I’ve got a question and could really use some perspective here. I’m currently dealing with three different collection agencies regarding cash assets, with the total debt sitting at about 8 $0.00; it originally started out at 15,000, but I’ve managed to chip away at it a little over time. I was wondering if there’s any actual chance of petitioning these collectors to lift the freezes on my bank accounts if I propose a direct payment plan—basically, paying them off in monthly installments directly rather than going through a central clearinghouse like Goldman Sachs. My goal is to get my accounts unblocked and just handle the remaining balance personally without all the middleman interference.
Thanks.
Honestly, only a fool would try that... because why would you unfreeze an account before the debt is actually settled? Usually, those installment plans are negotiated well before the collection orders are even finalized.
Does this mean I’m required to prior to the hearing formally invite everyone and file some sort of written notice with the court? It feels like the trustee is essentially just acting as the bailiff and nothing more. After all those massive renovations they botched, they just ended up splitting commissions among themselves.
At the end of the day, my property rights have been trampled upon, a situation that has dragged on far too long and is having a devastating impact on every aspect of my life.
For them, an expedited seizure is always within reach, while I’m left stuck in a grueling, expensive legal battle with no guarantee of a win—mostly because I simply don't have the bankroll to hire one of those powerhouse attorneys who can practically buy off every judge from the local circuit up to the Supreme Court.
Sam Wright21 said:Does anyone have any insight into a situation like this: the property manager issued an enforcement order on time regarding unpaid HOA fees covering the period from January 1, 2009, to March 21, 2010. The debtor filed an objection. Now, we’re finally seeing a court summons arrive in mid-2014. Can the debtor invoke the statute of limitations here, given that more than three years have lapsed? From what I’ve been reading, even certain legal matters—like those involving judicial delays—can fall under the statute of limitations. Thanks if anyone can provide some definitive answers.
Additionally, is it possible for the debtor to file a counterclaim against the enforcer during the hearing?
1. Probably not, assuming the proceedings were officially initiated within the required timeframe. 2. Yes, they certainly can, provided there are legitimate legal grounds to support a counterclaim.
Thomas Ward5 said:I was wondering if anyone might be willing to send me a template via PM—or perhaps just post it here—for a "third-party objection in an enforcement proceeding." Alternatively, if someone happens to know of a reliable website where I could hunt down a link myself, please let me know..
Much appreciated!
In what sense are we talking about a third party? Are we talking about a stakeholder who has a vested interest in joining the proceedings—like an employer who was supposed to withhold funds from a debtor's paycheck, for instance—but didn't 🙂—or perhaps a joint liable debtor? 🙂 I guess I'm just not quite sure which specific scenario you're dealing with here 🙂
Susan Thompson15 said:In my experience, courts regularly shut down those types of objections. They usually point out that standard business practices and U.S. regulations don't require invoices to be sent with proof of delivery. Plus, the simple fact that the debtor still hasn't paid after receiving the actual judgment—clearly knowing they owe the money—pretty much invalidates their argument.
So, I agree that this particular court went off the rails, and that ruling will almost certainly be overturned on appeal.
You won't believe what the judge wrote in the reasoning—it was quite something! He basically said, "The fact remains that the creditor isn't required to send payment slips via certified mail, yet the debtor does have the right to dispute the debt based on not receiving them, since the creditor lacks proof of delivery; this doesn't mean the debt doesn't exist, it just means it hasn't technically become due yet"—which is just... well, wow. Especially considering the person actually used the service! They used the service, there's a contract in place, and they are fully aware they need to pay for it. It feels like finding a sensible judge is a rare occurrence these days, I guess. Honestly, I feel like I'm just spinning my wheels on these appeals. Now, instead of simply posting the order on the courthouse bulletin board like they should, the clerk is insisting that I cover $59 the fees for a process server. There isn't even a rule requiring that kind of service, and I even provided her with the proof of residence. (That was for the insurance order, by the way).
I wanted to reach out and see if anyone here has a deeper understanding of legal precedents—if you could weigh in, I’d really appreciate it... basically... - So, I initiate an enforcement action, and the guy files an appeal claiming he never received his billing statements. Get this: the court actually rules in *his* favor (it's honestly ridiculous). I might end up having to cover the legal costs too, even though right from the jump, I attached all the invoices clearly showing every single charge and due date. Since the obligation to pay was explicitly laid out in the contract—meaning there is zero doubt he knows he owes the money—the court still sides with him. And the kicker? Nobody ever sends those billing statements via certified mail anyway... By that logic—and I think the court has gone completely off the rails here—you could practically get out of any enforcement action just by claiming you never got the bills... LOL. I mean, nobody is actually mailing them out requiring a signature upon receipt! As a result, no creditor can ever truly prove that the debtor actually received the statements in the first place.
casualranger22 said:First off, thanks for the reply. I don't actually owe this attorney anything, because back when this whole thing was going down in '99, we were fighting it out in court, and I paid off the principal, the court costs, and a chunk of interest—basically everything they told me to pay at the time. I’ve still got the receipts and even a letter from them confirming the balance was settled. But then, after I thought it was all over, I get hit with a notice saying I still owe some interest that apparently never got cleared. I really want to get this sorted because I completely lost track of this interest debt, and now I'm stressing about an IRS seizure or more crazy legal fees piling up... Is it even legal for them to charge interest on top of unpaid interest?
They aren't allowed to do that, though—but just so you know, when you make a payment, they don't apply it to the principal first. According to how the law is set up here in the States, they have to clear the collection costs first, then the interest, and only then does it touch the actual principal amount.
hollowmason64 said:A consultation? 😕 I haven't heard of that one... those jokers at the government agencies will come up with anything to squeeze you, 🤣 Given how much you owe and the fact that you're already paying it down, I don't see any legal basis for them to go after your personal property—especially since some bureaucrat from the bottom of the food chain told you they would. It sounds like that lady at the IRS was just talking big. 😁 Besides, they can't touch it anyway if the property belongs to your parents; you can argue it's their asset, and there's not much they can do about that. That said, for your own peace of mind, maybe look into clearing the debt with a small bank loan—it might actually end up being cheaper than what they're doing. Also, try sending a formal written request to the IRS headquarters. Ask if there's any possibility of waiving the interest if you pay off the principal in one lump sum... you know, like someone giving you a break.
And regardless of how bad some accountants are (and trust me, they exist), how is your accountant responsible for this situation?
I have to say, those "government bureaucrats" comments always sting me a little bit—last time, when people were calling lawyers the exact same thing, that guy actually won his case... but anyway... Personally, I wouldn't be so quick to bash the fact that he was offered an installment plan and a repayment agreement. Though, on the flip side, I do suspect they might be trying to "trick" people into resetting the statute of limitations—since agreeing to a payment plan usually restarts that clock. Then again, the IRS hasn't done much of anything for years, so now that they're finally active, they're just desperate to collect.
steelpuma15 said:It wasn't a property levy; they just seized my income. Recently, I was called in for some kind of "consultation" where the folks at the IRS were trying to convince me I had to settle the entire debt within eight days—even though they'd already garnished my paycheck and I’d actually started paying it off. They threatened that if I didn't, they'd move to seize assets, requiring me to provide an itemized list of everything I own (or something like that). I told them that was impossible because I was only working part-time back then and simply didn't have the cash, to which she basically replied that she didn't care and suggested I just take out a loan to cover it.
As for restructuring the debt... that's a whole different story. It's complicated when you have an accountant who knows the ropes, and their advice to everyone is pretty much: don't skimp on the professionals.😉
Sen from my TPC-7151 using Tapatalk
She probably thought the collection process would shift toward real estate or personal property (if you have any), though, of course, if you had an installment plan agreed upon and then failed to meet it—regardless of the reason—they could realistically jump straight to pursuing other assets.
But wait—why wouldn't they just initiate a seizure by selling off some real estate owned by the debtor? I mean, what's actually stopping them there? Why couldn't a telecom provider like AT&T just switch up their strategy and target property instead?
Maybe they tossed it out because there wasn't even a legal basis to start the pre-bankruptcy proceedings—like, if the company is actually liquid and solvent, and all they were trying to do was get someone to write off a debt??!! 🙂
Well, I suppose if they've managed to void that second tier—or maybe they're heading into bankruptcy or finally exiting a pre-bankruptcy settlement—then those accounts might just get unblocked again... I'm honestly not entirely sure what the exact situation was?
Did you get scammed? I mean, seriously—don't you know how to open a checking account for yourself? There is absolutely no way for you to get that money back now!!!
I feel like those legal costs are such a gray area—it’s a bit of a double-edged sword since you have the right to claim them, but the court also has the discretion to deny them. I guess if you don't appeal, you're stuck paying everything, but if you do decide to fight it, they might deduct some of those amounts, though you'll end up footing the bill for $33 court fees. Personally, I think the whole system really needs better regulation. Paperwork can justify just about anything, doesn't it? People try to list every little thing imaginable as an expense. In my experience, a judge once slashed my delivery costs from $6.75 down to just 15 bucks and completely tossed out my request for $3.25 photocopying costs—and that was because I wasn't a plaintiff, so I didn't even qualify for those specific reimbursements. It just seems like... well, all sorts of nonsense get passed off as legitimate expenses
To be honest, I’m a little stumped by what Susan Thompson15 is getting at regarding the payment reference number and the different types of courts? I mean—every single court has its own specific reference number and case type—whether it's an enforcement action, a civil suit, or some other filing category—along with the case number and the year. That’s pretty much it... I guess it’s pretty obvious they can see all that information (though I can't say for certain) because the reference number includes every single detail you need—I know this because you can find instructions online for every local courthouse on how to fill out a payment slip. For me, it feels more like a matter of sticking to the old-school ways and following the laws that protect my interests, rather than me having to call up the finance department just to verify everything. My actual headache is specifically the fact that I have to pay the fee within three days and then somehow prove I actually did it. In my city, that turns into a massive ordeal because I have to draft formal requests and letters that require a signature from the Mayor himself. Honestly, I’ve never quite understood this whole idea that they either can't see or simply don't want to see the payment. Let’s be realistic here—what is the entire purpose of a reference number if it isn't meant to act as a "marker" for my transaction? If this is truly an issue, I suppose one would have to appeal to the Supreme Court and try to establish some sort of legal precedent.
I just wanted to jump back in here—and I really want to expand on what Susan Thompson15 was mentioning—just to clarify things for everyone. To a regular person, it might seem like a total no-brainer, right? Like, why not just build a system where payments are instantly visible and the court's accounting department can see them in real-time? Well, sure, you *could* do that... BUT—and this is a massive but—it costs an absolute fortune. I can tell you from my own experience working in a major US city that whenever I suggest digitizing a process or trying to speed things up through better IT integration, I immediately hit a brick wall—and that wall is usually labeled "budget." Believe me, when it comes to tech services here in America, companies charge a premium for those kinds of upgrades. And it isn't just a one-time fee, either; you’re looking at constant, ongoing costs for maintenance and support. So, yeah... it's expensive! It really is. 🙂
I have a bit of a question—roughly how much time does it take for more obvious symptoms of TB to actually show up? I seem to remember that my brother had TB about 15 years ago, and back then, I tested positive on that skin test—which, if I recall correctly, just means I was exposed to the bacteria. It wasn't like he was coughing anything up or had an abnormal X-ray or anything like that. I distinctly remember he didn't have any real symptoms at all; it was just one morning where he simply couldn't get out of bed because his lungs were hurting so much. He hadn't lost any weight or anything, either—I think his doctors told him he’d been carrying it around for maybe three months. It's also interesting to note that our dad dealt with TB around that same age too.
rowdyraven112 said:Now I don't get it. If I include a specific reference number on my payment slip, the reason for the transfer is crystal clear. It shows up right away in the accounting department of the company receiving the money. So why bother sending proof of payment when their own accountants can see it without any trouble? And here we are screaming about "digital transformation."
Take apartment owners, for example. They all have nearly unique reference numbers for their monthly bills that only change by a few digits depending on which utility company issues them. Look at my situation. The apartment is in my mother's name, and the bills arrive in her name. I pay those bills regularly from my own account—using my own name—via online banking. Of course, I include the reference number. How is it that no utility company has ever tried to garnish my wages or even send a warning notice? My balance for all previous bills is zero.
That’s why I asked if he included the reference number on the slip. If some incompetent accountant at the courthouse messed up the bookkeeping, that's on them, not the individual. I deal with my company's accounting department constantly; they handle massive monthly turnovers, and at any given moment, they know exactly who paid what and why. Unless he failed to include the reference number, then he has to admit he screwed up.
Look, you're exactly right, but!! See, when you submit something to the court—like a motion or a lawsuit, for instance—you'll be summoned to pay a filing fee within three days. Even if you've already sent the money, if you haven't provided the actual proof of payment, the court will still issue a ruling against you regarding that fee (kind of like a collection action for an unpaid fee, plus an extra $33 charge), simply because that is what the law dictates. It doesn't matter if they can see the money sitting there or not; you're essentially stuck because you didn't submit the proof, and that's just how the law works. I suppose with standard contract relations and things like that, you might not need to submit proof since the payment is considered complete once the funds hit the account. But I'd draw a parallel to the courts here, especially since this is also a misdemeanor court.
Austin Hill6 said:Is there any way to actually look up property foreclosures online, and if so, where exactly am I supposed to find that info?
Well, you could potentially pull a title report or a deed search through the county recorder's office—assuming, of course, that you have all the right details handy!