Check out some similar questions!

snb0495 · May 5, 2011, 01:14 PM

My husband is on SSDI due to a motorcycle accident that left him with a tramatic brain injury. After the accident we were unable to keep up with all the bills. We went to court over a credit card bill where we informed them he was on disability, I didn't have proof with me so I mailed it. A year later they garnished our joint account, she told me there was no way to get in back, and told me she had never received the proof. I faxed it to her again and just took the loss of funds thinking that, that would be the end. Today about a year later, they garnished our account again, to the sum of 5300.00 most of which already had checks written on. Now the lawyer from the card company tells me that only money I can prove came from his SSDI check can be returned. The only money that my husband receives is 1300.00 from ssdi, I work 3 jobs trying to keep everything up, the only reason we had that much is because our tax refund just came in. Are they still allowed to take my money when I had nothing to do with the law suit in the first place? I am in a terrible binde we were already late on bills now I will have bounce check fees on top of everything else, and now I will be 3 months behind on the house payment... Please Help.

smoothy · May 5, 2011, 01:15 PM

If your name is on the account... yes.

You would have to prove to the court how much is really his or they assume all of it is yours.

snb0495 · May 5, 2011, 01:23 PM

I sent them the proff from the last three months that his check was deposited into that account, along with two months of my sons ssi that he draws through his father. I am not too sure how far they go back but the total of the last three months of deposits total 5552.00. If they go back 3 months then I am thinking I should get it all back, but if they just count that as the tax refund then I bet I will get nothing. This is just way to stressful...

smoothy · May 5, 2011, 04:06 PM

The further back you can prove the better off you will be. Better to have more than they need than so little they decide to take it.

Best advice as long as you owe. Get your name off any joint accounts.

ScottGem · May 5, 2011, 05:19 PM

First when posting a follow-up question or info, please use the Answer options at the bottom of the page rather than the Comments.

As long as he is listed as an owner of the account then they can attach it. They have probably been monitoring the account and waiting for enough money to be deposited.

Proving the source of the funds to the company that holds the judgement won't accomplish anything. You need to go to the court that issued the writ of execution and ask they it be revoked on the grounds that any funds that were deposited by your husband were from protected sources. This means you have to prove where ALL the funds came from.

I hate to be harsh, but you let yourself into this. First you didn't follow up on the results of the suit. You either weren't aware that a judgment was awarded or didn't understand that it mean they can attach your assets. Then, after the first time they attached the account, you made little attempt to protect yourself from future attachments.

I think you need to be more proactive now. If you can prove that the creditor received proof that your husband's only income is from protected sources, you may have grounds for a suit against them for pursuing another attachment.

AK lawyer · May 5, 2011, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by ScottGem

... They have probably been monitoring the account and waiting for enough money to be deposited.
...

I don't know that they would be privy to that sort of information. Then can garnish an account, but I don't think they can know, absent a garnishment, how much money is in the account.

ScottGem · May 5, 2011, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by AK lawyer

I don't know that they would be privy to that sort of information. Then can garnish an account, but I don't think they can know, absent a garnishment, how much money is in the account.

Well first it would appear the don't have a lot of scruples. They were apparently told that the husband's only income was from protected sources. But they claimed to not know that not once but twice. So it would not be a stretch to believe they may have bribed someone to get info. Its also possible that a credit report might have reported activity. I just find it suspicious that they timed serving the writ just after the refund was deposited.

JudyKayTee · May 6, 2011, 07:30 AM

Sources, sources, sources - some illegal, some legal.

Happens all the time.

snb0495 · May 6, 2011, 02:58 PM

Thank you all for you answers and advice. Your correct in the fact that I was a bit lax in not following through with what I knew I should have done. When we went to court I knew that they were due the money, I did not dispute that fact, only the fact that we were unable to pay it. I also knew they couldn't make us pay, I was not aware however that they could take money from our account. After they did garnish, because she said she didn't receive the proof, I fax it and kept proof that the fax went through. I really thought that would be the end of it, so I didn't think to change accounts or banks. I didn't try to get any of that money back for one because we owe the money and for another I thought that would be the end. I never guess I would be going through it all again. I am going to try everything possible to get at least some of it back, at the moment I have sent them proof that in the last three months between my sons and husbands ssi check 5500.00 have been deposited in that account. I will let you know if anything works. Thanks again.

ScottGem · May 6, 2011, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by snb0495

at the moment i have sent them proof that in the last three months between my sons and husbands ssi check 5500.00 have been deposited in that account. I will let you know if anything works. Thanks again.

Don't send the proof to the creditor, they could care less. You need to go to the court that issued the writ. The bank doesn't turn the money over to them immediately. They just freeze your account to see if you can rescind the order. You need to go to court and file a motion to rescind. You need to get the court to take action because the creditor won't.

snb0495 · May 6, 2011, 08:42 PM

I went to the court right away. I explain the situation to the clerk, and told her that I had read on the original court paper that I could fill out a form to be exempt from garnishment. She told me she didn't know of anything but told me I needed to call the creditors lawyer, then she called her and gave me the phone number. She did tell me that they hold the funds for 20 days and that the lawyer would have to call the court and tell them what we had worked out.

ScottGem · May 7, 2011, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by snb0495

I went to the court right away. I explain the situation to the clerk, and told her that i had read on the original court paper that i could fill out a form to be exempt from garnishment. She told me she didn't know of anything but told me i needed to call the creditors lawyer, then she called her and gave me the phone number. She did tell me that they hold the funds for 20 days and that the lawyer would have to call the court and tell them what we had worked out.

The clerk was wrong. You NEED to file a motion to rescind the writ of execution. The terminology may be different where you are, but the creditor is not going to do anything. They simply need to delay for 20 days and they get your money.

Check to see if there is a local law school that has a free clinic. They can tell you what you need to file. But I am about 99% sure you need to get the court to rescind the writ to release your funds.