Considering filing for BK but no papertrail...

[socal1105]

Those a good articles, but here is one from her website that will help too:

http://www.moranlaw.net/car-ownership.htm

very nice article... but it's based on assuming you currently have ownership of the car and you're just taking out a loan against it. However, in my case, I'd be purchasing this car from my mother and taking on a new loan. So how would I go about explaining the monetary transaction? Would I say that mother gave me $5,000 in cash as a lender and in turn, I gave it back to her for the purchase as a seller? (my brain hurts...)

Or, I can borrow the cash from my boyfriend, and pay my mother with it and in turn, my boyfriend can record a lien on title as the secured holder and I'll be paying him $400 per month. Your thoughts?

[2manybills]

It is your vehicle to get to your job. I would think that is enough for the trustee. It's not like you are going out and purchasing a $80K car to get you to work.

[keepmine]

very nice article... but it's based on assuming you currently have ownership of the car and you're just taking out a loan against it. However, in my case, I'd be purchasing this car from my mother and taking on a new loan. So how would I go about explaining the monetary transaction? Would I say that mother gave me $5,000 in cash as a lender and in turn, I gave it back to her for the purchase as a seller? (my brain hurts...)

Or, I can borrow the cash from my boyfriend, and pay my mother with it and in turn, my boyfriend can record a lien on title as the secured holder and I'll be paying him $400 per month. Your thoughts?

You're way overthinking this. Your mother has a car for sale. You buy the car with zero down and a contract that specifies monthly payments. Your mothers files the lein in a timely manner. I'd let a lawyer draw up the contract to be certain it meets all the elements of a contract in your state.

[pcn]

We looked into the same type idea. Our lawyer warned us it was very risky, and that if the court determined that we were trying to avoid having the trustee take the asset, we could be barred from any bankruptcy protection at all. Hopefully an expert can chime in and add some clarification to my attempted explanation.

[socal1105]

We looked into the same type idea. Our lawyer warned us it was very risky, and that if the court determined that we were trying to avoid having the trustee take the asset, we could be barred from any bankruptcy protection at all. Hopefully an expert can chime in and add some clarification to my attempted explanation.

hmm... but I think in my case, I'm not trying to hide assets. I am, however, trying to get my expenses up... so I guess even that has a risk in it's own. I wonder how the trustee will view that.

[socal1105]

that makes much more sense.... thanks PCN

[2manybills]

Like keepmine said, you are way overthinking this. You do in fact owe your mom the money for the car, you are just recording the lien. It's not like you're hiding an asset.

Your best bet is to consult with an attorney in your district that will give you the appropriate advice.

[music12]

Thanks everyone for your replies... yes, I am in Orange County, CA. I did try fighting the sewer service in court, but unfortunately, the burden of proof is on me and I couldn't prove I didn't get served. Even with a completely different signature and even different name on the papers, that wasn't enough to quash it. And the best part is that I paid an Attorney over $2k to basically stand there and say, "sorry your honor, we have no proof".

It's horrible to think that just about anybody can sue anybody for anything and use this sewer service technique and get a default judgment awarded. And all this for something I am absolutely not responsible for (thanks to my good old brother again). So as you can see, the last thing I want to do is give this guy a single penny for an erroneous judgment he got awarded from lying. I don't know how to describe this feeling of having someone steal money from you from right under your nose using a loophole in our judicial system.

TELL ME ABOUT IT!!! and they say we have due process in this country. well, the "due process" is on the books, in the constitution, but just not in real life.

did this lawyer that you paid so much suggest an appeal? sometimes these kinds of things get overturned on appeal because they are so fundamental to due process. if the person who "served" you was not an official constable or process server, then their word is not supposed to have more weight than your word. you could file the appeal yourself, by the way. you sound smart enough to look up some case law, and write up an appeal.

also, are you saying that the first time you even heard about this was a year later when they took money from your account?? and still they said it was too "late" for you to do something about it??

[2manybills]

The problem with fighting the process server in court is that in California, after 30 days has passed and a responsive pleading is not filed with the court, a request for entry of default and default judgment are filed with the court. That too is served (by mail) on the defaulting party. After that, when the judgment is entered that is mailed to the defaulting party too. So the system is set up so that not just the service of the original summons and complaint is at issue but all of the other documents too.

And once 6 months has passed when a judgment is entered it is almost impossible to get it overturned.

[socal1105]

The problem with fighting the process server in court is that in California, after 30 days has passed and a responsive pleading is not filed with the court, a request for entry of default and default judgment are filed with the court. That too is served (by mail) on the defaulting party. After that, when the judgment is entered that is mailed to the defaulting party too. So the system is set up so that not just the service of the original summons and complaint is at issue but all of the other documents too.

And once 6 months has passed when a judgment is entered it is almost impossible to get it overturned.

you hit it right on the nail. Not only did they claim they served me, but they also claimed they mailed all these documents to me as well. And he intentionally waited almost exactly a year to levy my bank account. It's that simple... all you need to do to win a default judgment and get it to stick here in CA is a lack of conscious and a lot of time...... how very sad.

[music12]

but how did they claim they mailed the documents to you? did they have the correct address? did they say a process server mailed it for them? or was it the court that was supposed to mail it? or did they just take the plaintiff's lawyer's word for it that he mailed it?

[2manybills]

The process server only serves the original summons and complaint. From there, the request for entry of default come from the attorney's office. Also, the Clerk of te Court also mails notice of entry of judgment in some districts and in others, the attorney mails that too.

[socal1105]

It seemed they had a 3rd party, private person, supposedly mail them out. That's the thing with CA, is that a Process Server is not required. Just about anybody can serve you... either in person or via mail (and not even certified mail at that). I'm not sure how much his Attorney was "involved" in this, but I can't believe somebody could know the intricate details and loopholes of our system on their own. But he pulled every trick out of the book and documented all the phony services. Even waited a year to levy. I know if I was awarded a judgment, I would be making every attempt at collecting ASAP and not wait around for a year.

[2manybills]

I can tell you from working in the legal community for over 30 years in
California that service of any documents other than the original summons and complaint and a subpoena would be served by mail by the attorney's office. I've never seen a law firm use an outside 3rd party mailing service to mail something.

[music12]

2manybills, is it also your experience that the courts always take the lawyer's word for it that things were mailed? if a person comes and says they didn't receive anything, are they presumed to be lying?