Author Topic: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement  (Read 1246 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dilberto

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4
Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« on: February 04, 2016 10:30:31 PM »
Hi all, I have been dealing with an aggressive judgement creditor(Calif). They have been persistently pulling my credit, since repossessing my car in 1994. They sold the car at auction and the deficiency is $1400. Years go by and I moved several times, not knowing the entire time this creditor has been using my credit to get a fix on where I work and live. Last year, they finally caught up with me. My debt has now ballooned to a whopping $11,800, factoring interest and their other <Removed> charges. However, I was never properly served. Can I get a judge to vacate this old judgement entirely on my own, or borrow money I don't have to retain an attorney?
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016 10:34:52 PM by Dilberto »

The Litigator

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1188
  • So, sue me.
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2016 12:56:40 AM »
Hi all, I have been dealing with an aggressive judgement creditor(Calif). They have been persistently pulling my credit, since repossessing my car in 1994. They sold the car at auction and the deficiency is $1400. Years go by and I moved several times, not knowing the entire time this creditor has been using my credit to get a fix on where I work and live. Last year, they finally caught up with me. My debt has now ballooned to a whopping $11,800, factoring interest and their other <Removed> charges. However, I was never properly served. Can I get a judge to vacate this old judgement entirely on my own, or borrow money I don't have to retain an attorney?

Only an atty can advise you on this matter.

IMO if I was a judge and you came into my courtroom with this defense to an almost 20 year old judgment I would say denied.

Look at making yourself judgment proof.

Dilberto

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2016 05:57:04 AM »
Ok, but not serving me(they claim they "tried")would still be considered improper debt collection, right? Yes, I moved around a lot because I followed where the Information Technology jobs were most needed. I wasn't trying to "run" from this judgement....I simply had no idea a deficiency balance was due.

Bruno the JDB Killer

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 13110
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2016 01:03:54 PM »
California law says:

You must file a motion (petition) NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS from the date the court clerk mailed you the Notice of Entry of Judgment (Form SC-130 or Form SC-200).

If you were NOT PROPERLY SERVED with the Plaintiff's Claim (Form SC-100), you have 180 DAYS from the date you DISCOVERED there was a judgment against you to file a motion to vacate.

You need to see what is in the court file, if they even still have it.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

The Litigator

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1188
  • So, sue me.
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2016 02:14:40 PM »
As Bruno said. You can view the case file and try.

You are up against the caprice of the Court on this one.

I've seen judges grant orders to vacate really old judgements like this and then tell others no. Depends on your demeanor in court and a valid excuse.

Oh and yes, following procedure.

Bruno the JDB Killer

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 13110
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2016 02:44:04 PM »
Also look up the statutes for repossession. See if all the documents etc required were properly filed. There has to be a procedure for informing you of the deficiency, probably a law suit.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

Dilberto

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2016 04:32:29 PM »
The deficiency letter was forwarded to me a year after it was sent. I guess moving around chasing jobs has it's drawbacks. I got the case files from court recently and it appears they left the summons to an address I was using solely to receive mail. I never paid a cent of rent and never resided there ever. The lady who received the docs can attest I was never a renter.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016 04:44:52 PM by Dilberto »

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 9779
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2016 05:00:23 PM »
You're going to have to have a better story than using the address where you were served as a mail drop to get out of this.


The fact that the lady getting your mail didn't give you the summons will be seen as a matter between you and the lady.

And if you are to be so lucky as to get the judgment set aside, you'll find that you are served right there in front of the court.

Bruno the JDB Killer

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 13110
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2016 05:22:01 PM »
California law as I understand it requires you to submit a viable defense to the charge when you file to have the judgment vacated. The theory being, if you couldn't have won the case then, you won't be able to win it now.

If you can get away with the non-service story, thestatute of limitations may have run on this and they may not be able to serve you again. I think you need a consultation with a lawyer who specializes in this area of the law.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

Dilberto

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2016 05:48:22 PM »
You're going to have to have a better story than using the address where you were served as a mail drop to get out of this.


The fact that the lady getting your mail didn't give you the summons will be seen as a matter between you and the lady.

And if you are to be so lucky as to get the judgment set aside, you'll find that you are served right there in front of the court.

(I) was not properly served with the summons and complaint in this
matter. When a plaintiff fails to comply with the applicable statutes regarding service. a
judgment is void not merely voidable. See, County of San Diego v. Gorham (2010) 186
Cal.App.4th 1215.1226 ("[a] judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction of the person
where there is no proper service of process on or appearance by a party to the
proceedings"). When a court lacks "fundamental jurisdiction" over the parties or subject
matter, any ensuing judgment is void and vulnerable to collateral or direct attack at any
time. Id. atp.1225; Rochin v. Pat Johnson Manufacturing Co. (1998) 67 Cal.App. th
1228,1?39, A judgment that is acquired in violation of due process rights is void and
must be set aside regardless of the merits of the underlying case. See, Perolta v. Heights
Medical Center, ftc. (1988) 485 U.S. 80, 86-87.) Prejudice is not a factor in setting
aside a void judgment or order. See, Sindler v. Brennan (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 1350.
13s4.).
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016 06:07:42 PM by Dilberto »

CleaningUp

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 9779
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2016 07:00:46 PM »

(I) was not properly served with the summons and complaint in this



It's not what YOU say, it's what the COURT says.

Right now, the COURT says you owe the money.

I agree that you are in over your head if you want to take this on.  Think, too, of the consequences of your losing the argument.


coltfan1972

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 6532
  • My Shoes Cost More Than Your House
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2016 07:03:53 PM »
I got the case files from court recently and it appears they left the summons to an address I was using solely to receive mail..

415.20.  (a) In lieu of personal delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint to the person to be served as specified in Section
416.10, 416.20, 416.30, 416.40, or 416.50, a summons may be served by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint during usual office hours in his or her office or, if no physical address is known, at his or her usual mailing address, other than a United States Postal Service post office box...

You were legally served, so go beat your horse all you want.
LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom- 05-17-2013 | 10:11 AM --

JONESBORO, Ark. - A federal judge in Arkansas on May 15 ruled that dismissal of a consumer's lawsuit against a debt collector is not proper because although the consumer posted messages on a website "in an odious manner," valid First Amendment concerns exist (Brandon Scroggin v. Credit Bureau of Jonesboro Inc., No. 12-0128, E.D. Ark.; 2013 U.S. Dist. Lexis 69070).

Bruno the JDB Killer

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 13110
Re: Wage Garnishment from 1998 Judgement
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2016 07:51:08 PM »
The deficiency letter was forwarded to me a year after it was sent.



I would say according to what you posted, this letter was forwarded to you when, maybe 1995? Why didn't you respond to it? There will be a record of this. It should be in the court file. See what it says. If it puts you on notice of a lawsuit, you have a problem.

The kinds of excuses you are putting forth here do not have a high rate of success. Judges are tired of hearing people claim they didn't read their mail, didn't live where they were served, etc. You need an argument that the court will accept. So far you don't have one.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.