Home
Public Forum
Credit Reports
Apply For Cards
Credit Directory
Credit Overview
Credit Problems
Credit News
International
Credit Glossary
Purchase Books
Credit Laws
Business Credit
Merchant Accts
   

Re: Debthelp.com (Q for CAK, WhyChat, LadynRed, etc.)


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Credit Forum Index ]

Posted by WhyBother (198.81.26.74) on November 23, 2003 at 17:34:02:

In Reply to: Re: Debthelp.com (Q for CAK, WhyChat, LadynRed, etc.) posted by LadynRed on November 23, 2003 at 15:21:49:

> If you've got a large debt, they won't take $20 a month and a judge will agree with them !

Not true. It doesn't always matter what the CA will or won't take since they usually just want a lump sum amount. I specifically know someone who got involved with Debtors Anonymous. She got onto a payment plan, started making consistent payemts with all her creditors, and the one creditor decided to sue. However, the judge did not give a judgement against her because she was making reasonable payments. I think it just depends on the circumstances. A judge has to realize that a judgement against a debtor who is making reasonable, affordable and consistent payments has a very high likelihood of forcing someone to file BK, since wage ganishments and seizure of one's account could make life unlivable for someone. Also, a judge needs to be able to distinguish between someone who is making good faith efforts to pay off their debts versus someone who has the money and just doesn't want to pay.

You're correct about debtor's exams, but note that it takes a lot of work to get a garnishment in place. It first involves suing and winning a judgement, and then takes the time, paperwork and process of a debtor's exam, and then takes the time, paperwork and process of doing the wage garnishment itself. And then again the debtor may appeal the judgement. So taking the wage garnishment approach could be time-consuming and expensive, and then hope the debtor doesn't declare BK which would nullify all the time, money and effort that went into that.

I think he mentioned not giving out one's employer information to reduce any sort of threats amd harrasment, although it is true that if someone doesn't know your employer they can't garnish your wages.

Either way, a lot of times what worked for one person won't necessarily work for someone else.




Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:


[ Follow Ups ]   [ Post Followup ]   [ Credit Forum Index ]

 

    Top Of Page

  

Copyright © 1999-2003 Enkephalos Web Design