Does being served mean I have a judgment against me?

[epiphany]

Legally you need to be served. However, you have to look at state laws to see whether service through the mail and other means are legal too. Collectors, by and large, are scumbags; they will send it to the wrong address, to an address at which you have not lived in years, or "lose it in the mail" just to get a default judgment. So yes, you can get a judgment and not know about it.

Now judging by your post, you have been served. So yes, this means you are being sued. They cannot get a judgment until you go to court, and it is a sure thing if you ignore the complaint. DO NOT blow this off.

I was sued by HSCB (or however they abbreviate that) and my recollection is that I had 30 days to answer the summons. My lawyer advised me not to answer it as that would cost several hundred dollars (with or without the lawyer I don't recall but there is a cost factor) and that it would be months before they got a judgment anyway. Then, to prove Murphy's law (which I experience daily), my lawyer dropped the ball and they got their judgment anyway--he didn't file for a full 30 days after I turned in the paperwork and had forgotten about my impending judgment.

As I've said in the past, that is partially my fault because I should have stayed on top of it.

Anyway, to answer the OP, I knew about the creditor filing suit before it was filed and it took about two weeks before I was served.

I know others would probably disagree with me, but were I you, and my bankruptcy filing was definite and imminent, I would call them and tell them so. They might not believe you, (I had one creditor who was getting close to filing suit that clearly didn't believe me--the laughter was indicative of that), but if they do, then they will realize that you are not worth pursuing.

Others might argue that telling them will just make them sue you faster, but I don't think so. They know they can't collect on it and it does cost them money to keep filing documents. The wise creditor would give you up in pursuit of riper fruit.

If you want to know what happens from soup to nuts when you are sued by a creditor, do a search in this forum. I believe there is a sticky from HHM which spells it out and was very helpful to me when I was going through it.

Good luck to you,
ep

[Exployer1234]

The reason they sue is because they feel that you have money to give them, regardless if you do. I was sued back in January. I do not make a lot per month, but the creditor regardless got a judgement. I filed BK the week they started the garnishment. It does not matter if you tell them you are filing BK, because many creditors want to try and get anything they can.

Also when they sue you normally the amount still has interest added in. It took a couple of months from the time of the lawsuit to actually start garnishing my wages. It did not work out so well for the creditor though, because I filed BK within a week of getting the wage garnishment. So they lost all that money for the lawyers, court cost, and any additional money they felt they could get.

[flyinbroke]

Well auto loans are not going to throw out paperwork. They have a secured interest, and will not be sloppy with papers.

Your CC seems to be a fluke. I had two admit they no longer have the signed application (which my lawyer now has) and two more where banks changed hands so the odds are overwhelmingly against them having paperwork. Which card kept effective records?

[tay666]

Well auto loans are not going to throw out paperwork. They have a secured interest, and will not be sloppy with papers.

Your CC seems to be a fluke. I had two admit they no longer have the signed application (which my lawyer now has) and two more where banks changed hands so the odds are overwhelmingly against them having paperwork. Which card kept effective records?

IT was Citibank, who was the backer on my AT&T mastercard.