Ask Me Help Desk - Default Judgment

Default Judgment

In 1996 I bought my son a set of drums. I received financing for the drum set from a financial company. In 1997 I lost my job and could not make the payments and called the company to let them know I had lost my job and could not afford to may payment and that I was moving out of state and let them know that they could pick up the drum set and gave them the address of where the drums would be. They never retrieved the drums from my church where I left them. Although they were given my new address they sued me and never sent me notice. They received a default judgment against me in 1997 which I just learned about and now are trying levy a trailer I owned in Idaho and have threatened to levy my car which is owned by my husband and I in Oklahoma.

I have not lived in Florida since July of 2007 and would like to know how long is the Judgment good for and can they seize my car and sale it at a sheriff sale. I do not own the trailer anymore so I am not worried about it but I am worried about them trying to seize my car.

Hello c:

It's probably good for 10 years and then can be renewed for another 10.

They can also attach your bank accounts and garnish your wages. They can't get your car, though.

excon

I agree with excon - now that's reduced to a judgment they can keep renewing and renewing until it is satisfied. It's old - have you tried to contact them? I don't know what your financial state is but rather than get nickels and dimes over a period they might take a lump sum now - 50% is not unusual.

Don't know Florida law - thought your car could be seized (although the creditor usually doesn't want the bother) but excon is right and that's not true in Florida.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Don't know Florida law - thought your car could be seized (although the creditor usually doesn't want the bother) but Excon is right and that's not true in Florida.

Hello Judy:

Your advice is terrific here. We need all the help we can get. Keep it up.

If the loan WAS secured, it was the drum set that was the security. They didn't want the drums. So, they can't all of a sudden make her CAR their security and take it.

Generally speaking, personal property, including cars, is exempt from seizure.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello Judy:

Your advice is terrific here. We need all the help we can get. Keep it up.

If the loan WAS secured, it was the drum set that was the security. They didn't want the drums. So, they can't all of a sudden make her CAR their security and take it.

Generally speaking, personal property, including cars, is exempt from seizure.

excon

Thanks - I wasn't thinking security; you are absolutely right in that regard. I was thinking getting their hands on assets to satisfy a judgment. In some States I believe cars are exempt; they are not in other States.

(Ever have a kid with a drum set? I'd try to force them to take it back! )

IF they never served you notice of the summons for jusgment you can File MOtion to Vacate judgment for improper service in the court that issued the judgment, you will have to attend that hearing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.yet

IF they never served you notice of the summons for jusgment you can File MOtion to Vacate judgment for improper service in the court that issued the judgment, you will have to attend that hearing.

This may vary in different parts of the country but setting aside a judgment on the grounds of improper service is very difficult here - I own a process service company and have never once lost a motion on the grounds of improper service. Process servers are trained professionals, understand what is required and what is allowed; of course, there are mavericks and maybe that's what happened to you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

This may vary in different parts of the country but setting aside a judgment on the grounds of improper service is very difficult here - I own a process service company and have never once lost a motion on the grounds of improper service. Process servers are trained professionals, understand what is required and what is allowed; of course, there are mavericks and maybe that's what happened to you.

Proper service is correctly identify the party served, and place it in their hands. No the process server must swear under oath they did that. If a challenge is place in court that process serve must be present to answer questions. IF they don't show up that al called affidavit is hearsay since the defendant did ot have the chance to question the witness.

Proper procedure must be afford to each party in any civil action.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.yet

Proper service is correctly identify the party served, and place it in their hands. No the process server must swear under oath they did that. If a challange is place in court that process serve must be present to answer questions. IF they dont show up that al called affidavit is hearsay since the defendant did ot have the chance to question the witness.

Proper procedure must be afford to each party in any civil action.

This is not 100% correct - there are circumstances and situations in which "nail and mail" (place it in a conspicuous spot and follow up with mailing within a prescribed number of days) or substitute service (service on a responsible party) are acceptable and legal. Not everyone is happy to see a process server and so they avoid, lie about their identity, claim the party moved, whatever they think will work. In NYS divorce papers MUST be personally served and that takes some time and thought. In all cases the process server signs the Affidavit of Service, which is notarized, and that Affidavit must be filed with the Court with a copy of the paper served within a prescribed number of days. We are obviously in different jurisdictions because the process server does NOT have to appear if there is a motion to preclude for bad service - although it is helpful if he/she does - and the Affidavit stands on its own. The Courts here often (never say always or never) assume that the process server has nothing to gain in the action, no interest, but the potential Defendant does have an interest and every reason to lie. Also the average lay person, not an Attorney, doesn't have a clue how to cross examine and only annoys the Court. (Speaking only for my experience.)