I got a summons today on an account that I previously been to court with the same CA. I was to start payments in Sept. 2003 on the condition that I would be employed by then. (I was unemployed when we initially went to court in July 2003.)Currently, I still haven't found work and notified the CA's attorney twice (in Nov. 2003 and Feb. 2004) that I'm still unemployed. I also stated that I have limited resources (child support) but was willing to pay $25 a month until I secured employment. I received no response from either letter. I received one phone call in June but I didn't have a working answering machine so the attorneys couldn't leave a message. Then I received a letter from the attorneys last week regarding the account but the wording seemed like I never responded to the account at all and that I should verify why I haven't set up arrangements to start paying when I know that I have given them almost $2000 as of July 2003. The summons doesn't have the old index number on it so I'm assuming that it is a new case. Should I play dumb and just answer the summons and request validation or should I just inform the courts that I'm still not working and can only afford to pay $25? I hope that I'm not confusing my words but I'm really worried about this situation. Thanks in advance!
One thing I have learned from CNet is to keep a log of everything. the BEST is to keep everything in writing, including the payment arrangements. If you can't do that, then at least write down the date and person you spoke with immediately after hanging up the phone. At least if you have to go to court, then you can pull up these details for the judge. Do you think maybe now you could make an arrangement, since you're still not working and only have child support? I mean, even if they DO take you to court they will get nothing. At this point you cannot be garnished. I hope all goes well. I've been in your situation, and know how scary it is. I'd check for a free legal aid in your area, if I were you.
Thank for the advice. One more question - why would the CA attorneys file another summons instead of just going to court to say that I defaulted on a previous agreement? I would think that it would be easier for them to win and then freeze my bank accounts than to go through court all over again and may not get nothing. These attorneys have done this before (re: getting a default judgment against me and putting a lien on my bank accounts) so it's just baffling why they haven't done it again.
You can read the laws in your state. But I do know that there are certain types of funds that cannot be garnished, and in turn if your bank account contains ONLY those type of funds that that portion of your bank account cannot be frozen either. I'm thinking of funds like Social Security. i can't be sure whther this includes child support or not, but I'm wondering whether they figure you have no money so the expense of court (again) isn't worth it?? Just a guess.. Others??
Judgments are good for many many years. If the poster's financial situation improves in the future they would have the legal means to attach the funds, so it's never a bad idea to go through the trouble....in most cases the expenses are tacked on to the judgment amount anyway
So what does that mean? Because I told them that I am not working, the CA figures it wouldn't pay to freeze my accounts? So what the deal with going back to court? So the judge can set a lower amount or give me a reprieve until I find work (which I doubt!)? What do they wish to accomplish by bringing me back into court? Another small development....when I was cleaning up my file cabinet of old papers, I happened to have found an old bill from the original creditor, Citibank, N.A. (dumb me threw it out!). The date on the bill was from 1996 (credit limit $2500) and I know the last activity on the account was March 1996 until I sent in one payment to the CA in July 2002. Since I know that the account is old and the CA has been trying to get me to settle the account for 50%, (I'm trying to see if they will go lower!) and Citibank has been solicitating me for credit cards again (I'm a college student), can I get get them to settle for $1000 since they already got almost $1600 already? That amount will total the amount of the credit limit.
Re: Re: New Summons in the future they would have the legal means to attach the funds chances are the SOL for collecting this debt had expired, but you may have restarted the clock by making a payment in 2002!!
Re: Re: New Summons They already have the legal means because they have placed a lien previously on this same account. I'm just baffled why they didn't do it again. Is it because I have no earned income? Can a judge make me use child support payments to pay on my personal debt? Even though I can spare $25 month (possibly!) can I be ordered to do so if this is my only income?
