Judgement Sold

[howdidithappen]

Got a letter from a law firm Pressler that they had bought a judgment from Chase. A form was enclosed where they wanted my bank name and accounbt number, place of employment, list of assets, etc. Are judgments sold?

[frogger]

Yes, judgments are sold. It happens every day.

As to that form that was enclosed wanting all of your info, don't fill it out unless it comes attached to an order from the court.

[jlmaca]

Got a letter from a law firm Pressler that they had bought a judgment from Chase. A form was enclosed where they wanted my bank name and accounbt number, place of employment, list of assets, etc. Are judgments sold?

Judgements are sold like credit card or consumer debt. I think about 5 different collection agencies bought my sears account over the years. Each agency has a policy as to how it handles the debt and when they don't collect over a certain period of time they just sell it to someone else who starts the whole process over again. Judgements are nasty because the holder can garnish wages and attach your bank account WITHOUT letting you know first. So one day you check your balance and oops it's at zero.

[BrokeIn2010]

Yes, judgments are sold. It happens every day.

As to that form that was enclosed wanting all of your info, don't fill it out unless it comes attached to an order from the court.

How does that work though? I would have thought if you're under a judgment that you'd be obligated to hand over that info, or is that only to the original creditor?

[GoingDown]

How does that work though? I would have thought if you're under a judgment that you'd be obligated to hand over that info, or is that only to the original creditor?

It is this widespread ignorance that keeps debt collectors in business.

Most debtors make it an easy job for debt collectors.

Unless the new owner of the judgment goes back to court and pays the fee for a debtor's exam (or something similar to that), you DO NOT have to answer any of their questions.

If it comes directly from the court and is delivered by a process server or sheriff's constable (required by Arizona Law), then you have to answer it.

Otherwise, NO !

Remember, they want information from you so they can take your money, wages and assets to pay the judgment. Don't make it easy for them.

And hopefully by now you have emptied your checking account(s) before they find them.

[WhatMoney]

How does that work though? I would have thought if you're under a judgment that you'd be obligated to hand over that info, or is that only to the original creditor?

It depends on the state laws (statutes) for post-judgment interrogatories.

In my state the judgment holder (attorney) issues the written interrogatory and there is no court involvement or court fees. However the judgment case# and court district should be on the form, showing they are the present owners of the judgment. If you don't answer the written questions they mailed you, they can ask for contempt of court against you.

Normally, if you don't answer they may file a motion to compel you to answer with the court, and if you ignored that they would get a contempt of court warrant. But there is no law that prevents them from asking for a contempt charge without giving you a second chance to answer, in which case you would have to answer the contempt charge in court. You could end up in jail for not answering the contempt of court charge, if you were picked up on a traffic stop for example. Here's the relevant statutes:

Again different procedures may apply in different states.

[GoingDown]

It depends on the state laws (statutes) for post-judgment interrogatories.

In my state the judgment holder (attorney) issues the written interrogatory and there is no court involvement or court fees. However the judgment case# and court district should be on the form, showing they are the present owners of the judgment. If you don't answer the written questions they mailed you, they can ask for contempt of court against you.

Normally, if you don't answer they may file a motion to compel you to answer with the court, and if you ignored that they would get a contempt of court warrant. But there is no law that prevents them from asking for a contempt charge without giving you a second chance to answer, in which case you would have to answer the contempt charge in court. You could end up in jail for not answering the contempt of court charge, if you were picked up on a traffic stop for example. Here's the relevant statutes:



Again different procedures may apply in different states.

If this was true the prisons would be full of debtors who ignored such things.

It is another scare tactic of the debt collection world to make you believe that by not bowing down and voluntarily paying the debt, they can put you in jail.

It is simply not true.

I have a judgment against me. I have never paid even one penny of it so far and it is over 5 years old. I have never been put in jail. And I have absolutely no fear of it.

Unless they call for something like a debtor's exam in court -- WHICH IS EXTREMELY RARE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -- then ignore it.

[WhatMoney]

GD,
No scare tactics here. I just answered what could happen, if you ignore a court sanctioned written interrogatory. I didn't say it was likely - that all depends on how much time and effort the judgment creditor wants to spend if you ignore their post-judgment legal requests for your financial information.

I was not talking about court ordered debtor's exam, although that might be what the judgment creditor would try next instead of going for contempt of court. These are not common, but they do happen. It costs all of $10 to schedule a debtors exam in my county. But a mailed written interrogatory is still cheaper and will get the same results.

Do you really think that if you ignore an interrogatory request that the judgment holder will just give up and go away? Have you ignored any interrogatory requests? In many states the written interrogatory is standard procedure once the creditor has the judgment, if they cannot find your assets any other way.

No one is arrested for an outstanding civil court warrant unless you get caught in some other infraction and a records search is done. And you are more likely to be processed and released if you are arrested than thrown in jail - most jails are already full of real criminals. There are millions of people running around out there with arrest warrants for contempt of court. Just never get pulled over and it won't be an issue.

[GoingDown]

GD,
No scare tactics here. I just answered what could happen, if you ignore a court sanctioned written interrogatory. I didn't say it was likely - that all depends on how much time and effort the judgment creditor wants to spend if you ignore their post-judgment legal requests for your financial information.

I was not talking about court ordered debtor's exam, although that might be what the judgment creditor would try next instead of going for contempt of court. These are not common, but they do happen. It costs all of $10 to schedule a debtors exam in my county. But a mailed written interrogatory is still cheaper and will get the same results.

Do you really think that if you ignore an interrogatory request that the judgment holder will just give up and go away? Have you ignored any interrogatory requests? In many states the written interrogatory is standard procedure once the creditor has the judgment, if they cannot find your assets any other way.

No one is arrested for an outstanding civil court warrant unless you get caught in some other infraction and a records search is done. And you are more likely to be processed and released if you are arrested than thrown in jail - most jails are already full of real criminals. There are millions of people running around out there with arrest warrants for contempt of court. Just never get pulled over and it won't be an issue.

The court fees for a debtor's exam are not what keeps most creditors and debt collectors from using debtor's exams. What costs them the most is attorney fees. Imagine how much an attorney charges per hour, and then to hire them to go down to court to ask some debtor a bunch of questions can get quite pricey. This is why it very rarely ever happens.

But these rumors fly around and scare most debtors into thinking that if they don't pay their debts, then they will go to jail. It is simply not true.

If something comes from a court and is delivered by a process server or sheriff, then you had better respond to it. If it is delivered in any other manner, you can ignore it.

MOST of the time they simply send it by regular mail (which they cannot prove to a court that you actually received) and it is simply a debt collector or collection attorney trying to scare you into voluntarily giving them the information they need to garnish or do something like that. The easier you make it for them, the more they will come after you. If they know you can be scared easily then they will keep coming after you until they get paid in full. If you make it hard for them, they will give up on you and move on to easier debtors.


I can tell you from my own experience that I have an old judgment from a credit card that has never been paid, and they did send me a letter in the mail (by regular mail) asking for asset, employment, checking account information, etc. I did not respond to that letter. It has been more than 5 years since they sent that letter to me. I have not been arrested. I was pulled over for speeding on Route 66 and the officer checked my Driver's License at that time and nothing came up on his little dashboard computer, or else he would have said something right then. He gave me a ticket for speeding and I was free to go on my merry way.

My point is this... just because a debt collector tells you that you have to give them information, doesn't make it true. Unless it comes from a court (which will be delivered by a process server or sheriff's constable in ARIZONA), you are very foolish to give them this information.

Remember debt collectors have been known to lie and to impersonate the police and even court officials to get what they want from you.

I think it all boils down to the delivery method. If it's from a court, then it is not going to arrive in the mail with a 44 cent stamp or meter on it. If it is not from a court, then ignore it.

[OHBOY]

My question is: IF one ends up filing for BK following one or more judgments and the judgements were sold, should everybody along the line be listed on the bk lists ?

[WhatMoney]

If something comes from a court and is delivered by a process server or sheriff, then you had better respond to it. If it is delivered in any other manner, you can ignore it.

My point is this... just because a debt collector tells you that you have to give them information, doesn't make it true. Unless it comes from a court (which will be delivered by a process server or sheriff's constable in ARIZONA), you are very foolish to give them this information.

I think it all boils down to the delivery method. If it's from a court, then it is not going to arrive in the mail with a 44 cent stamp or meter on it. If it is not from a court, then ignore it.

Again, that may be your experience in Arizona. As I quoted, in OR and other states, a written interrogatory should be sent with a return receipt, as stated in the statutes above. And it is NOT sent by the court, but by the holder of the judgment. There are standard forms and language an attorney must use once they have the judgment. Your advice makes no sense when the only way a written interrogatory can be sent according to State laws is the one you claim should be ignored.

We are talking only about post-judgment written interrogatories here. All your concern about scaring debtors into going to jail over a debt has nothing to do with this situation. A judgment debtor has many legal powers over the debtor, including subpoena powers. The simple fact is this: if a judgment holder has the legal right to request a written interrogatory, and follows the state statutes in issuing the summons, and if you ignore it, the next step MAY be a contempt of court order which can lead to an arrest warrant. That may not be the case in AZ, I haven't read your laws, but it is the case in many other states.

It is simply bad advice to tell everyone to ignore a court sanctioned legally processed interrogatory request. You must check the state statutes for your state to determine what is allowed by the judgment holder. Florida has similar laws as Oregon, as does New York. A blanket statement to ignore the laws of your state is a poor idea in a public national forum.

[catleg]

Since you mention Pressler are you in NJ or somewhere close by, like NY or Penna? State law, meaning rules of civil procedure, applies here.

If it's NJ they will send out an "information subpoena" followed by "Motion to Enforce Litigant's Rights" followed by an attempt to get the court to issue an "Order for Arrest".

You're better off sending it back with useless information rather than not sending it back.

[treehugger1]

These issues related to enforcing judgments are important to understand. WhatMoney's comments related to Oregon are Dead-On. In fact, "return receipt" in many of the statutes does not seem to imply "signed-receipt."

It is my understanding that substituted service by mail for a summons doesn't even require a green card. The only requirement is a return receipt which can be accomplished with a simple certified mailing.

Now, the plaintiff does run the risk of you claiming you never received the information, and this is probably a justifiable position if one is asked to show cause as to the defendant's failure to reply. I was recently served by certified return-receipt (I didn't sign) and when I inquired with my local district court, they said the law does not require a signed receipt from the non-moving party. I reviewed the ORCP and could not get clarity related to whether or not a signed receipt is required.

The rules of civil procedure are as follows. However, there seems to be an inconsistency between D(2)(d)(i) and D(3)(a)(i). Whatmoney, what is your take on this? Thanks.

D(2)(d) Service by mail.

D(2)(d)(i) Generally. When required or allowed by this rule or by statute, except as otherwise permitted, service by mail shall be made by mailing true copies of the summons and the complaint to the defendant by first class mail and by any of the following: certified, registered, or express mail with return receipt requested. For purposes of this section, “first class mail” does not include certified, registered, or express mail, return receipt requested, or any other form of mail which may delay or hinder actual delivery of mail to the addressee.

D(2)(d)(ii) Calculation of time. For the purpose of computing any period of time provided by these rules or by statute, service by mail, except as otherwise provided, shall be complete on the day the defendant, or other person authorized by appointment or law, signs a receipt for the mailing, or three days after the mailing if mailed to an address within the state, or seven days after the mailing if mailed to an address outside the state, whichever first occurs.

D(3) Particular defendants. Service may be made upon specified defendants as follows:

D(3)(a) Individuals.

D(3)(a)(i) Generally. Upon an individual defendant, by personal delivery of true copies of the summons and the complaint to such defendant or other person authorized by appointment or law to receive service of summons on behalf of such defendant, by substituted service, or by office service. Service may also be made upon an individual defendant to whom neither subparagraph (ii) nor (iii) of this paragraph applies by a mailing made in accordance with paragraph (2)(d) of this section provided the defendant signs a receipt for the certified, registered, or express mailing, in which case service shall be complete on the date on which the defendant signs a receipt for the mailing.

[WhatMoney]

Now, the plaintiff does run the risk of you claiming you never received the information, and this is probably a justifiable position if one is asked to show cause as to the defendant's failure to reply. I was recently served by certified return-receipt (I didn't sign) and when I inquired with my local district court, they said the law does not require a signed receipt from the non-moving party. I reviewed the ORCP and could not get clarity related to whether or not a signed receipt is required.

I don't think a signature is required either TH. In both the ORS and OR Rules of Procedure they only mention the mailing receipt and not a signature. In some states only a first class letter sent with an affidavit of mailing is enough for a summons.
ORS 18.271 (1) has similar language as the OR Rules of Proc.:

The interrogatories may be personally served in the manner provided for summons or may be served by any form of mail addressed to the judgment debtor and requesting a receipt. Service by mail under this subsection is effective on the date of mailing.

Registered mail, certified mail, overnight mail, etc. could all work, green card or not - although most would include the return receipt. When you refused to sign the return receipt I take it they just returned the letter to the sender with a refused delivery notation?

BTW, for GD's info, I did check the Arizona Statutes and Civil Rules and could not find any laws that mentioned written interrogatories by mail, or even service by mail. The only way it appears a judgment creditor can send an interrogatory by mail is to petition the court to do so as a special procedure. Even a mailed summons appear to be a last resort in AZ, after a personal summons has failed. This is entirely different than in OR and most other states. Maybe the Arizonians don't trust the USPS (it's a Federal entity), and just like to send out the sheriff to do the dirty work - the old wild west mentality?

[treehugger1]

WM, it's not that i refused to sign. There was nothing for me to sign. They simply sent me the summons with a certified return postal receipt for themselves. No signature from me was required. From now on, I'll not open anything that isn't sent in a manner requiring my signature. If the court needs me to show just cause, I can simply state, "Just cause for what? I am unaware of any actions against me. Perhaps the plaintiff can provide the court evidence that I received the interrogatories, summons, etc." My understanding is that failure to answer written interrogatories served by the plaintiff's attorney can get you a summons related to 'show cause." In which case, the debtor exam is probably held in front of the judge or other noted court official. I seriously doubt that some antecedent traffic crime will result in an arrest due to failure of a judgment debtor to answer some written questions.

I do see the occasional judgment debtor exam on the local district court docket, but these always seem to be done by the local small-time collection agency. They are pretty good at uncovering assets of local folks who owe other local folks/businesses money. Interesting that since I have screwed around with the local CA firm so much these past few years, they won't even take an assignment from an outside creditor with an alleged claim against me.