What the #($*#*????

[backtoschool]

hmmm, your right, I had no idea.. this article explains it all very well, what a screwed up mess. Time for a checking account in New Jersey...LOL

http://www.urbanjustice.org/pdf/pres...ws_11nov07.pdf

When I lived in nyc, and stopped paying my charge cards, my primary checking account was in California at a credit union. I couldn't get far enough away from that mess for my peace of mind, lol.

[OhioFiler]

In Ohio the account number is not necessary for garnishment either. I have a couple clowns who owe me money and I took a shotgun approach to garnishing them by having the court garnish each of the larger banks in our area.

[OhioFiler]

When I lived in nyc, and stopped paying my charge cards, my primary checking account was in California at a credit union. I couldn't get far enough away from that mess for my peace of mind, lol.

Did you forget Hawaii is a state as well?

[bktek]

Thanks much for the advice and links to information. I'll get down to the courthouse today and look up the info on the court proceeding. Again though, I was never issued a summons, either in person or by mail. I know they have my mailing address because they notified me of the civil lawsuit by mail. I've lived at the same address for almost 30 years, so I don't really think I'm that hard to find. I was talking to my bank about it because that's what the court clerk I spoke with advised. She said call the bank and tell them the funds were exempt. Then, of course, the bank says call the court. I'm in phone tag hell. LOL

Just to recap, there is no freeze on the account funds. They have been withdrawn. My balance is ZERO and there are no pending transactions on the account. The money, for now at least, is gone. All without any opportunity for me to state my case to the court.

frmdwn, it's been over 180 days since I paid on that account. You should look for options soon if you don't want CAP 1 muscling in on your money. I'm considering having a relative open an account somewhere and adding me as a signatory.

[catleg]

So by the way which state do you live in?

[bktek]

catleg, I'm in Tennessee.

UPDATE: Just received a call from my bank. They said they have established that the seized funds were from unemployment compensation and they have notified the court. They advised me to call the court on Monday to see if they had revised/updated the judgment. I may have to stop calling them nasty names now

Thanks all.

[lookingforward]

I would poop a monkey if I checked my balance and it was MINUS 6245.96.

Literally.

[backtoschool]

In Ohio the account number is not necessary for garnishment either. I have a couple clowns who owe me money and I took a shotgun approach to garnishing them by having the court garnish each of the larger banks in our area.

Good point Ohiofiler. Most creditors only check the larger banks. That's why it is safer to bank at a smaller local bank or a credit union. And if you bank at a small local bank in another state, you are even safer from these blanket garnishments.

[NoMoreCards]

I would poop a monkey if I checked my balance and it was MINUS 6245.96.

Literally.

ROFLMAO!!!

Nicely Put! I agree completely!

I'll have to remember that comment...Hehehehehe!

[backtoschool]

Also, I have two bank accounts, one at a local CU that I use most of the time and one at a local branch in the city I live in with US Bank. I figure this is my 'sacrifice' account....LOL I keep $25.00 in it and if it ever gets to that point this will be the account that is located since it meets all the regular search criteria. I also never keep money in the CU account either so really it wouldn't matter. But sometimes it is better to leave them something to find or at least think they found something. Once they find this they stop looking.

I totally agree. I had a "decoy" account with Bank of America, that had a $150 sitting in it. I opened it when I stopped paying on my charge cards. It was a savings account, so I didn't have to worry about monthly fees. I never used it for anything other than that first deposit. I figured that the Marshall would find that account, and put a lien for -25,000 on it or something, and I could just let it sit like that forever.

They never found it though, and then I moved to the midwest and filed for bankruptcy. I closed the account before I filed.

[backtoschool]

The one thing I am a bit confused over is the negative balance. So the amount owed to them was more than you had in the account, but I don't get how you can be negative. I mean if the bank 'paid' them off...wow great. Now the bank and try to get $6K from you...LOL

I am just lost as to why your not at a zero balance, the bank is not going to pay them any money only hand over what was in the account. This is why like in Oregon they only get one shot at hitting an account then they have to go back and file a motion to do it again. If you miss and hit a day when the account has no money or very little, that is all you get.

So, can anyone explain to me why he is overdrawn?

Well in NYC, they can put a lien on the account for double the amount of the judgement.

[treehugger1]

What kind of a freakin bank would assume a $6K loss by covering a judgment? DUH! "Yes, we will go ahead and give you a few dollars from the account and cover the remainder. No problem, the fact that our consumer did not pay his/her bills and has a judgment is meaningless to us." Poor banks... Perhaps they have a glitch or two in their financial software system.

[treehugger1]

Wait, a plan begins to evolve. If you don't pay your judgment, then you find a bank that will "cover" it for you. In the meantime, perhaps you have lost a bit of money. On the other hand, the judgment has been satisfied. The bank then has to sue you after several months at which point you find a different bank and have them "cover" the first bank's judgment. LMAO I'm as lost as BB.

[OhioFiler]

What kind of a freakin bank would assume a $6K loss by covering a judgment? DUH! "Yes, we will go ahead and give you a few dollars from the account and cover the remainder. No problem, the fact that our consumer did not pay his/her bills and has a judgment is meaningless to us." Poor banks... Perhaps they have a glitch or two in their financial software system.

I'd assume they applied the amount of the judgment immediately to the account to essentially freeze it so nothing else could happen to the balance. I doubt they actually issued a draft for the $6,000.

[treehugger1]

I was being sarcastic. However, a few years ago I had a checking account with a major bank. When I signed up, I made it clear that under no circumstances was I to be allowed to go under a $0 balance. I was already on checksys at the time and they were quite aware that I was the last person you probably wanted to allow overdrafts. I still have my contract with this bank, although the account has been closed for a long time. The "account conditions" clearly state the accunt is not eligible for overdrafts or negative balances. One day, I pull up to the ATM outside of the bank and use my atm card to withdraw $500. I received the $500 and a receipt showing a negative balance. I thought that to be weird, so I put the card back in and requested another $500.00 It gave me the money with the new negative balance. At about -$2000 the machine stopped giving me money and stated something to the effect that I had exceeded my daily withdrawal limit. I was tempted to go back on a Sunday and see if the goofy machine would give me another $2k but thought better of it. Monday rolled around and my account was hit for $49 each for the four ATM overdraft charges. I went into the bank with contract in hand including their advertised statement of no overdraft fees, no negative balance allowed, etc bullshit second chance checking account option.

The bank manager stated something to the effect that the ATM withdrawals were handled differently. I called him on it. I said I would bring the account current but would not pay the overdraft. He made some phone call to another top secret bank rep above him (He called someone with more authority) and they said, "No the overdraft charges stand." I asked him to close the account and he said they could not. He asked me to bring the account current in 30 days.

End of story - I refused to pay back a dime. At 180 days, they automatically closed my account after billing it for 45 days of $8 per day overdraft fee, or some bizarre fees. The approximte $1850 ballooned to $2500+ and was sent to inhouse collections. I sent them a copy of the original agreement and never heard a peep back from them. Am I proud of this? No. But, knowing myself and how much trouble I can get into with access to money, and then making this clear to the account specialist, I could give a sh*t about whether or not they ever get a dime. Can I afford to pay this back? Absolutely. But, they would have to sue, which means small claims court here, and they know they have no leg to stand on.

The sad part is that these banks get away with this and, in my opinion, definitely prey on less-educated individuals.

There was a post on this forum one time related to the overdraft limits and how many banks probably never pursue folks who over-draft. There are enough customers out there paying the $39 - $50 overdraft fees, day charges, etc, to make it worth the risk to let a few walk away.

How is this related to this post? I think the particular bank I was engaged with would have paid the judgment and done so by overdrafting the account. And the saddest part is that I am of the opinion that I could go downtown tomorrow and open up another "second-chance" checking account! I wouldn't be so sure a bank would not cover a funds levy with "overdrafts."