigan you wouldn't file an answer to a small claims suit. You can file one if you really want to but it's really not necessary. Credit card debt and things like that are filed in civil court, where you would file an answer. If you are served with a civil complaint you have 21 days to file an answer and if you don't then the plaintiff can get a default judgment. It can even vary from county to county within a state. In some counties you don't file a written answer but just appear at a scheduled hearing. In others you have to file an answer. And inn others you can do one or the other. So as stated above, you really do need to call the courthouse to determine the correct procedure. Do the wrong thing, and a default judgment can be entered against you.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2010 19:36
|
|
|
BusinessWallet posted:
Have you moved since you last had any contact with Capital One? It's possible they tried to serve you at your last known address, and when they couldn't they served you by publication. That would allow default judgment to be entered. I'd contact the clerk's office and find out when and how this happened. There would be a record of attempts to serve you and when/where it was published. You can ask about filing a motion to reopen the matter and then contest it if you have a valid basis to contest it. Where I am, these motions are almost always granted and you can then negotiate with whoever has your debt at this point. The fact that there's a judgment currently entered gives them the ability to garnish your wages if they know where you work, and assuming you don't have some exemption to garnishment (such as being on food stamps or having an income below poverty level).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2010 20:24
|
|
|
Bookish posted:In my county in Michigan you can get a bench warrant issued against you for not showing up to a discovery hearing. This includes small claims cases too. If you get served paperwork with a hearing date on it, GO TO THE HEARING. This. I do some collection work. What often happens is we get a judgment against a person, and then go to do a supplementary examination to find out their financial situation for purposes of garnishing wages or bank accounts. They are ordered by the court to appear at this examination. If they do not (and they usually don't) appear, it can be contempt of court, which can result in a bench warrant being issued. So the arrest isn't because they owe a debt, it's because they failed to comply with a court order. LorneReams posted:So that is how they are getting around the law. It's not "getting around the law." It is the law. People can't just ignore court orders and think nothing is going to happen as a result. quepasa18 fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Jun 15, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2010 18:28
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:Oh cool, I have a court order from AT&T to pay me from small claims court ($350). How can I have Randall Stephenson arrested? What you probably have is a judgment against them after a default. That's not the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Typically, after the judgment, they'll have another court hearing where the judge will make you disclose your assets - where you work, where you bank, etc. Then the court can order those assets seized/garnished to satisfy the judgment. Where I am, in small claims court I can initiate garnishment proceedings the day I get the judgment. We often know where the person works before we even file the case, and we've verified that employment with the employer. Sometimes we have a bank account number from a prior payment, and then we can immediately garnish that account as well. I'm not sure if the same is true in non-small claims court though. Yes, you are notified in advance, and have a chance to respond with why you shouldn't be garnished. quepasa18 fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jun 15, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2010 21:53
|
|
|
quote is not edit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2010 21:54
|
|
|
Bookish posted:Ok I guess I didn't explain myself well. You are notified that you are being sued of course but after the judgment is entered you are not notified ahead of time if they are going to garnish you. Sorry about the confusion. But you are notified once the bank freezes the money in the account. The bank notifies the court how much money they have, and there's a court hearing before it's released to the creditor.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2010 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
Bookish posted:No, that's not true here. There's no court hearing unless the defendant objects to the garnishment. True, but the defendant is still notified of the garnishment and given the opportunity to object. That was the point I was trying to make. I just left out a step. Thanks for clarifying for me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2010 15:14
|
|