Wage garnishments and collections

My husband lost his job a little over a year ago. We had an auto loan that we just couldn't keep up with. We tried selling the car, but the price we could get wouldn't even cover a third of what we owed. Eventually, we got word from our Bank that they had handed the debt over to some insurance company.

He recently landed a new job, so we’re hoping to start tackling that car loan again soon—once we clear out some other debts, of course, since we've been hit with a wave of collections due to those negative balances.

The thing is, we haven't heard a single peep from this insurance company. Who are we supposed to contact? Who do we even look for? I'm worried the interest has made the debt balloon, but we truly want to make this right and pay it off...

Thanks!

David Barnes5 said:My husband lost his job a little over a year ago. We had an auto loan that we just couldn't keep up with. We tried selling the car, but the price we could get wouldn't even cover a third of what we owed. Eventually, we got word from our Bank that they had handed the debt over to some insurance company.

He recently landed a new job, so we’re hoping to start tackling that car loan again soon—once we clear out some other debts, of course, since we've been hit with a wave of collections due to those negative balances.

The thing is, we haven't heard a single peep from this insurance company. Who are we supposed to contact? Who do we even look for? I'm worried the interest has made the debt balloon, but we truly want to make this right and pay it off...

Thanks!

Well, logically speaking, you really ought to ask the bank specifically which entity they handed the debt over to.

And don't worry, they'll eventually reach out—probably right before the statute of limitations hits, just so they can rack up the maximum amount of interest possible.

Jeffrey Booth2 said:Well, logically speaking, you really ought to ask the bank specifically which entity they handed the debt over to.

And don't worry, they'll eventually reach out—probably right before the statute of limitations hits, just so they can rack up the maximum amount of interest possible.

Yeah, I'm thinking the exact same thing...

We'll try to get ahead of them and reach out first. I just don't get why they haven't come to pick up the car yet.

David Barnes5 said:Yeah, I'm thinking the exact same thing...

We'll try to get ahead of them and reach out first. I just don't get why they haven't come to pick up the car yet.

It is probably because of this:

We attempted to sell the vehicle, but the price we could get wouldn't even cover a third of the total costs.

Plus, it’s easier for them this way—less red tape, especially if there is income available for them to garnish. They wouldn't be able to recover the full amount they're looking for by just seizing the car anyway.

There’s one more thing weighing on my mind: do you happen to know how the process works when a Bank sells off debt? Can that be paid back in installments, or is the insurance company just going to come after everything at once with a full seizure?
Do they show any mercy, or are they just sitting there waiting to squeeze out max interest before they go after my checking account... 😢

jadetinker85 said:They're trying to seize an old TV from you? 🤔

Man, it's a good thing they didn't put your underwear up for auction too. 🙏

Look, whether it's an old TV or whatever else, I'm JUST ASKING because that enforcement process is already finished.

Yeah, that garnishment is stayed (done), so if they want to move forward now, they’ll have to start from scratch with a brand new garnishment request.

rapidskipper12 said:Yeah, that garnishment is stayed (done), so if they want to move forward now, they’ll have to start from scratch with a brand new garnishment request.

well, technically speaking, that means they can choose to file a new enforcement request, but they don't actually *have* to.

Exactly, they can if they want, but they don't have to... just watch out, though. Now the statute of limitations starts running from the day things were suspended, and that clock is set at 10 years...

Good evening

Does anyone happen to be able to lend a hand? I’m looking for some legal advice regarding enforcement law—specifically if anyone could recommend a solid attorney who specializes in that area. If you know someone, would you mind shooting me a private message? Thanks so much in advance 😁

rowdyraven112 said:I did. The garnishment started in 2011. By using administrative freezes and redirecting the garnished portion of my paycheck to a trusted person's account, I prevented the money from bleeding out. Total garnished so far: $6.75.
I drafted the Appeal to the county court myself, and the garnishment was overturned because the creditor screwed up the procedure. The creditor sent a review to the Supreme Court, which in my opinion should fail anyway—even if the court decides to deliberate, legally there's nothing to discuss because the creditor messed up.
Two months ago, that same trusted person blocked my account and assets with a fictitious garnishment.
It took me six months of studying the Obligations Act and enforcement laws to figure this out. My next step is suing the creditor for the recovery of the garnished amount from $6.75 since the garnishment order was vacated.
The problem is that people who get garnished need to hand themselves over without being shot. When they don't, it's not just them who lose—it's also us, because we end up sharing models for escaping garnishment in vain. There is only one relevant group on Facebook that deals specifically with garnishments and escape strategies.
But first off, if you were foolish enough to let the creditor enter those notes and file salary restrictions, not even all of Marvell's heroes can pull you out of those predatory interest rates.

The court must be based on the place of residence, but for notaries, I don't think it matters. So, a notary from a different city can send you a garnishment. On the bright side, notaries have become pretty efficient with this lately; you usually get the proposal within three months at most. Once an objection is filed, the first available court handles it to keep the caseload down.

That's incorrect. According to the Enforcement Law Jurisdiction, jurisdiction is EXCLUSIVE (Art. 38), and it must be a Notary in the debtor's seat/residence—meaning the one with local jurisdiction for that area (for example, if a town doesn't have its own Notary, the nearby one would handle it, just as an analogy)

cosmicheron22 said:I have a quick question if anyone can help me make sense of this. I just received a ruling and a conclusion from the Commercial Court in San Jose, so let me quote it for you:😛Regarding Judge X and Judge Y in the enforcement case involving Creditor X, represented by Attorney X, against me as the Debtor, it has been decided: the seizure of personal property is suspended. That’s the conclusion, but here is the part I’m really scratching my head over:

The court's accounting department is ordered to pay the remaining balance of the deposited deposit to the creditor's checking account, specifically after all justified and unpaid travel expense receipts have been settled.
Then comes the explanation:

Based on this court's decision number X and Y dated June 1st, 2001, an enforcement was ordered via the sale of the debtor's seized personal property at a first public auction.
On May 15th, 2015, the first public auction was held to sell the debtor's personal property, but it was unsuccessful because there were no interested buyers (honestly, just some old TVs), and the document goes on to say that within 15 days of the auction, no party proposed scheduling a new one. Therefore, based on Article 142, Section 5 of the Enforcement Law Jurisdiction, it was decided as stated in the ruling.
So, does this mean the enforcement process is officially over, or what exactly is the explanation here?

So, the lawyer representing the creditor (an insurance company like Travelers) called me up. She basically told me it would be "best" if I just paid the debt and mentioned she had already submitted a request to the IRS for a lien on my real estate—which, by the way, I don't even own. That request has been sitting there with them for about 3 or 4 months now. AND THEN, out of nowhere, I get this letter saying the seizure of my personal property is suspended. Then she calls me again, threatening that the IRS is going to come after everything I own! I'm totally lost... what am I supposed to do? Is she just trying to scare me? It doesn't make sense. To give you some context, I signed a contract back in 1998 with this insurance company for cargo coverage because I had a shop at the time. The business went under, and I didn't pay it. They didn't bother notifying me about the debt for years since the shop was in a rented space, so I had no clue. Eventually, they tracked me down at my home address and sent me a certified letter about the enforcement. So, WHAT NOW? And she actually told me that the whole thing regarding the personal property (that old TV) has nothing to do with this and that I should just pay the debt.

cosmicheron22 said:So, the lawyer representing the creditor (an insurance company like Travelers) called me up. She basically told me it would be "best" if I just paid the debt and mentioned she had already submitted a request to the IRS for a lien on my real estate—which, by the way, I don't even own. That request has been sitting there with them for about 3 or 4 months now. AND THEN, out of nowhere, I get this letter saying the seizure of my personal property is suspended. Then she calls me again, threatening that the IRS is going to come after everything I own! I'm totally lost... what am I supposed to do? Is she just trying to scare me? It doesn't make sense. To give you some context, I signed a contract back in 1998 with this insurance company for cargo coverage because I had a shop at the time. The business went under, and I didn't pay it. They didn't bother notifying me about the debt for years since the shop was in a rented space, so I had no clue. Eventually, they tracked me down at my home address and sent me a certified letter about the enforcement. So, WHAT NOW? And she actually told me that the whole thing regarding the personal property (that old TV) has nothing to do with this and that I should just pay the debt.

So, what does that contract you signed with the CO actually say? Does it actually support their claim regarding the debt?

Look, it sounds like she's just trying to intimidate you into paying any way she can. You mentioned yourself that you don't own any real estate, so there's nothing for them to seize there. At most, they could only go after your income.

hollowmason64 said:So, what does that contract you signed with the CO actually say? Does it actually support their claim regarding the debt?

Look, it sounds like she's just trying to intimidate you into paying any way she can. You mentioned yourself that you don't own any real estate, so there's nothing for them to seize there. At most, they could only go after your income.

Yeah, the issue is that I'm working, and their lawyer told me she already submitted their enforcement order to the IRS via the court. She basically said she can trigger it whenever she feels like it—or even pull it back if I pay up, which is super confusing. As for what I actually signed with the CO... honestly, I have no clue. That was over 17 years ago! And now I'm stuck wondering: what happens now? Does this stuff just automatically bypass the statute of limitations?

It doesn't just automatically go into statute of limitations. You have to claim that yourself; the court isn't going to watch out for you... I don't know the exact timeline of this specific legal mess, so I can't say for sure if it's expired, but based on what's been said here, probably not.
Since they issued a stay on the seizure of personal property (like that TV seizure), it means the original enforcement based on the credible document became final and enforceable. That sets the statute of limitations at 10 years from when the court proceedings wrapped up.
Also, the lawyer hasn't filed anything with the IRS yet. All she can do now is switch up the collection method—basically using that enforceable document to request a new garnishment against your income, which gets sent to you and the IRS. Just try to settle with the lawyer. See if there's any chance they'll waive the interest if you pay the whole thing off at once, or maybe try to hammer out a payment plan...

Look, I’m not really the type of person who likes to jump down people's throats or play critic here, but man...
I honestly don't get how you let things escalate this far without having any clue what's actually happening or why they're coming after you for these specific amounts.
First thing you need to do is figure out the actual basis for the seizure—go down to the courthouse and take a look at the case files yourself...
..otherwise, you're basically just sitting there waiting to get hit.

Well, I finally got hit with an enforcement notice too.

Back on May 4, 2009, I got caught by transit police on a train and ticketed. The fine was roughly $300.
Naturally, I never actually paid the fine, but yesterday, out of nowhere, I received an enforcement proposal.

Attached to the notice is a Payment Order from the Zaprešić Municipal Court dated October 1, 2010, stating that I owe the fine $100 and $33 court costs.

Here’s the kicker: I never received the actual fine notice, never got a summons, and never saw any official court decision—but they certainly didn't forget to send the enforcement notice.

What are my options here? What can I actually appeal? Has this all statute-of-limitations expired?
Does anyone have examples of successful appeals?

You're better off just paying it... There’s no statute of limitations to hide behind here, because the Payment Order was issued right on schedule. They were supposed to get it to you, but honestly, even if they had delivered it, what kind of formal complaint would you even bother filing?

Rebecca White4 said:You're better off just paying it... There’s no statute of limitations to hide behind here, because the Payment Order was issued right on schedule. They were supposed to get it to you, but honestly, even if they had delivered it, what kind of formal complaint would you even bother filing?

It’s not the fine itself that I’m fighting.
My issue is with the collection fees and the bailiff costs, which are way higher than the actual penalty.
If I had just paid the fine, I could have avoided all those extra charges altogether.
Unfortunately, I couldn't pay it because I never actually received the notice in the first place.

Real estate is being sold off following a foreclosure, so I’m wondering who actually pockets the cash from those sales—everything is being handled in cash on the spot....