mojorison_2000 Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 I was sued by a Citibank attorney back in November and responded that the lawsuit was invalid because the attorney did not follow Fair Debt Collection procedures(he really didn't, he failed to verify debt). As predicted on this forum, he has now filed a motion for summary judgement. What does this mean exactly? I really have no assets. Can wages be garnished? Is there any way to defend against such a thing? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 First of all, just because someone doesn't follow the FDCPA doesn't make anything invalid. It's just then up to you to call them on it. You could/should have filed a counterclaim if there were violations.Was the lawyer trying to collect on the debt or did they just sue right away? If they just sued, FDCPA doens't apply here.Usually, they'll file an MSJ after they send you Discovery. Did you get any Admissions or Interrogatories? If so, did you answer those? When you file an MSJ, you're basically saying "listen, there's no reason to go to trial over this because I have this proof, this proof, and this proof...and I'd win anyway." For instance, if they sent you Amissions and you didn't answer them, you in essence admitted everything and therefore there was no reason for court, etc. It's just a faster and cheaper way to say "I win, let's get this over with."You can file an objection to their MSJ, but it has to have good cause. You cant' just do a simple "they're wrong" line...you have to prove WHY.As far as garnishment, it's possible,sure. It depends on the state you're in, how aggressive the lawyer is, etc. You need to check into your state rules about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojorison_2000 Posted March 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 No, I did everything correctly...the collection attorney sent a letter, I replied and disputed and he failed to verify the debt. Anyway, water under the bridge;I have no problem paying what I owe Citi-I fell on hard times and leaned WAY too heavily on my cards. But I have worked out agreements with my other creditors and enrolled in their hardship programs, and they deduct a certain amount of $ from my checking account each month, and I have been doing this for several months now(had all late fees and penalties erased, by the way!). What I am worried about is going into court and having the judge award a 25% garnishment to Citi's sleazy lawyer. This will prevent me from keeping up with all my debt obligations already established. Do judges generally consider your debts already being paid when they award a summary judgement and establish garnishment(or is it possible the court will work out some sort of non-garnishment arrangement?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 Well, a summary judgment will end up like any other judgment. It's very possible you will be able to work something out with them. If it's done in front of the judge and agreed to in writing, it should work out just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 Counter sue the attorney for violating the FDCPA. If he regularly sues for debts due to Citi.. which I guarantee he does.. then you have him dead to rights on an FDCPA violation.It might only be a grand but you could still use it to pay Citi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 If you do any countersuit, make sure to read your local rules and see how to do it and in what time frame you can do it in. Since it's gone this far it might either be too late or you'd have to motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 Good point CM.. thanks for making me not look so much like an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c m chase Posted March 9, 2005 Report Share Posted March 9, 2005 That's what I'm here for! My looking like an idiot so much overwhelms everyone else's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojorison_2000 Posted March 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 Thanks for all your help. A few final questions-I really have no assets, but do own my home and have probably 70K in equity,can they go after that? Also, I married after I opened my account with Citi, and while my wife never used tha account, I am afraid they might go after her paycheck or such...is this legal or practiced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blacksurfer Posted March 15, 2005 Report Share Posted March 15, 2005 Answering a Motion for Summary Judgement can be tricky. In the book I'm reading, Sue in California without a lawyer, it explains how to answer a MSJ. The judge who wrote the book says he saw too many defendants lose at this point simply because they didn't know how to respond to a MSJ. It should be similiar in most states. The book is downloadable from Amazon. For about $23 the book is worth it, even though the forms are for Calif. In some case if the creditor loses the MSJ, they usually dismiss the case unless the amount is large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
workingitout Posted March 16, 2005 Report Share Posted March 16, 2005 No, I did everything correctly...the collection attorney sent a letter, I replied and disputed and he failed to verify the debt. Anyway, water under the bridge;I have no problem paying what I owe Citi-I fell on hard times and leaned WAY too heavily on my cards. But I have worked out agreements with my other creditors and enrolled in their hardship programs, and they deduct a certain amount of $ from my checking account each month, and I have been doing this for several months now(had all late fees and penalties erased, by the way!). What I am worried about is going into court and having the judge award a 25% garnishment to Citi's sleazy lawyer. This will prevent me from keeping up with all my debt obligations already established. Do judges generally consider your debts already being paid when they award a summary judgement and establish garnishment(or is it possible the court will work out some sort of non-garnishment arrangement?)All you have to do is argue the motion for summary judgement. You get a hearing on it. Try to argue why it's not valid. If the judge grants the motion, you lose. But you are assuming it goes right to garnishment. That can't happen if you file a request to the court to establish court ordered payments. On the request you list all of your obligations and say what you can pay. You file that ( shouldnt be any charge) and then the judge reviews it. If the amount seems reasonable with what your obligations are, income, etc. the judge will grant it. Then you follow the court order to start making payments and then they can't do a garnishment as long as you keep up with payments. And even if you didnt and they got a garnishment you could still appeal it. Don't think they have all the control cuz they dont. For instance, Ford Motor Credit sued, they won against me, $1800, I filed for payments I had hardly any disposable income after paying bills- offered to pay $50 a month, it was ordered by judge. They also add a "statuatory" interest rate mine in state of MI is 3.6 % that varies depending on your state I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts