The ring on the doorbell was a process server.

Bingo!  You’ve been sued.

Now what?

Breathe deeply and work your way through this five step check list.  Then I’ll suggest some options.

Scout the territory

1. Look at the caption:  It identifies the parties to the suit.  It’s right below the centered name of the court involved.  The Plaintiff is the person filing the suit:  they have a comPLAINT for which they want the court’s help.

Do you recognize the plaintiff as one of your creditors?   If you don’t recognize the plaintiff, does the complaint explain how the plaintiff comes to assert someone else’s claim against you?

2.  Find any verification:  Attached to the end of the complaint may be a verification.  This is a sworn statement by someone with personal knowledge of the facts that the facts set out in the complaint are true.  If there is no verification, you can file a simple form called a general denial if you want to contest the suit.

3.  Mark your calendar:  In California, you have 30 days from service of the complaint to file an answer.  If you don’t file an answer, you are sure to lose the suit.

4.  Check whether suit is timely:  The statute of limitations in California is four years.  The four-year clock begins tickling when there was last activity on the account, a purchase or a payment.  If it’s been more than four years since you either paid or charged on a credit card, you can win the suit simply, if you file an answer.

5.  Read the prayer:  The prayer is at the end of the complaint, though maybe not the last page.  Determine how much money is at stake, and whether there is any claim that you have committed fraud.  The consequences of letting a fraud complaint go to judgment are much more serious than just a suit for money.

Plan of attack

Once you’ve taken those five steps to figure out who is suing you and what it takes to oppose the suit, you need to decide what to do.

Do nothing

If you do nothing, chances are real good that the plaintiff will ask the judge to enter your default, stating that you haven’t answered.

When you don’t answer a properly served complaint, the court system assumes you agree that you owe the money.  Sooner or later, the court will enter a judgment against you.

A judgment entitles the creditor to use the power of the government to get its money.  In the Golden State, it means the creditor can levy bank accounts, file a judgment lien, and garnish wages.

A judgment is enforceable for 10 years.

File an answer

If you contest the suit by answering, you at least slow the creditor’s march to getting a judgment.  If you have a good defense, you may actually win.

The California court system provides information and resources for those representing themselves without a lawyer.  But as the Alameda County court’s site says:  You cannot come to Court and tell the judge that you are not a lawyer and do not understand what you are supposed to do.  

If you are going to be your own lawyer, you are charged with knowing what a lawyer knows.

Filing an answer at least gives you a position from which you can negotiate a settlement.  Consider whether you have any resources with which to fund a settlement.  How is it possible to pay the debt now when you couldn’t pay before?

Find global debt solution

Whether of not you have a defense to this suit, the filing of a lawsuit should be a red flag for you.

• Is this suit the tip of the iceberg?
• Is this creditor just one of many who are poised to sue you?
• Will a piecemeal approach to your debts really get you anywhere?

It may be time to see a financial counselor or a bankruptcy attorney.  Even if you don’t expect to file a bankruptcy case, a bankruptcy lawyer deals with debt issues all the time and can help you assess your options.

Look at your calendar: you have 30 days in which to plot your course before you are at risk of having a judgment entered.

Make a plan, now, before the 30th day.

More

California protections from debt buyers

Wage garnishments in California

Are California judgments dischargeable in bankruptcy

Image courtesy of nles.com. 

Scoping out dates and mates by their credit scores at first seems far fetched and overblown.

Not to mention it pretty much kills romance.

CNN reported on credit scores and dating.  My colleague Frank Pipitone took off on the idea.

But there is a kernel of wisdom there that couples in California need to heed.

A couple’s community property is liable not only for the debts that either spouse incurs during the marriage, it is liable for the debts that either spouse incurred before the marriage.

Zap!

Your accumulations during marriage could be levied by a creditor with a judgment to satisfy your spouse’s debts that arose before the two of you even met.

California does have an exception to that rule that protects the wages of one spouse earned during marriage from the other spouse’s premarital debts.  It requires that the non liable spouse put those wages into a bank account to which the indebted spouse has no access.

Returning to credit scores as a dating criteria, maybe it isn’t so outlandish.  That is, assuming you think the credit score is meaningful.

Many of my bankruptcy clients, who are drowning in debt they can never pay off, tell me that they have a 800+ credit score.  The credit score cannot be a reliable measure of much of anything, if that’s so.

Remember that credit scores are based on credit reports, which are uniformly significantly inaccurate.  Here in Silicon Valley, we love to chant, garbage in, garbage out.

Community property is the default

So if the love of your life brings a bunch of debt to the relationship, all is not lost.

Bankruptcy will, of course, discharge most debt.

But if that’s not feasible or timely, remember that you don’t have to hold your marital assets as community property.

Community property is the default.  What you earn and acquire together doesn’t have to be community property.

Spouses can agree that they won’t have community property.  The agreement can craft any kind of characterization of assets that the parties desire.

There are rules about pre nuptial agreements, to guard against overreaching by either spouse.  If you are relying on an agreement to protect you from a significant debt of your spouse,  it’s worth it to get legal help.  From a lawyer, not a website, or a paralegal or a form book.

If your financial stability in the future depends on your marital property arrangement, do it right.

More

Principles of California community property

Why credit scores are meaningless in the real world

Image courtesy of Flickr and Zoetnet.

Psst!

Let me tell you a secret about bankruptcy law.

You can get 3/4 of the benefits of a bankruptcy discharge without ever going near a bankruptcy court if you are a married person in California, or any other community property state.

If your spouse files bankruptcy and you don’t join in, you still reap much of the protection from your creditors that you would get if you had filed.

How can that be?

It’s the law,  a little known feature of the bankruptcy code that applies to a bankruptcy discharge in a community property state.  §523(a)(5)

Here’s how and why it works this way.

When only one spouse files

Spouses aren’t required to file bankruptcy together.  They can file together, but they don’t have to.

But even if only one spouse files, all of the community property of the marriage becomes property of the bankruptcy estate.

In return, the community property gets a bankruptcy discharge, just as though it was a separate person.  (Which is why I sometimes  say that, in a community property state, each marriage is a menage a trois.)

The discharge protects not only the property that the couple owned when one spouse filed bankruptcy, it protects community property that they acquire in the future. [Read more…]

The game isn’t very fair when the players are mismatched.

Though bankruptcy court is hardly a game, it’s been unfair when it comes to attorneys fees for the winning party.

California law provides that when a contract allows one party their fees if they prevail, the other party got their fees if they won.  So, even if the contract only provided that you pay my fees if I have to sue you to collect,  the statute made the right to fees reciprocal.

Only, bankruptcy courts have for decades held that the California statute didn’t control if the issue involved bankruptcy.

And then came Penrod in the 9th Circuit.

The firm of bankruptcy icon Ken Klee argued for the consumer that the fight between the car lender and the debtor in the bankruptcy court was “on the contract” and covered by the agreement.  And the 9th Circuit agreed.

A bankruptcy fight over $7000 in negative equity in a Ford ended up with an attorneys fees award for the car buyer of $245,000.

Going forward, when debtors win in fights with creditors in bankruptcy court, they, too, will get the benefit of the contract they made with the creditor.

Chapter 13 Confirmation Fight Covered

The case that lead to a ruling about attorneys fees started out as an objection to confirmation of the Chapter 13 plan.

Prior to filing bankruptcy in 2007,  Marlene Penrod had traded in a car that was worth less than she owed on it for a new Ford Taurus.  The new loan included not only the purchase price of the new wheels but the unpaid balance of her trade in.

When she filed Chapter 13, she proposed to pay in full that part of the new car loan that reflected the purchase price of the new car, but not the part of the loan that payed off her trade in.

That difference, in bankruptcy lingo, was the “negative equity” in the trade in.

The car lender objected to confirmation of the plan, contending that the entire loan taken when the debtor bought the new car was a “purchase money” loan.  Therefore, said the lender, it was protected from cramdown by the”hanging paragraph” added to 1325 by BAPCPA, the mislabeled bankruptcy reform act of 2005.

Several rounds of appeals later, the 9th Circuit held that the “negative equity” portion of the loan was not “purchase money” and therefore, the debtor could confirm a Chapter 13 plan that paid that part of the loan pennies on the dollar.

Who Pays For Debtor’s Win

Winning wasn’t cheap for Marlene.  By the time she got a ruling in her favor from the 9th Circuit in 2011, and beat back the lender’s petition to the Supreme Court, her attorneys fees were $245,000.

Her loan agreement with Americredit said:

“You will pay our reasonable costs to collect what you owe, including attorney fees, court costs, collection agency fees, and fees paid for other reasonable collection efforts.”

And California’s Civil Code 1717 says:

In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney’s fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to other costs.

But, said each court considering her request for an award of her fees, the confirmation fight over treatment in bankruptcy of the loan wasn’t an action “to enforce that contract.”  You won, Marlene, but you pay for the victory out of your pocket.

Not so, held the 9th Circuit.  The Supreme Court’s decision in Traveler’s held that nothing in the Bankruptcy Code expressly disallows claims for attorney’s fees simply because the fees are incurred litigating questions of federal bankruptcy law.

Under the language of the attorneys fees provision in the contract, Americredit would have been entitled to its fees had it won on the issue of plan confirmation.  Accordingly, when the bankrupt borrower prevails, that borrower gets an award of attorneys fees.

Attorneys Fees For Winner, Period

The implications of this second Penrod decision are substantial.  It becomes possible for the debtor to challenge creditor actions in the bankruptcy forum and recover the cost of the challenge, if they prevail.

I see it most important in bankruptcy litigation about the amount of mortgage arrearage claims and in relief from stay actions.

Any number of times, I’ve defeated motions for relief from stay, where the lender’s declaration about my client’s alleged defaults were simply untrue.  But because we were in bankruptcy court, fighting over bankruptcy’s automatic stay, my client had to pay the cost of the fight.

To benefit from the newest Penrod holding, debtor’s counsel may need to get a determination from the court that the debtor is the prevailing party.  But the possibility of such may make it possible to negotiate payment of the debtor’s fees without the necessity of trial.

The fruits of victory are now available to both players.

Individuals with matters before the state courts of California have an updated resource in the Self Help Center.

The information here can be either good background if you have a legal problem or a treasure-trove if you expect to represent yourself in court.

It even includes a section on bankruptcy, as part of the materials on Problems With Money.

Bankruptcies are actually filed in the federal bankruptcy courts, but the information offered is sound.

Image courtesy of Wikimedia