Sign in to follow this  
credit2011

Court judgments for debt: Your options after the gavel How they work; your 4 choices for dealing with them

Recommended Posts

"The worst choice to make about a judgment is to ignore it, experts say. Many people do so out of fear of the court process, but the consequences get ugly."

Fear. Professional collections are a psychological war on the alleged debtors.

 

"After a judgment you may be summoned to answer questions about your finances -- and asked to turn out your pockets on the spot, in some areas. Fail to answer the summons and it is remotely possible that you will be picked up by police for disobeying a court order."

Family members picked up by police no longer believe it is only "remotely possible".

 

The link at the bottom of the article looks like it should be a good read. Peter Holland, a law professor at the University of Maryland, wrote in an analysis called "Junk Justice: A Statistical Analysis of 4,400 Lawsuits Filed by Debt Buyers," published in March in the Loyola Consumer Law Review.

A quick glance provided:

Defendants who filed no response had the worst outcomes.

Of the 85% of people who did not file a response, debt buyers ob-

tained a judgment by affidavit, consent, default, or trial 73% of

the time, and recovered  82%  of  the  amount  sought in the com-

plaints.

Defendants who filed a response had better outcomes than

those  who  did  not  file  a  response,  but  the  outcomes  were  poor

overall. Of the 13% of defendants who proceeded pro se (by filing

a  response  called  a  Notice  of  Intention  to  Defend),  debt  buyers

obtained judgment by affidavit, consent, default, or trial 47% of

the time, and recovered  62%  of  the  amount  sought in the com-

plaints.

Defendants who had a lawyer fared best. Of the 2% of de-

fendants who had a lawyer enter an appearance in the case, debt

buyers  obtained  an  affidavit,  consent,  or  default  judgment  only

15% of the time, and recovered only 21% of the principal amount

sought in the complaints. 133  However defendants were represent-

ed by a lawyer in only 52 cases, and it is clear that different law-

yers provided different levels of service, rendering this data not

statistically  significant  enough  to  be  a  reliable  measurement.

 

As I understand it:

The pro-se that fights prevails 53% of the time and when they lose the judgment is only 62% of the principal amount sought in the complaint. Those that don't fight prevail only 27% of the time and the judgment is 82% of the principal amount sought in the complaint.

 

My calculations indicate that on every $100,000 of alleged debt sought in a JDB complaint...

Those that fight and lose have judgments entered against them for a total of:           $29,140  (.47 x .62 x 100,000)

Those that don't fight/respond have judgments entered against them for a total of:  $59,860 (.73 x .82 x 100,000)

Those with an attorney have judgments entered against them for a total of:              $  3,150  (.15 x .21 x 100,000) not accounting for any attorney fees paid and the fact that the "data not statistically significant enough to be a reliable measurement."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is those calculation are correct, then we can understand why the JDBs and CAs do not care if their paper is good or not. Currently out of every $100,000 they buy and sue on, they JDB can expect to collect 92% of that (or about $92,000). If they even pay 10% of that amount (which is unusually high for debt like that), they still have a profit of $82,000 or 820% of capital expended (excluding other costs such as legal fees but even there, they collect that too most of the time).

With a gross profit like that, why bother changing because a few of us on a board such as this bother to fight. Now if most of the people served bothered to fight, that might change things but right now, the system is too profitable to bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And any statistics for those who appeal???

Do it yourself is available online.

 

Go to the AZ CoA search through the 60 opinions 60 or the 323 memorandum decisions for Div 1 in 2013.

Search filter ON - 60 records found

Decision Type: OPINION

Date Range: 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2013

Court: Court of Appeals, Div 1

Case Type: CV - Civil

 

Search filter ON - 323 records found

Decision Type: MEMORANDUM

Date Range: 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2013

Court: Court of Appeals, Div 1

Case Type: CV - Civil

 

When the case states Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant & Counsel for Defendant/Appellee or similar there is not a self-represented party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this