smallest amount they will sue for

[lrprn]

Hansky, I'm curious....are you a bankruptcy lawyer? If not a bankruptcy lawyer, a lawyer in another area of legal specialty practice?

Legal interpretation of the 2005 BAPBCA statutes is still a work in progress, and there is variance in legal opinions and case law regarding what the new law really means in several areas (which if you are as knowledgeable about bankruptcy as you would like us to believe, you know already).

It clearly states in our forum rules and in our moderator signatures that we don't offer legal advice on this board. The most frequently seen sentence on this board in moderator posts is "be sure to ask a/your bankruptcy lawyer" for a reason.

We welcome differences of opinion on this board. As I said to you before, it adds to the richness of what our members learn about bankruptcy in general. You seem to have a lot to offer here - hopefully you can find a way to agree to disagree when others don't automatically agree with your opinion. Of course, if you are a bankruptcy lawyer in current practice, then that would lend more weight to your insistence that only your opinion is the right one no matter what area of bankruptcy law and legal interpretation is involved. So...are you a bankruptcy lawyer? Or another specialty lawyer?

[HHM]

I think you missed my point, I wasn't arguing that SOL was an affirmative defense. My argument is, that the SOL limitation on the commencement of an action is specifically forbidden by statute. If you look at the Nevada wording of the Statute, it puts the burden on the putative plaintiff, "Civil actions can only be commenced within the periods prescribed" that is not the wording of an affirmative defense, instead, it specifically forbids the bringing of the action in the first place, and only potential plaintiffs can "bring" actions. The statute says nothing about it being raised, etc, it simply says you cannot commence an action outside the SOL. What you are missing is the fact that most affirmative defenses are either common law or specifically mentioned as such. Your argument is equivalent to saying that if you don't caught driving under the influence, then you haven't violated the law even if you are intoxicated.

Again, this may be a difference in state law.

And despite the request for validation of your point (at least I have quoted specific statutory language), you have not provided any evidence of your contention.

[GoingDown]

Paying on a charge off will not necessarily lower your scores - and if it does, only by a few points. With all those debts in deliquent/Collection status that will be the least of your worries.

I have a sister that chose this route about 9 years ago and she is still being harrassed by junk debt collectors.

You are correct, PA does not allow wage garnishment - however, they do allow siezing of funds in your bank account for judgement AND/OR a sheriff can come to your home to inventory your personal belongings for sale at auction to settle your debts.

As HHM pointed out, just because the SOL runs out, the creditor can't sue, but it doesn't cancel the debt. And thinking these items are will fall off your credit report on a certain date is faulty - each time a new junk debt buyer gets your account, they will report it on your credit report and re-age it. (is it legal to re-age a debt - no - does it happen - yes!).

Each debt collection will add their own collection fees and as someone else pointed out - the debts will be adding interest at 30% - they could be double or even triple the amounts that are currently owned.

You could be running from this the rest of your life.

IMHO, if you file for BK - or go to a reputable credit couseling service, like CCCS, believe it or not - your credit report will improve faster and you will recover from this sooner than if you just let it ride!

Of course, this is not legal advice - only a qualified attorney can give you legal advice based on your situation.

I have read about this possibility of sheriffs coming to a person's home and taking an inventory of their personal belongings to put them up for sale at a sheriff's auction, but I have never actually heard of it happening to anyone.

Can someone help me out with this one. Does this ever really happen? And if you can find a web-link to some instance of it actually happening to someone, could you post the link or send me a pm with it?

As far as I can tell, sheriffs only seize big items of great value, such as houses and cars. They don't seem to be interested in going through someone's sock drawer or underwear drawer looking for things that wouldn't bring much at a yard sale, let alone a sheriff's auction. And it may vary from state to state, but in Arizona it is well known that a sheriff cannot force their way into a person's home over a civil matter. The person would have to voluntarily open the door and invite the sheriff to come inside to have a look around. The sheriff would have to be in possession of a search warrant signed by a judge before he could force his way inside a person's home, and those are only handed down by a judge for criminal matters. And don't be fooled by debt collectors who will try to scare you into paying by claiming that being in debt makes you a criminal-- it is just a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

Scroll down to the third page of this document from an Arizona court, and read about what sheriffs are not allowed to do:

http://www.co.yavapai.az.us/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=19206

[BK'd-Betty]

I didn't even know about it until I read it right here on this board. I was looking through the archives and found a thread from last summer about someone who did have the Sheriff show up at thier house to inventory thier items. They were in PA.

I don't think it ever went to auction as I believe the OP worked something out with the creditors.

All of what you say is probably true and factual - but I can't see why someone would want to live with that hanging over their head when they can just deal with it head on - but that's just me - I want to deal with things and move on!

[no_it_all]

Back to the orginal post: Forget about the whole <judgment proof> defense...it is a myth. You may be without a dime now, but who knows three, four or ten years from now? A succesful judgment NOW can be a noose around your neck for many years. Your strategy should be to fight any claims BEFORE they become judgments.

As correctly pointed out, do not confuse the SOL on revolving debt as automatically preventing you from being sued. You can still be sued and it is your responsiblity to answer the summons. Otherwise a default judgment can be entered for the Plaintiff.

In addition, if you are only concerned with improved FICO scores, you would be better served by a Chapter 7 now, than by waiting seven years or so for the derogs to drop....good luck

[SinkingFast]

Back to the orginal post: Forget about the whole <judgment proof> defense...it is a myth. You may be without a dime now, but who knows three, four or ten years from now? A succesful judgment NOW can be a noose around your neck for many years. Your strategy should be to fight any claims BEFORE they become judgments.

Very good point, NIA!!

You have to look toward the future, Madmac. While you may be Judgement proof today, that may not always be the case.

Why force yourself to be a slave of poverty forever when you can file and rectify the situation.

[madmac13]

Thanks for the advice. My credit card debt is only around 7000. I realy don't have much left over to make payments to these debts. My cars transmission is shot and will need a car, so since I don't have any money to buy a car outright I will have to make get a loan. I asked for advice one time before on this board about bankruptcy and it was suggusted 7000 isn't worth it for bankruptcy. i only make 17000 a year and someone suggested i get a full time job, but I do have a full time job. I know a lot of people who make this type of wages or only a little more. It is tough out there to make it. if i did file i would consider filing pro se. i don't have the money for a lawyer.

[SinkingFast]

About the only two you probably won't be sued for are the Walmart and J.C. Penny (at least not within the next two years). What you have to keep mind, however, is the accumulating interest. What is a $974 dollar debt today at 30% (a typically default rate for credit cards) will be $1,560, if not more, in 2 years. A good rule of thumb is any thing over $1,500 you will probably be sued over at some point.

As a general matter, trying to wait out the statute of limitation to deal with debt is typically a stupid move. It really only prolongs the inevitable. Even if you can make it past the statute of limitations, doesn't mean you are done with collection activity, the inability to sue for the debt does not necessarily cancel the debt.

This point that HHM made earlier on is very valid.

You think you have about $7K debt right now. And granted, your pay level isn't such to support more than a meager existence, let alone pay payments to anyone.

But every month that goes by, the $7K grows in size. Each month your Creditors are adding lates, penalties, potentially other fees, AND interest to your current debt load. $7K could grow to $10K in a matter of months.

About the posts you got before,............ Take 'em with a grain of salt. Debt loads are relative. What might not be much to you may be a huge amount to someone else.

Your debt load is significant in relation to your total earnings. If you were working part-time while attending college where you'd possibly land a much higher paying job in a couple of years, I'd maybe be inclined to consider looking for another way.

[lrprn]

asked for advice one time before on this board about bankruptcy and it was suggusted 7000 isn't worth it for bankruptcy. i only make 17000 a year and someone suggested i get a full time job, but I do have a full time job. I know a lot of people who make this type of wages or only a little more. It is tough out there to make it. if i did file i would consider filing pro se. i don't have the money for a lawyer.

Each bankrupcy case is different, so don't let anyone tell you that some amount isn't enough to file on. You know your situation best. Since your debt is 41% of your annual income, for what it's worth, that's enough to file on in my opinion.

Whether filing pro se or not is a good idea for you depends on how straightforward your case is. At $17,000/year you are obviously below the median income for whatever state you will be filing in. What assets do you want to keep? Are you current on the loans for each of the assets you want to keep? Do you have assets that are vulnerable to the trustee (for example, home equity above your state's exemption level)? Have you taken out any cash advances from your credit cards or payday loans in the last 70-90 days? Have you stopped using your credit cards? Etc, etc.

Although you don't have money for a lawyer right now, you can still make appointments with 3-4 bankruptcy lawyers in your area that give free initial consultations - most do. You will learn a great deal about whether filing is in your best interests and what potential problem areas might be. Then after that if you are committed to filing, stop paying your credit cards and use that money to pay for a lawyer instead. You will typically have 4-6 months of missed payments before the credit card companies begin to move you to collections. Ask the lawyers you speak with about this.

Also make an appointment to speak with a credit counselor at a US Dept of Justice-approved credit counseling agency - the list is at http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/bapcpa/ccde/cc_approved.htm . The intial consultation with a counselor is free as well . This way you'll have both viewpoints and can make the best decision for yourself.

Hang in there, madmac. Deciding whether to file or not is one of the most stressful times along the bankruptcy timeline. Making the decision after speaking with several knowledgeable bk lawyers and a credit counselor typically guarantees the best outcome, even if you end up filing pro se.

[pink_amulet]

as for amount....we got sued over $180....yes a freaking $180......we knew we filing, but got a court summons, about 6 days before filing , so we said heck with it since we are filing anyways, why pay it.
So with that said....no amount is too little to be sued over.

Good luck

[ChainSmokin]

$85,000.00. I feel fortunate I got the wakeup call before it went over 100k.

[Spartan]

I owed about the same. But the collection agencies just compounded the crap out of the balance, for 4-5 years. When my attorney added everything up, the total has ballooned to over $180k. wow! I guess the agencies will just have to write those off now.

[no_it_all]

Since your debt is 41% of your annual income, for what it's worth, that's enough to file on in my opinion.

Yikes! Looks like everyone with a mortgage should file then??

[lrprn]

Yikes! Looks like everyone with a mortgage should file then??

If someone is as foolish as we were to sign on for a mortgage payment + other house-secured loan payments that equal more than 30-40% of our gross income, then the chances are the answer to your question will eventually be yes, no it all.

Budget experts recommend that no more than 30-40% of your income be devoted to a mortgage payment. Any higher than that you are placing yourself (and if applicable, your family as well) at unacceptable financial risk.

See http://www.lendingtree.com/smartborr...-of-thumb.aspx for good rules of thumb for what % of income your typical expenses should be to maintain good financial health.

[no_it_all]

If someone is as foolish as we were to sign on for a mortgage payment + other house-secured loan payments that equal more than 30-40% of our gross income, then the chances are the answer to your question will eventually be yes, no it all.

Sorry but in your original post you make no mention of payments. Obviously if payments are forty percent of income there can be potential problems with debt servicing. However, to claim that if someone's debt is 41 percent of their annual income is enough to file bankruptcy is simply mis-information, especially without considering their monthly debt service.