Wage garnishments and collections

feraltinker8 said:When submitting my Direct Debit Request through the Federal Reserve, I included the original court judgment as the payment basis—it’s fully finalized and enforceable, complete with all the necessary stamps and signatures.

However, the Federal Reserve returned all my documentation with the following explanation:

"The underlying payment basis cannot be executed. Judgment xxxx lacks the required certificate of enforceability pursuant to Article 10 of the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets NN 112/12."

Where am I supposed to obtain this certificate of enforceability? Isn't the judgment itself supposed to serve as an enforceable instrument?

The judgment bears an official seal stating, "This decision became final on xxxxx," along with the court's stamp and signature. It also features a second seal explicitly stating, "This decision became enforceable on xxxxx," accompanied by the court's stamp and signature...

Article 10 of the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets NN 112/12:

The provisions of this Act apply to enforceable decisions and settlements of a domestic court or administrative body that mandate the fulfillment of a monetary obligation and became enforceableafter October 15, 2012.

Since your judgment became enforceable on July 22, 2002—which was way before October 15, 2012—I think it’s pretty obvious why you can't go through the Federal Reserve for direct collection. Even if the Fed gives you some canned explanation, that's the bottom line.

As for changing the assets being seized or any potential statute of limitations issues, you haven't provided enough info regarding whether there might be a stay on the enforcement.

John Clark6 is on the right track here, and coppermoose42 completely missed it because she doesn't know the difference between the enforcement act and the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets.

Brandon Hill8 said:Article 10 of the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets NN 112/12:

The provisions of this Act apply to enforceable decisions and settlements of a domestic court or administrative body that mandate the fulfillment of a monetary obligation and became enforceableafter October 15, 2012.

Since your judgment became enforceable on July 22, 2002—which was way before October 15, 2012—I think it’s pretty obvious why you can't go through the Federal Reserve for direct collection. Even if the Fed gives you some canned explanation, that's the bottom line.

As for changing the assets being seized or any potential statute of limitations issues, you haven't provided enough info regarding whether there might be a stay on the enforcement.

John Clark6 is on the right track here, and coppermoose42 completely missed it because she doesn't know the difference between the enforcement act and the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets.

Looks like you guys haven't even dug into the discussion on expiration dates yet, so I’m getting called out here for no reason again.

Look, I wasn't actually referring to any specific law here. Please, just read what I wrote with a bit more care.

"The basis for payment cannot be executed. The xxxx judgment lacks the required certification of finality under Article 10 of the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets (NN 112/12)."

coppermoose42 said:NN 112/12??? The enforcement act has been updated twice since then. Why are you using a judgment based on that old law instead of the current one??

Article 10 of that old law states that decisions issued by a court during enforcement or security proceedings take the form of a formal order or conclusion.

You just have a judgment. :/
It makes zero sense why they're citing that old law. How long ago was this judgment issued or when did the debt start?

When a debtor fails to follow what's written in a judgment, you have to go through a formal enforcement process in court. I'm not sure which stage you're at, but you need a formal enforcement order, not just a judgment.

Unfounded?

Brandon Hill8 said:

"The basis for payment cannot be executed. The xxxx judgment lacks the required certification of finality under Article 10 of the amendment to the law on enforcement of monetary assets (NN 112/12)."

Unfounded?

My bad, feraltinker8! I was typing this on my phone without my glasses on and totally misread that. 🙂 🙂
Look, you’re still missing that enforcement order. Just head over to a notary and get some actual answers. 🙂
(Info is free, just ask if you need anything)

Brandon Hill8—get a life. 😁 Hey, thanks for the correction. Honestly, I'm not even gonna bother getting down in the mud with you and all that constant nitpicking and trolling.😒

That’s it from me. Unless you've got some actual legal arguments to throw my way, I'm done commenting.

Hey everyone,
My mom just got the annual statement for my sister’s loan (since Mom is acting as the co-signer). Given that this debt has been dragging on for about 14 years now, I’m starting to get a little nervous about my own neck... My mom is getting older, and if she passes away in a few years, I've been googling and seeing that heirs might end up inheriting all those debts too, but I'm wondering if that’s an absolute rule or if there's some wiggle room?

Is there any way to actually prevent that from happening?

So, here’s the situation: we have a house and yard that's currently going through the whole legalizing process. Mom owns half, and I own the other half. On the property records, it's basically just listed as the land the house sits on for now, since we're waiting on the inspectors to clear everything for the final legalization...

Mom is the co-signer for both of my sister's loans; my sister handles the big one at Bank of America, while Mom covers the smaller one at Bank of America...

Does anyone have any advice? Could Mom maybe draw up a gift deed or something similar so I don't technically become the heir to the debt, or perhaps transfer it to someone outside the family? Or should we just look into selling the house entirely? 🤔

Thanks in advance!

Quick question here... I won't drag you all through the backstory of why this is happening, but basically, I hired an attorney to file a lawsuit over unpaid child support. She told me we’re moving toward a garnishment/seizure process. This was back in October 2014, so I’m wondering if anyone has a rough idea of how long it actually takes for an enforcement order to take effect? I tried calling my lawyer, but she just brushes me off every single time with some variation of "you just have to wait." Does anyone here have a ballpark answer? Thanks! :-)

I have a question... I recently had a freeze placed on my account because of an enforcement action, but I’ve gone ahead and paid off the debt in full. Now I’m wondering whether I should expect to receive some kind of official notice or resolution confirming the enforcement has been satisfied, or if they just unfreeze the account and that’s the end of it?

Alright, here’s the situation—I could really use a little guidance if anyone is willing to weigh in.
My take-home pay is roughly $1333. I’m currently juggling two different loans: one at a local bank with monthly installments of $733 handled via automatic transfer, and a second loan through another institution where the payments are $267 per month. Because I handle that second one directly at the branch, my full salary doesn't show up clearly on my official pay stubs.
To make matters more complicated, my head of accounting refused to deduct the loan payment directly from my paycheck—claiming it exceeds one-third of my earnings—so I’ve been managing it myself. Now, I’m facing a bit of a dilemma: I’m expecting an enforcement action coming my way because I acted as a guarantor for someone else. I’m trying to figure out how to protect what’s left of my salary—if you can even call it that—given how heavily it's already leveraged by these loans, especially since payroll won't step in to automate the deductions.
I would be truly grateful for any insight or help in interpreting my predicament.

Look, if your boss refuses to garnish your wages just because the debt amount exceeds one-third of your pay, she’s actually breaking the law. (The specific violations are listed toward the end of the enforcement act, so go take a look yourself).
Her job was to withhold that one-third; anything beyond that is your headache, and you should have been covering the rest out of your own pocket.

The way things stand, you don't technically have a wage garnishment on file—as far as the company is concerned, it doesn't exist.
If they were actually following protocol and docking a third of your check, then two-thirds would be landing in a protected account. (Which, by the way, you'll have to set up at the Federal Reserve once they freeze your main account).
But based on what I'm seeing here, they're going to send one-third of your pay to your frozen account, while the rest goes to the protected one. That means you're stuck manually paying off those first two loans yourself.

Here's the kicker: you might find yourself unable to keep up with those first two payments. If that happens, after a while, those two banks are going to jump down your throat and start their own garnishments through the Federal Reserve.
Your situation is a total mess, and honestly, I think there isn't much you can do about it right now.
The only shot you might have is trying to work out some kind of settlement regarding the garnishment you're expecting.

Robert Murphy49 said:Alright, here’s the situation—I could really use a little guidance if anyone is willing to weigh in.
My take-home pay is roughly $1333. I’m currently juggling two different loans: one at a local bank with monthly installments of $733 handled via automatic transfer, and a second loan through another institution where the payments are $267 per month. Because I handle that second one directly at the branch, my full salary doesn't show up clearly on my official pay stubs.
To make matters more complicated, my head of accounting refused to deduct the loan payment directly from my paycheck—claiming it exceeds one-third of my earnings—so I’ve been managing it myself. Now, I’m facing a bit of a dilemma: I’m expecting an enforcement action coming my way because I acted as a guarantor for someone else. I’m trying to figure out how to protect what’s left of my salary—if you can even call it that—given how heavily it's already leveraged by these loans, especially since payroll won't step in to automate the deductions.
I would be truly grateful for any insight or help in interpreting my predicament.

lonegull13 said:Hey everyone,
My mom just got the annual statement for my sister’s loan (since Mom is acting as the co-signer). Given that this debt has been dragging on for about 14 years now, I’m starting to get a little nervous about my own neck... My mom is getting older, and if she passes away in a few years, I've been googling and seeing that heirs might end up inheriting all those debts too, but I'm wondering if that’s an absolute rule or if there's some wiggle room?

Is there any way to actually prevent that from happening?

So, here’s the situation: we have a house and yard that's currently going through the whole legalizing process. Mom owns half, and I own the other half. On the property records, it's basically just listed as the land the house sits on for now, since we're waiting on the inspectors to clear everything for the final legalization...

Mom is the co-signer for both of my sister's loans; my sister handles the big one at Bank of America, while Mom covers the smaller one at Bank of America...

Does anyone have any advice? Could Mom maybe draw up a gift deed or something similar so I don't technically become the heir to the debt, or perhaps transfer it to someone outside the family? Or should we just look into selling the house entirely? 🤔

Thanks in advance!

Since it’s basically the same thing anyway, here’s a simple fix. Is it legal? Yeah. Is it ethical? Nope. It’s not criminal, per se. But it touches on that part of the law regarding abuse of rights—the stuff where you can face actual penalties. $6.75 If it gets proven—and I’m just speaking hypothetically here—then fine. But if someone actually proves this to you, you have to be willing to admit you were being an idiot. Seriously. If that happens, you both sign a loan agreement for an amount large enough to cover your payments for the rest of your lives. Personally? I’d recommend a million bucks just to be safe. Now, let me break this down for you.
Real estate:
If you're setting up a loan agreement with a lien, do it with your mother. Here’s the template:
Once you file a lien against the property your mother owns, you’re set. Any other lien filed later will sit behind yours in priority, meaning they get paid second. If anyone tries to force an auction to collect on those later debts, you just file a motion with the court to claim ownership because your claim outweighs the total value of the property. In that scenario, all those junior liens get wiped out. You won't have to worry about inheriting the house or the debt. When she passes, you trigger the process to take title via that lien. It's secure because you aren't technically "inheriting" the real estate. Also, coordinate with her on the following: submit an administrative freeze on her Social Security benefits directly to the Social Security Administration.

2. Salary
Here’s the play: you set up a loan agreement with a trusted person—usually a family member who isn't under any legal fire—and then file an administrative stop against that contract. Take that administrative stop straight to your employer's payroll department. As ruggedmaker2 mentioned, they’ll divert 1/3 of your paycheck directly into the account of this trusted person. Since this person isn't a gambler and doesn't have an overdraft, they can just withdraw the cash and hand it to you personally. For the remaining 2/3, open a protected account for your deposits. Even if a creditor comes knocking at the office, they have to wait behind your administrative stop, which effectively means they never get a cent. As a guarantor, you won't lose a single dime toward someone else's debt.
Now you can actually pay off YOUR own debts properly.

To all the busybodies whining about these solutions: go jump in a lake. This "Option 2" works reliably in 7 out of 7 enforcement cases I've seen. That's exactly why I put this together.

An acquaintance of mine had a loan he was paying RELIABLY. Out of nowhere, a collection notice from Mastercard hit, and they placed a lien on his property, triggering a foreclosure process. The house sold at auction for peanuts. The bank grabbed the proceeds to cover part of the principal, leaving Mastercard empty-handed. Because my friend was working in Ireland while this mess unfolded (and he was paying his loan faithfully from there), and since the collectors were bothering social services because they couldn't track him down—even though he'd officially notified the authorities about his temporary work overseas—it's pretty obvious how many loopholes exist in the enforcement law. That's why I'm doing this. Before leaving, the guy settled all his debts in the States. He even got a confirmation from Mastercard stating he owed them nothing as of that date. Now, he's filed for a case reopening and a lawsuit with the Supreme Court (though based on court precedent, he won't get anything, and explaining why would take too much space and I don't feel like it)

As for you two: if you let those garnishments hit even after learning how to actually protect yourself and manipulate the system, I’d call you names that aren't fit for this forum—names that would get me banned before you could even finish reading this message. Once the garnishment or the lien is official, these solutions WON'T WORK. Then it'll be too late to start crying about politicians or calling for protests...

Hey there,

The Hz is coming after me for a fine, and they’re looking at roughly 500-$267(that’s the total, including court costs and interest)
So, here's the deal—are they actually allowed to seize my car? It’s basically all I own. And if they can, can I dodge that by signing a gift deed over to someone else before the court order kicks in? Like, I could draw up the paperwork (just to get the date on record) but have them hold onto it until it’s actually needed... or would it be smarter to just transfer the title right now?

Is there any way this whole thing hits the statute of limitations? If so, how long does that take and when does the clock actually start ticking?

One last thing: am I able to just serve this penalty in jail?
Honestly, I’d prefer to just do the time because I'm unemployed and don't have any income coming in right now.

Edit: forgot to mention they said they’d go after my bank account, but I don't even have one. Does that change anything about the situation?

Thanks!

So, here’s the situation:
Today I got a letter from a law firm over in San Francisco claiming they’ve taken over debt collection from State Farm regarding some supposed debt I owe them. The thing is—I actually have car insurance with State Farm, and I have all the receipts and confirmations to prove I’m paid up. What really trips me up is that they’re coming after me for a policy number that doesn't match my current one or my old one—they're totally different. On top of that, they're claiming I owe about $1100, but I paid roughly $3,800 for my current policy, and last year's was even more than $1333. So, nothing adds up—not the policy number, and definitely not the amount. I tried calling them, but since I called in the evening, I couldn't get through to anyone. I did end up emailing their office with copies of my actual policies and payment receipts attached so they can see I'm not bluffing.
I'm thinking about sending them another formal letter via certified mail—just so I have a paper trail proving I sent over my "evidence." I also plan on calling them again, and I'll be reaching out to State Farm directly too.
Does anyone have any advice on what else I should do to make sure they don't just go ahead and pull money straight from my bank account?

You should definitely give that insurance company a call and run it by their legal department.
Based on what you're telling me, the whole thing smells like a massive mistake to me.

Take another look at that notice you received. It ought to say somewhere exactly what steps to take if you're disputing the debt. There might be a specific phone number or an email address listed; just so you don't waste your life calling people around only to have them bounce you from one extension to another.

I’m definitely going to get on top of this... I actually have the phone numbers for the law firm right here—I'll be giving them a call tomorrow morning. This whole situation just feels incredibly surreal..

😁 Got an enforcement notice yesterday because I missed some water bills. I’m sitting on $433 in unpaid debt. Of course, they tacked on notary and lawyer fees that bring the total up to almost $333. If I settle the $433 water debt within 8 days, am I still on the hook for those extra costs?
http://i57.tinypic.com/rbe89w.jpg
http://i61.tinypic.com/2nk6fic.jpg

So, I've got this debt sitting at $17, plus I own a few properties. How does the bank actually go about seizing real estate? Look, I honestly wouldn't mind if they grabbed my farmland and left me my house alone. I know deep down they’d probably prefer the house since it's worth more, but I'll be out on the street if they take my place. Basically, if I can somehow sort out the situation with the house, are they legally forced to take the farmland instead?

Lawrence Mendoza said:😁 Got an enforcement notice yesterday because I missed some water bills. I’m sitting on $433 in unpaid debt. Of course, they tacked on notary and lawyer fees that bring the total up to almost $333. If I settle the $433 water debt within 8 days, am I still on the hook for those extra costs?
http://i57.tinypic.com/rbe89w.jpg
http://i61.tinypic.com/2nk6fic.jpg

The costs already incurred? Yeah, you're on the hook for those... the ones you could see coming? Not necessarily...

analogscout15 said:I’m definitely going to get on top of this... I actually have the phone numbers for the law firm right here—I'll be giving them a call tomorrow morning. This whole situation just feels incredibly surreal..

Look, they aren't going to be able to just snatch funds out of your account because they don't have any legal leg to stand on. If you actually receive an enforcement notice, you absolutely have to step up and file a formal objection if everything is going down exactly the way you described it...

The sooner you get in touch with them and sort this mess out, the better it's going to be for everyone involved.

I just got off the phone with State Farm and their legal team. State Farm actually admitted they messed up—they said they’ll notify the law firm directly and send me a formal apology letter. I also cleared things up with the lawyers; I'm going to send over copies of my documents and receipts to prove I've already settled everything I owe. Really hoping this finally puts an end to the whole ordeal.

gentlescout26 said:So, I've got this debt sitting at $17, plus I own a few properties. How does the bank actually go about seizing real estate? Look, I honestly wouldn't mind if they grabbed my farmland and left me my house alone. I know deep down they’d probably prefer the house since it's worth more, but I'll be out on the street if they take my place. Basically, if I can somehow sort out the situation with the house, are they legally forced to take the farmland instead?

The bank will probably just put a lien on the property first. But usually, their first move is going after your paycheck... if they can't collect that way, then they'll likely move in on the real estate.