JudgmentBuy is taking off big, I have at least 500 judgments backlogged, working night and day to place them with judgment buyers and enforcers. Also i had to spend a lot of time making a 100 million dollar judgment against sneaky debtors with assets placed with the right expert.
As soon as I'm caught up I will resume posting to this blog, stay tuned, thanks. Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com
Total Pageviews
Thursday, June 13, 2013
Monday, June 3, 2013
The Fifth Amendment And Judgments
Although most judgment debtor examinations take place in hallways or areas away from the judge, occasionally a judgment debtor will attempt to invoke "their 5th Amendment rights", and say they cannot answer your question(s), because answering your questions might lead to self-incrimination.
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
Generally, judgment debtor examinations are intended to have the "widest scope of inquiry in the search for assets to satisfy the judgment". Generally, "Leave no stone unturned" applies, and creditors are much less susceptible to relevance objections if they can show a connection between their questions and the debtor's assets.
The Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, includes a provision that no person may be forced to testify as a witness against themselves in a criminal matter. Fifth Amendment protection requests are much more likely to be heard in criminal courts, however sometimes they are also heard in civil courts.
Until the possibility of a criminal charge arises (with the district attorney's office or the police involved), within a court; creditors are usually free to ask almost anything they want. Usually, a debtor may only successfully claim their privilege against self-incrimination if there is an imminent threat of prosecution for a crime. The 5th Amendment only defends against self-incrimination, and is not a right not to answer. Judges may compel debtors to answer questions in situations where the debtor is attempting to thwart the creditor.
In a criminal case, the defendant or their attorney can ask for a recess, then go to the prosecutor's office, and get a 5th Amendment waiver from prosecution, to reduce the likelihood of self-incrimination.
In civil courts, if a judgment debtor uses the 5th Amendment as the reason not to answer your question(s) at an examination, they must next speak with the judge. As the creditor, you can then politely ask the judge to review your question(s), and have the judgment debtor explain why your questions might be prejudicial to their 5th Amendment rights in the civil judgment debtor examination. Then, the judge will either:
A) Remind the debtor this is a civil proceeding, not a criminal case, and the judgment debtor cannot assert their 5th Amendment rights unless they allege that revealing the information would cause a criminal case against them.
B) Grant the debtor's 5th amendment request only for specific questions. Whether a specific Fifth Amendment request will be denied or approved, cannot be predicted. It is always determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on the unique facts and circumstances surrounding each question.
A Fifth Amendment claim can be asserted in any proceeding; civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. A judgment debtor cannot successfully make a "blanket assertion" of their Fifth Amendment rights. However, for particular questions, Fifth Amendment objections are regularly upheld, even in post-judgment proceedings.
Even when a judgment debtor fails an attempt to assert their 5th Amendment right, their refusal to answer your question will rarely result in a contempt ruling. Even when the reason for a certain course of action is completely without merit, a person's good faith belief in its meritorious nature, even if not successful, will rarely become a red flag for contempt. However, a fair judge might become angry at debtors attempting to abuse the 5th Amendment's purpose, only to thwart their creditor.
Even when the court orders the judgment debtor to answer a question after they have asserted their 5th Amendment right, the debtor can later file an appeal; and delay the proceedings for a long time, which makes it likely the judgment will settle at a steep discount. If the debtor's 5th Amendment-related request is granted, the creditor can probably later take the issue up again at some appeal-type hearing, having to spend more time and money.
In Troy vs. Superior Court (1986) 186 Cal. App. 3d 1006, the Court of Appeals said that in order for a judgment debtor to claim the 5th in a debtor examination, a "real danger" must exist, not merely speculation. This case was followed by Hooser vs Superior Court (2000) 84 Cal App 4th 997.
A 5th Amendment claim is harder to argue in family court support matters, see Marriage of Sachs, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1144 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). A review of this case was denied by a Supreme Court. Also, in California, as per CCP 708.130, the spousal privilege does not apply in an examination proceeding.
Many judges are liberal in granting 5th Amendment objections whenever possible. Attorneys have successfully argued in bankruptcy courts, on behalf of judgment debtor clients having offshore accounts; to block certain individual questions where their answers could be used to indict the debtor for bankruptcy fraud.
Consider a typical debtor examination question: "Do you have any offshore accounts?" Your debtor might have a Swiss bank account which they failed to report to the IRS. If they answer "Yes", then that could expose them to criminal prosecution for tax evasion; so they might reply, "I refuse to answer that question under the Fifth Amendment". Although it is not fair to creditors, most judges would not force the debtor to answer that question.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
Generally, judgment debtor examinations are intended to have the "widest scope of inquiry in the search for assets to satisfy the judgment". Generally, "Leave no stone unturned" applies, and creditors are much less susceptible to relevance objections if they can show a connection between their questions and the debtor's assets.
The Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, includes a provision that no person may be forced to testify as a witness against themselves in a criminal matter. Fifth Amendment protection requests are much more likely to be heard in criminal courts, however sometimes they are also heard in civil courts.
Until the possibility of a criminal charge arises (with the district attorney's office or the police involved), within a court; creditors are usually free to ask almost anything they want. Usually, a debtor may only successfully claim their privilege against self-incrimination if there is an imminent threat of prosecution for a crime. The 5th Amendment only defends against self-incrimination, and is not a right not to answer. Judges may compel debtors to answer questions in situations where the debtor is attempting to thwart the creditor.
In a criminal case, the defendant or their attorney can ask for a recess, then go to the prosecutor's office, and get a 5th Amendment waiver from prosecution, to reduce the likelihood of self-incrimination.
In civil courts, if a judgment debtor uses the 5th Amendment as the reason not to answer your question(s) at an examination, they must next speak with the judge. As the creditor, you can then politely ask the judge to review your question(s), and have the judgment debtor explain why your questions might be prejudicial to their 5th Amendment rights in the civil judgment debtor examination. Then, the judge will either:
A) Remind the debtor this is a civil proceeding, not a criminal case, and the judgment debtor cannot assert their 5th Amendment rights unless they allege that revealing the information would cause a criminal case against them.
B) Grant the debtor's 5th amendment request only for specific questions. Whether a specific Fifth Amendment request will be denied or approved, cannot be predicted. It is always determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on the unique facts and circumstances surrounding each question.
A Fifth Amendment claim can be asserted in any proceeding; civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. A judgment debtor cannot successfully make a "blanket assertion" of their Fifth Amendment rights. However, for particular questions, Fifth Amendment objections are regularly upheld, even in post-judgment proceedings.
Even when a judgment debtor fails an attempt to assert their 5th Amendment right, their refusal to answer your question will rarely result in a contempt ruling. Even when the reason for a certain course of action is completely without merit, a person's good faith belief in its meritorious nature, even if not successful, will rarely become a red flag for contempt. However, a fair judge might become angry at debtors attempting to abuse the 5th Amendment's purpose, only to thwart their creditor.
Even when the court orders the judgment debtor to answer a question after they have asserted their 5th Amendment right, the debtor can later file an appeal; and delay the proceedings for a long time, which makes it likely the judgment will settle at a steep discount. If the debtor's 5th Amendment-related request is granted, the creditor can probably later take the issue up again at some appeal-type hearing, having to spend more time and money.
In Troy vs. Superior Court (1986) 186 Cal. App. 3d 1006, the Court of Appeals said that in order for a judgment debtor to claim the 5th in a debtor examination, a "real danger" must exist, not merely speculation. This case was followed by Hooser vs Superior Court (2000) 84 Cal App 4th 997.
A 5th Amendment claim is harder to argue in family court support matters, see Marriage of Sachs, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1144 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002). A review of this case was denied by a Supreme Court. Also, in California, as per CCP 708.130, the spousal privilege does not apply in an examination proceeding.
Many judges are liberal in granting 5th Amendment objections whenever possible. Attorneys have successfully argued in bankruptcy courts, on behalf of judgment debtor clients having offshore accounts; to block certain individual questions where their answers could be used to indict the debtor for bankruptcy fraud.
Consider a typical debtor examination question: "Do you have any offshore accounts?" Your debtor might have a Swiss bank account which they failed to report to the IRS. If they answer "Yes", then that could expose them to criminal prosecution for tax evasion; so they might reply, "I refuse to answer that question under the Fifth Amendment". Although it is not fair to creditors, most judges would not force the debtor to answer that question.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Free Online Training
I am a judgment broker that writes often. Formal education usually matters a lot, and degrees usually make the difference when applying for a job. However, long term success depends much more on what is learned after the degree is earned. People that earn degrees and/or certifications once, will find over time, that alone is often not enough; one must keep doing, training, and learning, to make any progress.
Now, there are many great choices for learning things for free on the web. No longer is money and your location a reason not to learn most any subject. There is almost always value in learning, although there could be a very long time delay before there are any financial payoffs from (only) learning things.
Even if there were no other benefits, the consistent action of learning has value. Writing this article has more value than not doing anything. Real results come from practice and focused actions over time. Learning improves the mind, and you are better off knowing more than knowing less.
Will free online learning do you any good in today's economy? Free online courses are usually excellent, and many include lectures and tests, however there are no paper sheepskins (no diplomas to show anyone or hang on your wall). Again, most employers make hiring decisions based on degrees and certifications. However, keeping a job depends mostly on knowledge (this is where free online learning helps), experience, and attitude.
Even if learning a lot does not lead to a job, sufficient learning can increase your chances of inventing a new job for yourself. While you are waiting and looking for jobs and/or opportunities, you can learn things to increase the chances of finding either someday.
Going into business for yourself online, or any other way; is 50% what you do and 50% what the world does. However, the only part you have any control over is what you do, so why not improve what you have control over?
Free education rocks, not only because it is free, also because you can multitask, and can even learn in your pajamas. To get started, do a web search for "Free Online Training" or "Free College Courses". Some of the best sites include alison.com, coursera.org, gcflearnfree.org, khanacademy.org, openculture.com, professormesser.com, ted.com, and udacity.com. One can also find many free books online as PDFs.
Online education is really big, and corsera.com has had more than three million students. Without official diplomas or certificates, why is online learning so popular? Because it is free and so much more convenient. You cannot pause a college class, or watch TV or listen to music while in a conventional classroom. Online courses wait for you to visit the restroom, until you are off the phone, etc. When there is nothing better to do, why not learn things?
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Now, there are many great choices for learning things for free on the web. No longer is money and your location a reason not to learn most any subject. There is almost always value in learning, although there could be a very long time delay before there are any financial payoffs from (only) learning things.
Even if there were no other benefits, the consistent action of learning has value. Writing this article has more value than not doing anything. Real results come from practice and focused actions over time. Learning improves the mind, and you are better off knowing more than knowing less.
Will free online learning do you any good in today's economy? Free online courses are usually excellent, and many include lectures and tests, however there are no paper sheepskins (no diplomas to show anyone or hang on your wall). Again, most employers make hiring decisions based on degrees and certifications. However, keeping a job depends mostly on knowledge (this is where free online learning helps), experience, and attitude.
Even if learning a lot does not lead to a job, sufficient learning can increase your chances of inventing a new job for yourself. While you are waiting and looking for jobs and/or opportunities, you can learn things to increase the chances of finding either someday.
Going into business for yourself online, or any other way; is 50% what you do and 50% what the world does. However, the only part you have any control over is what you do, so why not improve what you have control over?
Free education rocks, not only because it is free, also because you can multitask, and can even learn in your pajamas. To get started, do a web search for "Free Online Training" or "Free College Courses". Some of the best sites include alison.com, coursera.org, gcflearnfree.org, khanacademy.org, openculture.com, professormesser.com, ted.com, and udacity.com. One can also find many free books online as PDFs.
Online education is really big, and corsera.com has had more than three million students. Without official diplomas or certificates, why is online learning so popular? Because it is free and so much more convenient. You cannot pause a college class, or watch TV or listen to music while in a conventional classroom. Online courses wait for you to visit the restroom, until you are off the phone, etc. When there is nothing better to do, why not learn things?
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Corporate Shenanigans And Subpoenas
What if your judgment debtor is a relatively small corporate entity (that still has assets and/or makes a profit) that seems to at least partially own, or is involved with some other "insider" small corporate entities; that seem to be helping your debtor hide income and assets to thwart creditors? Solutions for these kinds of situations usually begin with a series of judgment debtor and third-party examinations, which are not cheap or quick.
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
The advanced ideas discussed in this article might be useful for only specific situations with close-knit small company "shenanigan" relationships involving a judgment debtor company. One should expect each party to have an attorney retained to try to block all attempts to get any information. I recommend you retain an attorney to attempt these kinds of post-judgment tactics.
With company partner asset shenanigan/money laundering situations, the way toward following trails to potential income or assets to attach; is to have some kind of proof that the company(s) involved with the judgment debtor company is paying them, holding assets for them, or knows about their assets.
In California, the threshold for subpoenaing post-judgment witnesses is $250. When you have a good faith belief that a third-party is holding, or has first-hand knowledge about at least $250 worth of the judgment debtor's income or assets; they can become a witness to that.
As an example, you have a judgment against company A, and you have some evidence that leads you to believe the assets or income of A, may be involved with, at, or coming from, companies B and/or C.
The first step for this type of post-judgment information discovery is scheduling a judgment debtor examination with subpoenaed document production requests from the judgment debtor company; to determine which accounts, if any, they control, and whether such accounts are in their name or not. If company B and/or C is involved in any movement of money with A, you can probably divert the cash flow with appropriate court orders.
At least in California, along with your court-scheduled subpoena for a representative of company A (the judgment debtor) to appear at your judgment debtor examination; you could also subpoena representatives of companies B and C as witnesses to assets belonging to company A, as long as you believe and declare that they hold, or know of, at least $250, which belongs to A.
The primary goal of bringing in companies B and C is to have them answer questions about company A, and supply any documents, that show any of A's assets/income or rights to them. Subpoenaing third-parties to bring documents such as their banking records is a big deal, so make sure you have some evidence or a strong reason to believe they are paying company A, is involved with them, or knows something about their assets.
Either the representatives for companies B or C have or know about A's assets, or they don't. Either they will tell you the truth or they will lie. If you know they are lying, show them a copy of your proof. If that does not work, the only option left may be to start a new creditor's fraudulent asset transfer lawsuit; which is not guaranteed, cheap, or easy; and is way beyond the scope of this article.
If company B or C admits to possessing or having knowledge about company A's assets, that is a great start; however what counts are documents which prove it, or even better, the debtor paying you. If you subpoenaed documents that A, B, or C did not bring, then ask the court to continue the examination to a future date when the parties can bring the subpoenaed documents.
Sometimes, asset transfers are valid and not designed to thwart creditors. If that is the case, subpoenaed witnesses should provide a copy of their contracts with the judgment debtor company, because as a judgment creditor, you have a right to know about such contracts.
Sometimes companies factor invoices for each other, which occasionally gets used to help launder income. In such situations, perhaps you could get an order from the court which orders company A not to hypothecate any invoices issued after a certain date. That should prevent any future invoices from getting factored until you are repaid. In theory, you can stop the diversion of A's income from invoices by either:
1) Getting the court to order B and/or C to stop tendering invoices for the judgment debtor company.
2) Getting an assignment order from the court, to order that the income going to A (the judgment debtor), will go to you until the judgment is satisfied; and then serving that order on B and C so that the factoring payment proceeds for any invoices factored by B or C from the judgment debtor company will be paid to you.
Once such an order has been served on them, if B or C (or any of their subsidiaries) disobeys the court order and/or pays or wire transfers money to any accounts owned or controlled by A, they will probably be in contempt of the court order.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
The advanced ideas discussed in this article might be useful for only specific situations with close-knit small company "shenanigan" relationships involving a judgment debtor company. One should expect each party to have an attorney retained to try to block all attempts to get any information. I recommend you retain an attorney to attempt these kinds of post-judgment tactics.
With company partner asset shenanigan/money laundering situations, the way toward following trails to potential income or assets to attach; is to have some kind of proof that the company(s) involved with the judgment debtor company is paying them, holding assets for them, or knows about their assets.
In California, the threshold for subpoenaing post-judgment witnesses is $250. When you have a good faith belief that a third-party is holding, or has first-hand knowledge about at least $250 worth of the judgment debtor's income or assets; they can become a witness to that.
As an example, you have a judgment against company A, and you have some evidence that leads you to believe the assets or income of A, may be involved with, at, or coming from, companies B and/or C.
The first step for this type of post-judgment information discovery is scheduling a judgment debtor examination with subpoenaed document production requests from the judgment debtor company; to determine which accounts, if any, they control, and whether such accounts are in their name or not. If company B and/or C is involved in any movement of money with A, you can probably divert the cash flow with appropriate court orders.
At least in California, along with your court-scheduled subpoena for a representative of company A (the judgment debtor) to appear at your judgment debtor examination; you could also subpoena representatives of companies B and C as witnesses to assets belonging to company A, as long as you believe and declare that they hold, or know of, at least $250, which belongs to A.
The primary goal of bringing in companies B and C is to have them answer questions about company A, and supply any documents, that show any of A's assets/income or rights to them. Subpoenaing third-parties to bring documents such as their banking records is a big deal, so make sure you have some evidence or a strong reason to believe they are paying company A, is involved with them, or knows something about their assets.
Either the representatives for companies B or C have or know about A's assets, or they don't. Either they will tell you the truth or they will lie. If you know they are lying, show them a copy of your proof. If that does not work, the only option left may be to start a new creditor's fraudulent asset transfer lawsuit; which is not guaranteed, cheap, or easy; and is way beyond the scope of this article.
If company B or C admits to possessing or having knowledge about company A's assets, that is a great start; however what counts are documents which prove it, or even better, the debtor paying you. If you subpoenaed documents that A, B, or C did not bring, then ask the court to continue the examination to a future date when the parties can bring the subpoenaed documents.
Sometimes, asset transfers are valid and not designed to thwart creditors. If that is the case, subpoenaed witnesses should provide a copy of their contracts with the judgment debtor company, because as a judgment creditor, you have a right to know about such contracts.
Sometimes companies factor invoices for each other, which occasionally gets used to help launder income. In such situations, perhaps you could get an order from the court which orders company A not to hypothecate any invoices issued after a certain date. That should prevent any future invoices from getting factored until you are repaid. In theory, you can stop the diversion of A's income from invoices by either:
1) Getting the court to order B and/or C to stop tendering invoices for the judgment debtor company.
2) Getting an assignment order from the court, to order that the income going to A (the judgment debtor), will go to you until the judgment is satisfied; and then serving that order on B and C so that the factoring payment proceeds for any invoices factored by B or C from the judgment debtor company will be paid to you.
Once such an order has been served on them, if B or C (or any of their subsidiaries) disobeys the court order and/or pays or wire transfers money to any accounts owned or controlled by A, they will probably be in contempt of the court order.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
When Do Judgments Change Ownership?
What are your options when you have assigned your judgment to a judgment enforcer who has not made any progress and stops responding to you? What if you then visited the courthouse and found out they never filed your assignment of judgment with the court? Are you free to find another judgment enforcer, or attempt to recover your judgment yourself?
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
If your judgment debtor is poor, getting your judgment back is not so important. Assuming your debtor might have some income or assets, or may get some in the future, what should you do? While you could take a chance and do otherwise, the best policy starts with making several attempts to contact the judgment enforcer. Perhaps email, phone, and mail certified letters to them. If those all fail, you might want to consider a legal action to get your judgment back.
After you sign and return a judgment enforcer's purchase contract and the notarized assignment of your judgment, both of those documents could be used to determine who owns your judgment. Even if your assignment of judgment has not been filed with the court, the judgment enforcer might legally still own your judgment because of the mutually signed purchase contract.
For anyone besides the original judgment creditor: If a judgment assignment is not filed at the court; instead of the power of court orders, will be the usually much weaker strategies of calling and mailing the debtor, to ask them to pay. To enforce a judgment through the court or to satisfy the judgment, the judgment assignment must first be filed at the court.
Court clerks decide who owns a judgment based on whether any judgment assignments have been filed, and that sure makes sense to me. However, most experts believe the legal right to own a judgment is within the purchase contract. Most experts believe if there is a purchase contract executed (signed) by both parties (the judgment enforcer and the original judgment creditor), then that purchase contract is valid; whether or not the judgment assignment is filed with the court.
The assignee's rights as the judgment owner are somewhat special; and judgment owners can choose whether or not to sit on their rights, or to pursue collection or litigation. Even if the assignee fails to pursue collection, the assignor (usually the original judgment creditor) does not have the right to interfere.
Unless a state law requires it, filing or recording an assignment of judgment is not mandatory. Filing an assignment of judgment with the court is not a constructive notice to the judgment debtor.
Notice of a judgment ownership change is covered by the Uniform Commercial Code when the judgment debtor receives notice that the judgment against them has been assigned and that in the future, payments are to be made to the assignee (the new judgment owner). After receiving notice of the ownership change (the assignment of the judgment against them), the judgment debtor usually cannot legally pay anybody other than the assignee, to satisfy the judgment.
Sometimes, certain available assets of the judgment debtor are known; and after filing the assignment of judgment at the court, one can attempt to have their available assets levied without any prior notice.
In situations where the debtor's assets are unknown or hidden, noticing the judgment debtor about who now owns the judgment, has almost the same priority as filing the assignment at the court. Almost always, both noticing the debtor and filing the assignment, should be done quickly; because skipping either can open the door to hassles later. Some judgment enforcers do not file the assignment of judgment at the court or notice the debtor until they run a credit report on the judgment debtor. If the credit report is bad, they return the judgment.
In theory, an acknowledgment of assignment of a judgment is similar to a title document. It transfers all rights, title, and interests in the judgment. This means it does not need to be accepted by anyone because it is not a contract. However, in certain courts in California, court clerks insist that incoming assignees of record for a judgment sign the acknowledgement of assignment with words similar to "I accept this assignment", signed and dated by the new creditor.
That does not make sense to me, because who would assign their judgment to someone that does not want it? Also, there is no location on an assignment document for anyone other than the grantor/assignor/original judgment creditor, to sign anything. Only the signature of the assignor must be acknowledged before a notary public. The laws say nothing about anyone else needing to sign anything. However, on a minor matter such as this; it probably makes more sense to spend a minute making the court clerk happy, than to fight their policy.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
This article is my opinion, and not legal advice. I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.
If your judgment debtor is poor, getting your judgment back is not so important. Assuming your debtor might have some income or assets, or may get some in the future, what should you do? While you could take a chance and do otherwise, the best policy starts with making several attempts to contact the judgment enforcer. Perhaps email, phone, and mail certified letters to them. If those all fail, you might want to consider a legal action to get your judgment back.
After you sign and return a judgment enforcer's purchase contract and the notarized assignment of your judgment, both of those documents could be used to determine who owns your judgment. Even if your assignment of judgment has not been filed with the court, the judgment enforcer might legally still own your judgment because of the mutually signed purchase contract.
For anyone besides the original judgment creditor: If a judgment assignment is not filed at the court; instead of the power of court orders, will be the usually much weaker strategies of calling and mailing the debtor, to ask them to pay. To enforce a judgment through the court or to satisfy the judgment, the judgment assignment must first be filed at the court.
Court clerks decide who owns a judgment based on whether any judgment assignments have been filed, and that sure makes sense to me. However, most experts believe the legal right to own a judgment is within the purchase contract. Most experts believe if there is a purchase contract executed (signed) by both parties (the judgment enforcer and the original judgment creditor), then that purchase contract is valid; whether or not the judgment assignment is filed with the court.
The assignee's rights as the judgment owner are somewhat special; and judgment owners can choose whether or not to sit on their rights, or to pursue collection or litigation. Even if the assignee fails to pursue collection, the assignor (usually the original judgment creditor) does not have the right to interfere.
Unless a state law requires it, filing or recording an assignment of judgment is not mandatory. Filing an assignment of judgment with the court is not a constructive notice to the judgment debtor.
Notice of a judgment ownership change is covered by the Uniform Commercial Code when the judgment debtor receives notice that the judgment against them has been assigned and that in the future, payments are to be made to the assignee (the new judgment owner). After receiving notice of the ownership change (the assignment of the judgment against them), the judgment debtor usually cannot legally pay anybody other than the assignee, to satisfy the judgment.
Sometimes, certain available assets of the judgment debtor are known; and after filing the assignment of judgment at the court, one can attempt to have their available assets levied without any prior notice.
In situations where the debtor's assets are unknown or hidden, noticing the judgment debtor about who now owns the judgment, has almost the same priority as filing the assignment at the court. Almost always, both noticing the debtor and filing the assignment, should be done quickly; because skipping either can open the door to hassles later. Some judgment enforcers do not file the assignment of judgment at the court or notice the debtor until they run a credit report on the judgment debtor. If the credit report is bad, they return the judgment.
In theory, an acknowledgment of assignment of a judgment is similar to a title document. It transfers all rights, title, and interests in the judgment. This means it does not need to be accepted by anyone because it is not a contract. However, in certain courts in California, court clerks insist that incoming assignees of record for a judgment sign the acknowledgement of assignment with words similar to "I accept this assignment", signed and dated by the new creditor.
That does not make sense to me, because who would assign their judgment to someone that does not want it? Also, there is no location on an assignment document for anyone other than the grantor/assignor/original judgment creditor, to sign anything. Only the signature of the assignor must be acknowledged before a notary public. The laws say nothing about anyone else needing to sign anything. However, on a minor matter such as this; it probably makes more sense to spend a minute making the court clerk happy, than to fight their policy.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Saturday, May 18, 2013
MC-12 Forms With No Costs
One of the best ways to attempt to recover a judgment is to have the Sheriff or Marshall levy/garnish your judgment debtor's bank account. This article is based on California, however the concepts here will probably be similar in many states.
I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer. A successful bank levy depends on three things:
1) That your judgment debtor keeps money in their bank account. If there is little or no money in their account, paying for a levy is usually money lost.
2) Cooperation and performance from your court, Sheriff, and in some places, a registered process server. All of them have paperwork to complete and require payment.
3) The element of surprise. If your debtor learns of your upcoming levy, they will probably empty their bank account. One must pay attention to the laws of their state, to help avoid tipping off their judgment debtor.
In California, when a judgment creditor wants their debtor's bank account to get levied, usually they must begin by getting a writ, which is written permission from the court to have a Sheriff attempt to levy their judgment debtor's assets in a particular county.
In California, to get a writ of execution from the court, one usually must provide a completed MC-12 (Memorandum Of Costs) form. If you do not want to include accrued interest on your writ of execution, you do not need a MC-12 form. The MC-12 form is where the creditor claims the interest accrued, and any costs that should be added to the amount of the judgment debt.
To avoid tipping off the judgment debtor to an upcoming bank levy, one should not put costs on a MC-12 form. This is because if costs are included, the debtor must be served a copy of the MC-12 form by mail, giving them a chance to move or hide their money.
Most bank levies do not fully satisfy judgments. After the bank levy process completes, the creditor is free to use another MC-12 form and declare whatever might have been recovered as a credit, interest accrued, and any costs (within 2 years of those costs getting incurred); because the element of surprise will no longer be a factor.
In California, you can claim up to $99.99 on a MC-12 form to get a writ with no waiting period. If the costs are more than $100, the creditor must wait 15 days after the MC-12 is served on the debtor, before the court will issue a writ, as per CCP 685.070.
With costs $100 or more, if the proof of service (POS) by mail on the back/second page of the MC-12 has been filled out and signed by a third-party, that means the debtor has been notified. Then, the debtor has an opportunity to file a Motion to Tax Costs (contest your expenses); if they have kept their mailing address up to date with the court.
Most judgment debtors do not keep their address updated with the court. When you have costs less than $100, if the POS envelope mailed to the debtor's last-known address bounces, with a post-office "unable to forward" stamp because there is no forwarding order with the post office; this is most likely not your problem.
However, keep that bounce-stamped envelope just in case anyone ever questions you about it later. If your claimed costs are large, especially relative to the amount owed on the judgment; consider finding the debtor's current address and have the proof of service done for sure, which in certain cases, might mean even having them served personally. Also, waiting six months after personal service of a judgment-related document on the debtor might clean up a weak proof of service on a default judgment.
If there are no new costs claimed on your MC-12 form, it does not need to be served on your judgment debtor. On the second/back side of the MC-12 form, I type "(No proof of service required - No costs, interest only - See CCP 685.070)" in the "My Address" area at the top of the page, and sign and date the bottom of the page.
Some court clerks do not fully know the law when it comes to interest-only MC-12 form situations, and will insist on the proof of service getting completed; even if there are no new costs claimed. This problem is often solved by asking for and explaining the situation, to a court clerk supervisor.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
I am a judgment broker, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer. A successful bank levy depends on three things:
1) That your judgment debtor keeps money in their bank account. If there is little or no money in their account, paying for a levy is usually money lost.
2) Cooperation and performance from your court, Sheriff, and in some places, a registered process server. All of them have paperwork to complete and require payment.
3) The element of surprise. If your debtor learns of your upcoming levy, they will probably empty their bank account. One must pay attention to the laws of their state, to help avoid tipping off their judgment debtor.
In California, when a judgment creditor wants their debtor's bank account to get levied, usually they must begin by getting a writ, which is written permission from the court to have a Sheriff attempt to levy their judgment debtor's assets in a particular county.
In California, to get a writ of execution from the court, one usually must provide a completed MC-12 (Memorandum Of Costs) form. If you do not want to include accrued interest on your writ of execution, you do not need a MC-12 form. The MC-12 form is where the creditor claims the interest accrued, and any costs that should be added to the amount of the judgment debt.
To avoid tipping off the judgment debtor to an upcoming bank levy, one should not put costs on a MC-12 form. This is because if costs are included, the debtor must be served a copy of the MC-12 form by mail, giving them a chance to move or hide their money.
Most bank levies do not fully satisfy judgments. After the bank levy process completes, the creditor is free to use another MC-12 form and declare whatever might have been recovered as a credit, interest accrued, and any costs (within 2 years of those costs getting incurred); because the element of surprise will no longer be a factor.
In California, you can claim up to $99.99 on a MC-12 form to get a writ with no waiting period. If the costs are more than $100, the creditor must wait 15 days after the MC-12 is served on the debtor, before the court will issue a writ, as per CCP 685.070.
With costs $100 or more, if the proof of service (POS) by mail on the back/second page of the MC-12 has been filled out and signed by a third-party, that means the debtor has been notified. Then, the debtor has an opportunity to file a Motion to Tax Costs (contest your expenses); if they have kept their mailing address up to date with the court.
Most judgment debtors do not keep their address updated with the court. When you have costs less than $100, if the POS envelope mailed to the debtor's last-known address bounces, with a post-office "unable to forward" stamp because there is no forwarding order with the post office; this is most likely not your problem.
However, keep that bounce-stamped envelope just in case anyone ever questions you about it later. If your claimed costs are large, especially relative to the amount owed on the judgment; consider finding the debtor's current address and have the proof of service done for sure, which in certain cases, might mean even having them served personally. Also, waiting six months after personal service of a judgment-related document on the debtor might clean up a weak proof of service on a default judgment.
If there are no new costs claimed on your MC-12 form, it does not need to be served on your judgment debtor. On the second/back side of the MC-12 form, I type "(No proof of service required - No costs, interest only - See CCP 685.070)" in the "My Address" area at the top of the page, and sign and date the bottom of the page.
Some court clerks do not fully know the law when it comes to interest-only MC-12 form situations, and will insist on the proof of service getting completed; even if there are no new costs claimed. This problem is often solved by asking for and explaining the situation, to a court clerk supervisor.
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Google Play May 15th 20, 2013 downgrade
OMG, on May 15th 20, 2013 Google Play downgraded - well they upgraded to a new format that is so much harder to use, Oh well, gone is the shuffle button and much more - so sad. Oh wait, I just figured it out, the way to make shuffle work again is to click the Shuffle button at the bottom on the screen - and then press the fast forward button at the bottom. OK, now I can live with this but it reminds me of when Apple's iTunes 11 first came out - but they quickly fixed iTunes 11. Google please consider making the format a bit more like the old format - thanks so much.
Update again, I am getting used to the new Google Play, it's OK, it just took some getting used to, thanks Google for Google Play, and I do see some improvements too, so progress is bumpy sometimes. Thanks Google!
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Update again, I am getting used to the new Google Play, it's OK, it just took some getting used to, thanks Google for Google Play, and I do see some improvements too, so progress is bumpy sometimes. Thanks Google!
----------------
Mark Shapiro of http://www.JudgmentBuy.com - The easiest and fastest free way to find the right expert to buy or recover your judgment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)