[Vision]

My wife just got a letter from a law firm representing Asset Acceptance on a judgement from back in 1999. According to the letter, the judgement was renewed in 2009 for another 10 years...can this be right? They are submitting a court order to attempt garnishing her wages. We're trying to figure out her options.

[Cada]

Yep...it's possible...judgments are often renewable so you'll need to check your state laws to see what applies. You may also want to look into your states garnishment laws to get an idea of what to expect. Have you considered talking to an atty who specializes in consumer debt issues? Sometimes they'll give a free or low cost consultation and can most likely give you better advice about your options.

[Vision]

Cada, on 21 February 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

Yep...it's possible...judgments are often renewable so you'll need to check your state laws to see what applies. You may also want to look into your states garnishment laws to get an idea of what to expect. Have you considered talking to an atty who specializes in consumer debt issues? Sometimes they'll give a free or low cost consultation and can most likely give you better advice about your options.

Gotcha...I found an attorney in our area that was recommended by the Bud Hibbs website, we are waiting to hear back from him now. This judgement is confusing to me because it has never showed up on the credit report, and she was never notified about a court date for the judgement renewal.

[Vision]

Okay, we've talked to a few lawyers in the area and they have told us that the renewal is legit, so we should try to get a settlement. We got all the documents on her case from court. The original judgement from 1999 was for around $10,000. They renewed the judgement in 2009, and that was for the same amount of $10,000. But in the garnishment order they are adding $20,000 in interest, for a total of $30,000. That amount of interest seems crazy to me. A lawyer recommended that we request a detailed calculation of the interest - he said they can't add more than 3% interest in our state.

We are going to try offering a settlement, we may be able to pay the full original judgement amount of $10,000. Any tips on trying to get a settlement?

[Massive]

Vision, on 28 February 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

Okay, we've talked to a few lawyers in the area and they have told us that the renewal is legit, so we should try to get a settlement. We got all the documents on her case from court. The original judgement from 1999 was for around $10,000. They renewed the judgement in 2009, and that was for the same amount of $10,000. But in the garnishment order they are adding $20,000 in interest, for a total of $30,000. That amount of interest seems crazy to me. A lawyer recommended that we request a detailed calculation of the interest - he said they can't add more than 3% interest in our state.

We are going to try offering a settlement, we may be able to pay the full original judgement amount of $10,000. Any tips on trying to get a settlement?

How was the judgment obtained?? Did you fight it?? If it was me in your situation I would file a response to the garnishment action stating that I am willing to pay this judgment or a portion of it as long as there is authenticated evidence on the record that Asset Acceptance does in fact own the debt that is the subject of this judgment. I would also note that "Fraud Upon The Court" has no statute of limitations and res judicata is waived when the court has been defrauded. An Attorney expressed to me that in his over twenty years of defending junk debt buyer lawsuits, he had yet to experience a junk debt buyer EVER being able to prove with admissible evidence that they owned any debt.
I know they have a judgment, but that does NOT prove that they own the debt. I would check the entire case file and search for that elusive "bill of sale" and if it isn't in the file I would attack the garnishment and judgment. I'm not talking about some "bill of sale" showing a portfolio of bundled accounts, I am talking about an actual bill of sale showing the entire chain of custody of ownership with your name, account number, balance and amount of consideration paid by the junk debt buyer. You may think I'm nuts, but if a legitimate bill of sale is not in the court case file then judgment is not merely voidable but it is and always was void from its inception, that is void ab initio.
Keep us posted.

[Massive]

I forgot to add that there is a valid reason why a respected consumer advocate like Bud Hibbs believes that consumers should never pay a junk debt buyer any money.

[Massive]

Vision, on 21 February 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

My wife just got a letter from a law firm representing Asset Acceptance on a judgement from back in 1999. According to the letter, the judgement was renewed in 2009 for another 10 years...can this be right? They are submitting a court order to attempt garnishing her wages. We're trying to figure out her options.

Arizona2012 exposes the fact they have next to nothing as evidence. That should give you confidence in attacking the judgment, regardless of how old it is.

[Vision]

Massive, on 28 February 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

How was the judgment obtained?? Did you fight it?? If it was me in your situation I would file a response to the garnishment action stating that I am willing to pay this judgment or a portion of it as long as there is authenticated evidence on the record that Asset Acceptance does in fact own the debt that is the subject of this judgment. I would also note that "Fraud Upon The Court" has no statute of limitations and res judicata is waived when the court has been defrauded. An Attorney expressed to me that in his over twenty years of defending junk debt buyer lawsuits, he had yet to experience a junk debt buyer EVER being able to prove with admissible evidence that they owned any debt.
I know they have a judgment, but that does NOT prove that they own the debt. I would check the entire case file and search for that elusive "bill of sale" and if it isn't in the file I would attack the garnishment and judgment. I'm not talking about some "bill of sale" showing a portfolio of bundled accounts, I am talking about an actual bill of sale showing the entire chain of custody of ownership with your name, account number, balance and amount of consideration paid by the junk debt buyer. You may think I'm nuts, but if a legitimate bill of sale is not in the court case file then judgment is not merely voidable but it is and always was void from its inception, that is void ab initio.
Keep us posted.

There was definitely no bill of sale in the court documents. They had one of the documents from the original purchase (this debt is for a car that was purchased, and ended up being in an accident which totaled it, and the insurance company didn't pay the full amount owed.) But there was no bill of sale in the documents.

[Vision]

Okay - we just got off the phone with Asset Acceptance. They refused to accept any payoff less than the full $30,000. They told us that the interest was calculated at 12% (even though they shouldn't be charging more than 3% interest according to the lawyers we talked to.) They refused to send us anything in writing at all - nothing about the interest calculation, and nothing proving that they owned the debt. They just kept telling us that they didn't have to send us anything at all, and that we should go to the court to get this information. We already have the entire file from the court, and none of that is in it.

I don't know what to do now. I guess we could send letters requesting this information formally. But we definitely need to have a lawyer represent us at this point.

[Linx04]

What state are you in?

[Vision]

Linx04, on 28 February 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

What state are you in?

Michigan.

[Vision]

We sent a certified letter to Asset Acceptance asking that they show proof that my wife owes the debt, and proof that they have purchased it. We also asked for a detailed calculation of the interest charged. According to the lawyers we talked to they can't charge more than 3% but they are charging us 12%.

It's really stressful because they are already garnishing 25% of her wages at this point. I'm not sure what else we should do. Is there something we can file with the court showing that we are disputing the judgment amount and/or the garnishment?

[Vision]

Okay here's an update. We a certified letter to Asset Acceptance asking for debt verification and a detailed calculation of interest owed. We also sent a letter to the court that we were disputing the amount of the judgment.

I called Asset Acceptance and let them know about both letters, and asked about settlement options. Right off the bat they offered to settle for $19,000. (They are garnishing my wife for $30,000. The original amount owed is $10,000 and they are adding $20,000 in interest.) I offered them $8,000, which they said is too low, but I'm holding firm to that amount. They came back with an offer for $15,000. I still held firm to $8,000. They then came back with an offer of $8,000 now to stop the garnishment, and then a payment plan for a remaining $7000 (still adding up to $15,000.) I held firm to $8,000, and at that point they said they would need to go to a higher manager to try to get approval.

They called me back today, didn't say if they got approval for my offer of $8,000 or not, but said that to proceed with settlement negotiations they needed to see my wife's last two paystubs for income verification. My question is should I refuse to send this? Are they trying to use it against us as a reason to deny the settlement offer? Or is there a legit reason they'd need to verify income? We are offering to pay it off with one payment of $8,000 - not a payment plan, so I don't know why they would need income verification.

[Massive]

Vision, on 05 March 2012 - 04:31 PM, said:

Okay here's an update. We a certified letter to Asset Acceptance asking for debt verification and a detailed calculation of interest owed. We also sent a letter to the court that we were disputing the amount of the judgment.

I called Asset Acceptance and let them know about both letters, and asked about settlement options. Right off the bat they offered to settle for $19,000. (They are garnishing my wife for $30,000. The original amount owed is $10,000 and they are adding $20,000 in interest.) I offered them $8,000, which they said is too low, but I'm holding firm to that amount. They came back with an offer for $15,000. I still held firm to $8,000. They then came back with an offer of $8,000 now to stop the garnishment, and then a payment plan for a remaining $7000 (still adding up to $15,000.) I held firm to $8,000, and at that point they said they would need to go to a higher manager to try to get approval.

They called me back today, didn't say if they got approval for my offer of $8,000 or not, but said that to proceed with settlement negotiations they needed to see my wife's last two paystubs for income verification. My question is should I refuse to send this? Are they trying to use it against us as a reason to deny the settlement offer? Or is there a legit reason they'd need to verify income? We are offering to pay it off with one payment of $8,000 - not a payment plan, so I don't know why they would need income verification.

Looks like you want this over with. In that case I would get a settlement in writing that the $8,000.00 acts as payment in full and releases both of you from any further claims. If they indeed added illegal interest as you were advised by an Attorney they should be agreeable to the stipulation that this payment acts as a payment in full and releases both you and the junk debt buyer from any further claims. Interesting how they went from $19,000 to $15,000 and are seeking $8,000 now to stop the garnishment. They most likely paid about $300 for the $10,000 debt although that is an estimate since the account was among hundreds of others bundled up and "sold" for pennies on the dollar. I'm sad that this original scam is foisted on the American people, the same people who have paid thousands over the years in social security payments, which the government spent as soon as it received the payments from your paycheck, then left IOU's in the social security trust fund. When social security payments are due the American senior citizens, the American tax payer is taxed again because the trust fund was raided and left only with worthless IOU's. Further, the American people are saddled with bailing out these Banks and to the further of that, I am sad that these same bailed out Banks have the audacity to sue the American people with credit card lawsuits and/or sell these "debts" they have charged off for pennies on the dollar in bulk portfolios to junk debt buyers who then attempt to make millions off an unsuspecting public. I've said enough!!!! That's why I would never pay a junk debt buyer a penny and also why I have helped consumers chew up and spit out junk debt buyers and original creditors. I was abused by original creditor suits once upon a time and learned the scam and how to fight the scammers.