Beasua75

Forged signature on proof of service, never personally served, garnishing my wages

Recommended Posts

Can someone please answer this question? 

If the proof of service documents say that I was personally served but wasn’t served at all, grounds to have a judgment vacated even though I still resided at the address? 

Proof that I wasn’t personally served is in the documents they filed.  Forged signatures. 

I was sued by PRA and Asset Acceptance/Midland Funding several years ago.  Default judgments awarded to both of them because I didn’t appear in court. I wasn’t personally served like the proof states. Both PRA and Asset Acceptance filed proof of service, using the same process server.  The signatures on the filed documents are obviously different. One even has a date a month after the day the server claimed I was served.  The signatures, spacing, font, and dates are clearly suspicious are my proof that I was never personally served.  I had lost my son, was laid off due to the recession that caused many Americans hardship, was losing my house, and had exhausted all my unemployment benefits.  I didn’t care to be alive then. I suffered major hardships that turned my world upside down. I was judgment proof.  Judgments were entered in 2012.  I understand timing is an issue but I still want to try to have them vacated.  It wouldn’t be hard to prove that the documents are forged,false affidavits were submitted, no valid documentation showing proof of a contract, and other violations.  I finally started to pull myself together and started working again May, 2014 and since then my wages have been garnished by PRA. Asset is patiently waiting and getting bigger every day.  Can someone give me hope?  

I can and will upload the documents if I need to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First I am sorry you lost your son.

37 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

 I understand timing is an issue but I still want to try to have them vacated.

Unfortunately it is WAY too late for that.  The time to do this was when you found out about the judgment(s) or when they started garnishing which ever came first.  Because they have been garnishing your checks for over a year now actually almost 4, the chances the court would vacate the judgment are slim to none.  To be certain consult a good consumer attorney though.

38 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

Asset is patiently waiting and getting bigger every day.

Asset is out of business and I believe Midland bought them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Beasua75

I agree with @Clydesmomthat you should consult a consumer attorney.   If necessary, consult with more than one (just like you'd get more than one doctor's opinion). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Clydesmom said:

First I am sorry you lost your son.

Unfortunately it is WAY too late for that.  The time to do this was when you found out about the judgment(s) or when they started garnishing which ever came first.  Because they have been garnishing your checks for over a year now actually almost 4, the chances the court would vacate the judgment are slim to none.  To be certain consult a good consumer attorney though.

Asset is out of business and I believe Midland bought them out.

I have consulted an attorney.  I thought I’d give it a shot on my own.  I’m hoping that I can stop Midland from garnishing based on merit and non service.  I have a good solid defense with the forged signatures and maybe excusable neglect.  

Answer me this if you will: If the documents state that I was personally served that literally means me not anyone else? If I had time on my side and with the proof that the documents were forged along with all the other violations I would stand a good chance of getting them vacated? 

If you are willing to look at the document signatures I’ll upload them @Clydesmom @BV80

I do thank you both for your feedback.  I figure I don’t have much to lose by at least trying.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

If the documents state that I was personally served that literally means me not anyone else?

Sorry for playing the skeptic, but what exactly happened? I mean did someone sign for the papers while you yelled at the server from inside the house, or did no one ever come to your residence - you just got sued and garnished without knowing anything about it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

I have a good solid defense with the forged signatures and maybe excusable neglect.

Those defenses were valid had you gone to trial or challenged the judgment on appeal.  

32 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

Answer me this if you will: If the documents state that I was personally served that literally means me not anyone else?

Yes I believe so.

32 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

If I had time on my side and with the proof that the documents were forged along with all the other violations I would stand a good chance of getting them vacated? 

4 years ago:  yes.  Today?  I doubt it.  There is a time frame to challenge this and 4 years after they started garnishing your wages is WAY too late.  After a year the judgment is presumed to be valid by the courts.  What you need to be prepared for is that the court is going to want a REALLY good reason why you didn't challenge this 4 years ago.  Excusable neglect is not going to cover this unless you were hospitalized for treatment for an extended period of time.

34 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

I’m hoping that I can stop Midland from garnishing based on merit and non service.

I am really afraid that ship has sailed.  You are correct you have nothing to lose by trying but do not get your hopes up too high on this one. 

35 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

If you are willing to look at the document signatures I’ll upload them

Make sure to black out any personally identifying information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2018 at 4:06 PM, Clydesmom said:

Those defenses were valid had you gone to trial or challenged the judgment on appeal.  

Yes I believe so.

4 years ago:  yes.  Today?  I doubt it.  There is a time frame to challenge this and 4 years after they started garnishing your wages is WAY too late.  After a year the judgment is presumed to be valid by the courts.  What you need to be prepared for is that the court is going to want a REALLY good reason why you didn't challenge this 4 years ago.  Excusable neglect is not going to cover this unless you were hospitalized for treatment for an extended period of time.

I am really afraid that ship has sailed.  You are correct you have nothing to lose by trying but do not get your hopes up too high on this one. 

Make sure to black out any personally identifying information.

 

 

relief-default-judgment

 

Party not given actual notice in time to defend action brought by a debt buyer (Civ § 1788.61): Similar to the grounds discussed above, Civ § 1788.61 permits a defendant to set aside a default or default judgment when service of a summons did not result in actual notice in time to defend cases brought by a debt buyer. This code section applies only if you were sued by debt buyer, such as a collection agency or law firm that purchased the debt from the original creditor. Motions brought under this code section must be filed within either 6 years after the entry of default, or 180 days of the first actual notice of the action, whichever is earlier.. 

thank you for your feedback.  I am most certainly not getting my hopes up as I do understand time limits.  I don’t want to have to file bankruptcy because I just started rebuilding my credit, I’m not entire ok after losing my son but I am trying to get my life back on track.   

Say that everyone agreed that the proof of service was forged/false/fake then everyone will also agree that there was no service. The court lacks jurisdiction to do anything on the matter, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2018 at 4:06 PM, Clydesmom said:

Those defenses were valid had you gone to trial or challenged the judgment on appeal.  

Yes I believe so.

4 years ago:  yes.  Today?  I doubt it.  There is a time frame to challenge this and 4 years after they started garnishing your wages is WAY too late.  After a year the judgment is presumed to be valid by the courts.  What you need to be prepared for is that the court is going to want a REALLY good reason why you didn't challenge this 4 years ago.  Excusable neglect is not going to cover this unless you were hospitalized for treatment for an extended period of time.

I am really afraid that ship has sailed.  You are correct you have nothing to lose by trying but do not get your hopes up too high on this one. 

Make sure to black out any personally identifying information.

I will do that.  Thank you! I do appreciate everyone’s feedback and time!  @Clydesmom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2018 at 3:47 PM, Goody_Ouchless said:

Sorry for playing the skeptic, but what exactly happened? I mean did someone sign for the papers while you yelled at the server from inside the house, or did no one ever come to your residence - you just got sued and garnished without knowing anything about it?

 

No worries, I’d probably think the same.  From what I know by being personally served by the same process server, he served me the court documents for my house because it was being foreclosed, I never signed any documents.  I was never avoiding being served, it was hard to catch me there because I didn’t want to be there because of the memories plus I was drinking a lot.  Not that any of that matters but I know for a fact I was not personally served and no one was ever given such summons that may have been there. I was friendly with the server when he gave me the summons for the house.  It’s about a two hour drive for him to serve me.  I don’t think he had anything to do with the false proof of summons.  I honestly believe that the jbd’s did this and still do this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Beasua75 said:

 

 

relief-default-judgment

 

Party not given actual notice in time to defend action brought by a debt buyer (Civ § 1788.61): Similar to the grounds discussed above, Civ § 1788.61 permits a defendant to set aside a default or default judgment when service of a summons did not result in actual notice in time to defend cases brought by a debt buyer. This code section applies only if you were sued by debt buyer, such as a collection agency or law firm that purchased the debt from the original creditor. Motions brought under this code section must be filed within either 6 years after the entry of default, or 180 days of the first actual notice of the action, whichever is earlier.. 

thank you for your feedback.  I am most certainly not getting my hopes up as I do understand time limits.  I don’t want to have to file bankruptcy because I just started rebuilding my credit, I’m not entire ok after losing my son but I am trying to get my life back on track.   

Say that everyone agreed that the proof of service was forged/false/fake then everyone will also agree that there was no service. The court lacks jurisdiction to do anything on the matter, right? 

@Clydesmom @BV80 @Goody_Ouchless Thank you for your feedback. 

 

Party not given actual notice in time to defend action brought by a debt buyer (Civ § 1788.61): Similar to the grounds discussed above, Civ § 1788.61 permits a defendant to set aside a default or default judgment when service of a summons did not result in actual notice in time to defend cases brought by a debt buyer. This code section applies only if you were sued by debt buyer, such as a collection agency or law firm that purchased the debt from the original creditor. Motions brought under this code section must be filed within either 6 years after the entry of default, or 180 days of the first actual notice of the action, whichever is earlier.

What does the above paragraph mean? @Clydesmom

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Beasua75 said:

@Clydesmom @BV80 @Goody_Ouchless Thank you for your feedback. 

 

Party not given actual notice in time to defend action brought by a debt buyer (Civ § 1788.61): Similar to the grounds discussed above, Civ § 1788.61 permits a defendant to set aside a default or default judgment when service of a summons did not result in actual notice in time to defend cases brought by a debt buyer. This code section applies only if you were sued by debt buyer, such as a collection agency or law firm that purchased the debt from the original creditor. Motions brought under this code section must be filed within either 6 years after the entry of default, or 180 days of the first actual notice of the action, whichever is earlier.

What does the above paragraph mean? @Clydesmom

 

It means if you were not given sufficient time to defend the action you can use this as a defense to over turn the default judgment.  You have a slim chance of getting this set aside but you will need a skilled consumer attorney to do it.  This is not a DIY project.  The problem you have is that you have known about this action for 4 years and allowed the wage garnishment.  I highly suspect the court's opinion will be the time to assert that paragraph/defense was when they garnished you and you found out about the action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2018 at 12:09 PM, Clydesmom said:

It means if you were not given sufficient time to defend the action you can use this as a defense to over turn the default judgment.  You have a slim chance of getting this set aside but you will need a skilled consumer attorney to do it.  This is not a DIY project.  The problem you have is that you have known about this action for 4 years and allowed the wage garnishment.  I highly suspect the court's opinion will be the time to assert that paragraph/defense was when they garnished you and you found out about the action.

But is garnishment a proper "notice of action"?  I don't know that it is.  This statute says the OP has 6 years to over turn the judgement or 180 days after "first actual notice of action".  I would argue no actual notice of the court action was ever given. I would argue that garnishment does not give me any notice of a court action only that Midland is taking money for some reason.  Whether the court agrees or not, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

But is garnishment a proper "notice of action"?  I don't know that it is.  This statute says the OP has 6 years to over turn the judgement or 180 days after "first actual notice of action".  I would argue no actual notice of the court action was ever given. I would argue that garnishment does not give me any notice of a court action only that Midland is taking money for some reason.  Whether the court agrees or not, I don't know.

The judgments were entered in 2012.  The OP doesn't have much time to file a motion to try to get the judgments set aside.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

But is garnishment a proper "notice of action"?  I don't know that it is. 

I never said it wasn't.  I said the MAJOR problem the OP has is that notice came 4 years ago   They have been having their wages garnished for 4 years.  You know very well that the courts would consider it a moot point after that amount of time.  If the OP wants to get this vacated under that statute it is going to take an attorney who can effectively maneuver the courts with the long period of time that has lapsed since the garnishment started. 

2 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

This statute says the OP has 6 years to over turn the judgement or 180 days after "first actual notice of action".

The 180 days after the first notice of garnishment expired 3 and a half years ago.  That is a major hurdle to over come.

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.