Wage garnishments and collections

July 15, 2014. I committed some parking violation way back then, and today? Today the damn thing finally hits me as an enforcement action... I swear, I am so done with this government and their endless $100 fines...

John Clark6 said:And why the sudden interest? Are you actually involved in some collection action or something? I can't quite wrap my head around why this specific bill is weighing on you so much. From what I've seen, it’s actually pretty rare for bills to hit the statute of limitations window before things get moving—people tend to sit around calculating expiration dates, while the actual seizure proposal is already sitting on a desk at JP Morgan Chase. Sometimes they just don't hand it over immediately, and suddenly months have slipped by.

'cause I'm trying to figure out if I should pay up or not. I haven't been served anything yet, but the folks over at Prima Solvent keep calling me, saying they're about to move forward with a garnishment.

Patrick Chase4 said:'cause I'm trying to figure out if I should pay up or not. I haven't been served anything yet, but the folks over at Prima Solvent keep calling me, saying they're about to move forward with a garnishment.

Well, look—if you haven't signed anything specifically agreeing to a payment plan or otherwise "acknowledged" the debt in writing, they might not even be able to start the collection process. And even if they do try to initiate it, you could potentially file an objection based on the statute of limitations. It's entirely possible that these collection agencies play a bit of a shady game when it comes to debts that have technically expired—I mean, if I were in their shoes, I'd probably pull similar tactics too! Because, see, the moment you step up and say, "Hey, can I pay this off in installments?", you've essentially reset the clock on that statute of limitations.

John Clark6 said:Well, look—if you haven't signed anything specifically agreeing to a payment plan or otherwise "acknowledged" the debt in writing, they might not even be able to start the collection process. And even if they do try to initiate it, you could potentially file an objection based on the statute of limitations. It's entirely possible that these collection agencies play a bit of a shady game when it comes to debts that have technically expired—I mean, if I were in their shoes, I'd probably pull similar tactics too! Because, see, the moment you step up and say, "Hey, can I pay this off in installments?", you've essentially reset the clock on that statute of limitations.

Not sure if I officially acknowledged it or not. Last time they called (this past Friday), I told them I'd pay Monday (yesterday)—just wanted to buy some time to get answers here. Also, I actually paid one of these bills back in March of this year, for a bill from August 2013 (didn't really think I owed it, but figured it was better to just cough up the $67 than waste my life fighting it).
So the bill is from July 2013—are you 100% certain it's past the statute of limitations?

If the maturity date hit back in the seventh month of the 2013 billing cycle, then there's a 100% chance those charges are way past the statute of limitations. I mean, standard telecom bills from providers like T-Mobile typically expire after just one year. Honestly, I have no idea how anyone could have even linked a Zoo to this discussion.

John Clark6 said:If the maturity date hit back in the seventh month of the 2013 billing cycle, then there's a 100% chance those charges are way past the statute of limitations. I mean, standard telecom bills from providers like T-Mobile typically expire after just one year. Honestly, I have no idea how anyone could have even linked a Zoo to this discussion.

So, I'm calling my cousin at Solvent later today to lay it all out for them—what do you guys think of that move? You think I should play this any differently?

Just hopped off the phone with them. Their line is that when the debt was bought back by Optime, it wasn't past due—and apparently, that’s the only thing that matters. What’s your take on that?

Look, if you’re convinced you don't owe them a dime, then dispute it. If they come knocking with a garnishment order, file an appeal... or just pay the damn small change you owe and get some peace of mind. It's your call. Don't make your own life harder than it needs to be.

ruggedmaker2 said:Look, if you’re convinced you don't owe them a dime, then dispute it. If they come knocking with a garnishment order, file an appeal... or just pay the damn small change you owe and get some peace of mind. It's your call. Don't make your own life harder than it needs to be.

If everyone just took the path of least resistance all the time, we'd all be getting bullied by those "consulting" firms—you know, the debt collectors.

Patrick Chase4 said:Just hopped off the phone with them. Their line is that when the debt was bought back by Optime, it wasn't past due—and apparently, that’s the only thing that matters. What’s your take on that?

Well, they definitely have their little "methods" down to a science, haha—just try to ignore them if you can. If they actually try to initiate a seizure under the Uniform Commercial Code, just file an objection and call it a day. And, just so you know, they aren't actually required to send you any written notice about canceling the debt before they start the legal process.

Patrick Chase4 said:Just hopped off the phone with them. Their line is that when the debt was bought back by Optime, it wasn't past due—and apparently, that’s the only thing that matters. What’s your take on that?

Look, the debt is officially past the statute of limitations if they haven't even filed for a judgment under the Uniform Commercial Code yet.

Just ignore them.

Hey everyone, I could really use some help here.

A friend of mine runs a small business, and she just got hit with an enforcement order—based on a certified document under the Uniform Commercial Code. We're talking about unpaid invoices from back in 2011 and 2012 (specifically April, June, July, September, October, November, December of 2011, and then January through April and July of 2012). The kicker? She never even received a single warning notice before this enforcement order showed up at her door.
Are these 2011 invoices already past the statute of limitations? And if so, can she actually file an objection based on that?
Looking at Section 228 of the Zoo.
Regarding mutual claims arising from commercial contracts for the sale of goods and services:

1) Mutual claims stemming from commercial contracts for goods and services—basically any contract between a merchant and a public entity—as well as claims for reimbursement of expenses incurred under those contracts, expire after three years.
2) The statute of limitations runs separately for every individual delivery, job, or service provided.

So, what can be done? Is there even any ground to stand on here?

Thanks in advance!

Hey everyone, looking for some quick advice here.

A friend of mine runs a small business and just got hit with an enforcement order (based on a certified document under the Uniform Commercial Code). We’re talking about unpaid invoices from way back—mostly spanning 2011 and 2012. The kicker? She never even received a single warning notice before this enforcement order showed up at her door.
Are these 2011 invoices already past the statute of limitations? And can she actually file an objection based on that?
Looking at Section 228 of the Zoo.
Regarding mutual claims arising from commercial contracts for goods and services:

1) Claims stemming from commercial contracts for the sale of goods and services—specifically those between a merchant and a public entity—along with any reimbursement for expenses related to those contracts, expire after three years.
2) The clock for the statute of limitations runs separately for every individual delivery, job, or service performed.

So, what's the move here? Is there actually anything she can do to fight this?

Thanks in advance!

What's all these charges even for?

Jeremy Lee3 said:What's all these charges even for?

The bills are for services rendered—basically, eyeglass repairs. A friend of mine owns an optical shop, and she used to send glasses off to this specific firm for repairs.
Turns out, her husband—who used to work there—was handling all this behind the scenes. My friend, the actual business owner, hasn't seen a single one of these invoices for two years.
Is there anything we can even do here? Can you even file a formal dispute under the Uniform Commercial Code?

Regarding those first four claims, you can file a statute of limitations objection. As for the October 2011 entry, that one is likely expired as well—provided the due date was more than three years prior to when they filed the motion for judgment. However, you’re going to have to settle the bills from November 2011 through July 2012, because those haven't hit the expiration threshold yet.

All of this assumes, of course, that you haven't already inadvertently acknowledged the debt by paying off parts of the balance or by consenting to the seizure of open items in the interim.

ruggedmaker2 said:It’s pretty obvious T-Mobile just sold off their debt to that firm. It's called an assignment.

Basically, an assignment—or transferring receivables—is just when one creditor hands over their right to collect money to a new one. The person who owes the money and the actual debt itself don't change, and you don't even need the debtor's permission to make the switch. It’s nothing fancy, definitely not some shady scam, just standard business practice you see all the time.

If you're actually curious about the legal weeds, go dig through the state's contract laws. You can look it up yourself.

Look, if you have a legitimate reason to dispute the service or the bill in the first place, you can take that fight to this new company too. But you better have a real reason—like the statute of limitations having run out or something.

The relationship between the assignor and the assignee.Look, here’s how it works: the old creditor and the new one sign an assignment agreement to transfer the debt. You don't even need the debtor's permission to pull this off. The assignor just has to notify them that the deal went down. That notice isn't just a courtesy, either—it actually carries legal weight. So, what does that mean? Until that notice hits, a debtor can only legally settle up with the original creditor. Period.Once the notice hits, you pay the new creditor. Simple. What happens if there’s multiple assignments—successive cesions? If a debtor assigns the same debt to several different people, priority goes to whoever got notified first. It doesn't matter who signed the deal first. You owe the money to the one the debtor actually received notice from. Period.

Been offline for a while dealing with some personal stuff, so I'm just now getting around to catching up. This part is a straight copy-paste. Right now, I'm looking into a situation where someone’s been paying Verizon for ages, yet the CEI is still coming after them for the debt. This should be interesting.

Might be useful for someone out there:
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-economy-inflation-trends-282725

I can’t help but feel a little uneasy about the possibility of them suspending foreclosures... I mean, at the end of the day, you still have those long-standing legal processes where there aren't even any judges involved to oversee things.

Jerry Alvarez7 said:Regarding those first four claims, you can file a statute of limitations objection. As for the October 2011 entry, that one is likely expired as well—provided the due date was more than three years prior to when they filed the motion for judgment. However, you’re going to have to settle the bills from November 2011 through July 2012, because those haven't hit the expiration threshold yet.

All of this assumes, of course, that you haven't already inadvertently acknowledged the debt by paying off parts of the balance or by consenting to the seizure of open items in the interim.

Thanks a ton for the advice! 👍