Bank Attachments...

[oldbaddebts]

A Credit Card company attached my bank accounts that are used to pay business expenses such as insurance, bookkeeping, etc.. After looking into the laws in Nevada, where I am, it appears that an attachment is only good for for what is in the account at the time of execution. The accounts are now empty, and the bank says that the attachment is still in place until the judgement is satisfied for 3k. The attorney for the credit card offered a settlement of 1900, and I tried to buy 30 days to get a game plan together by demanding that in writing including that he would release the attachment, and he refuses to release it. He says that he would suggest I don't use the account until I pay him.

Now, with the bank and the credit card attorney saying that I shouldn't use the account until he is paid, what am I missing? The law says clearly that the writ of execution is only good for funds currently in the account at the time of execution, and another writ of execution must be executed for each attempt. Odd thing is with an "attachment" I can deposit my business revenue including funds to pay business bills and personal as well as eat and live, and they can take every dime. With a "garnishment" if I were employed, they have to leave enough to cover bare essentials.

Any clarification appreciated.

Nick

[lrprn]

OBD, in your other post you noted that you were a cross-country truck driver without a home address and you haven't filed bankruptcy yet. Was the cc company who attached your bank account located in Nevada? Which state is your bank account in? When did the cc company get the attachment agreement in court?

As far as your contention that a garnishment is 'more fair' than an attachment, the creditor doesn't care - they just want the money you owe them and will do what they can legally to get it as soon as possible. If it messes up your bookkeeping and adds difficulty to your work life, they could care less. Are you hoping that filing bankruptcy will wipe out the account attachment? That will take many months. What are your plans to cover your financial obligations for your trucking in the meantime?

[oldbaddebts]

As far as meeting business obligations, it is little more than a nusence (sp) to not use the bank account. My revenue is given to me in a "Pass thru account" that I have no ownership of, in fact the place I am contracted to can block access to it perfectly legally without warning or cause. I.e, I don't answer phone, they block card, they know I'll call when I can't fuel or get my money. And anyone familiar with trucking, including all places that I have expenses with, take what is essentially a certified check from the account.

The cc company used a NV attorney to sue me in the county where I used to reside, and am working on reestablishing residency. The Bank account is a NV account. The judgement was filed in June 06. Writ of attachment obtained April 25 07.

My reference to garnishments was just to point out an apparent irony in NV law. They can only take a portion of your paycheck from your employer, but if you put your pay in the bank they can take it all. Of course the creditor will use the most efficient method.

My preferred plan is to be able to get this creditor to agree to settle within 30 days in writing with them releasing the attachment, resolving them and continue to pay off debts. They agree to settlement and to put in writing but refuse to release attachment. I can't open a bank account elsewhere due to residency issues and credit, and frankly my bank (BofA) has done nothing wrong, and have by far the best customer service of any financial or non financial business I have dealt with so I don't want to pursue changing banks.

I don't see this creditor backing down on the attachment, so I intend on building funds in the pass through account to pay attorney to file and start the process.

Hope this background info can help someone answer the question of how the attachment works, and is it theoretically safe to use the account unless they file and act upon a new writ of execution?

Thanks,

Nick