Marraige and Wage Garnishment

[TeacherMomma]

I have mostly all pre marital debt, so does my husband. None is joint, even the few things that were after we got married.

Can either of our wages be garnished for each other's debt? Like if AMEX gets a judgement against me and my wages are garnished, and I (for example) were to quit my job/lose my job, would they go after my husband even though he is not legally liable for the debt (didn't sign, use, not on the card, etc)

[NoMoreCards]

California is a community property state. This makes everything both you and your husband have/own, is shared by both. Unfortunately this also includes debts. So if you don't pay things in your name, your husbands pay can be garnished.

I ran into a issue with this years back, and was liable for bills under similar circumstances.

I wish you the best.

[albacore44]

I have mostly all pre marital debt, so does my husband. None is joint, even the few things that were after we got married.

Can either of our wages be garnished for each other's debt? Like if AMEX gets a judgement against me and my wages are garnished, and I (for example) were to quit my job/lose my job, would they go after my husband even though he is not legally liable for the debt (didn't sign, use, not on the card, etc)

Well since your in a community property state like me yes they can. not sure of the Logistics of how they do it, but they would have to sue and get a judgement.

interesting you should bring this up. My 22 year old son got married in August. His new wife has a judgement from an old Unlawful Detainer on an apartment she moved out of. Of the roommates in the apt. she was the only one they had employment on so they filed for garnishment, but by the time the sheriff tried to garnish, she was no longer working . so i told him DO NOT put her name on any of your accounts, she has been undercover for about 2 years, but the judgement remains. she also has a couple of old CC's that have long been charged off. So i told him prepare yourself to eventually file BK, because none of that is going away, you inherited it.

[TeacherMomma]

I undertand it at face value.....but truly, how could you garnish someone for something they did not sign for? I mean what if he had no idea when he married me (lets just say) and this was all a surprise to him?

[NoMoreCards]

I undertand it at face value.....but truly, how could you garnish someone for something they did not sign for? I mean what if he had no idea when he married me (lets just say) and this was all a surprise to him?

I believe that would be grounds for anallment (I know I spelled that wrong)
Something about marrying under false pretenses...is grounds.

[TeacherMomma]

I'm sure it is grounds for an annullment. But that is not what I am talking about, he knew before we married and won't divorce me, LOL - it just doesn't make sense to me that someone who did not legally sign for the loan and was not a factor, can be held responsible.

[NoMoreCards]

I agree with you 110%.

Like I said, I was burned by that one before. My (now ex) husband decided to quit work after we married and I ended up being liable (and garnished) for his debt. It burned my bacon! I was furious! But legally, I couldn't do a thing about it because we lived in CA.

The story gets better...after divorce, I moved to a non community property state. He then changed all his bills to my phone number and address. (to get even with me)

This was 4 years ago. Still, just today I got another phone call from Captila Recovery trying to track the deadbeat down.

[albacore44]

I agree with you 110%.

Like I said, I was burned by that one before. My (now ex) husband decided to quit work after we married and I ended up being liable (and garnished) for his debt. It burned my bacon! I was furious! But legally, I couldn't do a thing about it because we lived in CA.

The story gets better...after divorce, I moved to a non community property state. He then changed all his bills to my phone number and address. (to get even with me)

This was 4 years ago. Still, just today I got another phone call from Captila Recovery trying to track the deadbeat down.

Men can be so Rotten. dirty bastage

[NoMoreCards]

Lol!! People can be rotten, thankfully most of us are not.

Lovely Pic btw...Lol!! I have enjoyed watching your pic change through the months.

[jribe]

I'm sure it is grounds for an annullment. But that is not what I am talking about, he knew before we married and won't divorce me, LOL - it just doesn't make sense to me that someone who did not legally sign for the loan and was not a factor, can be held responsible.

i believe you had another thread recently about similar questions (husband not having to file)? If not, i apologize....

Basically - it doesn't matter. If you're in a community property state- your husband needs to file. They won't make the distinction that it was "pre" or "post" marriage. They'll go after him anyway.

[optimistic1]

Basically - it doesn't matter. If you're in a community property state- your husband needs to file. They won't make the distinction that it was "pre" or "post" marriage. They'll go after him anyway.

I disagree,

That is a presumption to which most people and collection agencies are wrong. Only 1 needs to file in a community property state to equally absolve both spouses. Yeah, local court rules apply, but for California and Arizona, I know the law is the law, one files, the other is absolved. There are certain circumstances for this, but if the debts were incurred while married in the comm. prop. state, then that's the way it is.

There is a sticky in the forum on this very topic discussion.

Here it is,

http://www.bkforum.com/showthread.php?t=24544

While the OP of the sticky is right about responsibility, the filing of a bk and discharge is another story all together.

[jribe]

wow. that's really interesting..

I had asked several attorney's here in CA- they all said we both had to file because the other would be liable..

I've been reading on what you're talking about and it makes sense.

I haven't filed yet- i might try that first.

I disagree,

That is a presumption to which most people and collection agencies are wrong. Only 1 needs to file in a community property state to equally absolve both spouses. Yeah, local court rules apply, but for California and Arizona, I know the law is the law, one files, the other is absolved. There are certain circumstances for this, but if the debts were incurred while married in the comm. prop. state, then that's the way it is.

There is a sticky in the forum on this very topic discussion.

Here it is,

http://www.bkforum.com/showthread.php?t=24544

While the OP of the sticky is right about responsibility, the filing of a bk and discharge is another story all together.

[optimistic1]

Read

http://www.moranlaw.net/alone.htm

[TeacherMomma]

i believe you had another thread recently about similar questions (husband not having to file)? If not, i apologize....

Basically - it doesn't matter. If you're in a community property state- your husband needs to file. They won't make the distinction that it was "pre" or "post" marriage. They'll go after him anyway.

File what? I am talking about wage garnishment, not BK.

[treehugger1]

You might find an answer here:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp/family/enforcement/collecting.htm#np