What state?


You need to execute that judgment asap.

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

Some thougths from someone who is NOT your attorney (that requires paperwork and dead presidents)

It is a defendant's God given right as an American to seek bankruptcy protection if warranted.

It is your God given right as an American to pursue satisfaction of your judgment until you are presented with a bankruptcy filing. Saying he is going to do it is simply not good enough.

Creditor remedies include the following: Garnish wages (you are working on that), levy on bank accounts (get the information from past rent checks) judgment debtor examination (you get to question him under oath at the courthouse concerning his assets which you then levy, like a car, P3SL's etc.)

"I found out last week that my loser tenant will be filing bankruptcy during our hearing to garnish his wages. During that hearing my tenant informed the judge that he was not working and could not find work. I have since found out he is working full time and making good money."

I am unclear on this point. If the debtor falsely informed the court that he was unemployed and you can prove otherwise. Seek a contempt citation. Debtor is in BIG trouble. Courts frown on being lied to. (unless, maybe, you are the President)

Did the court rule on your garnishment? Did the court deny it based upon the false representation of unemployment? Did the court deny it based upon the representation that the debtor would file bk in the future? (as opposed to having filed for bk protection prior to the hearing) If the court made a ruling based upon false information, seek a rehearing on the matter to bring the false information to the court's attention. (act quickly, a right to a rehearing is usually conditioned with a very short time fuse.)

If debtor asserts bk in your hearing, keep in mind that he had to act prior to your hearing by filing a bk petition, or at least the face page, in the federal BK court. If he says he is GOING to file, you comment is to ask the court to grant your motion because, as of the time of your hearing, there is no bk! If it is granted, it is a race to garnish before he bk's, or more likely, he will offer you a deal to avoid having his employer learn of the garnishment. Take cash.

On the issue of filing bk in a diff state, if you know his SS#, you can look it up with precision, with the name alone, you need to hope it is a distinctive name. The effect of a prior filing depends upon the basis (what chapter) of any prior filing and the basis of the current filing.

BK is not a panacea. Unless this guy is truly a bottom dweller, $3K is really not worth a filing. Especially if the debtor has a job. If he does file, you will recieve notice of the filing and notice of a creditor's hearing. Go to it and ask questions about assets and the job issue. The BK trustee (or authorized minion) will be present and will take note if there is potential fraud. The Trustee's office periodically makes an example out of some clown trying to game the system. You could get lucky.

Good luck.

Tri N OC provides very good advice. The only thing I would add is that you are unlikely to get any satisfaction from a bankrupcy trustee. They are not in the habit of doing any work. SOP is to grant the bankruptcy and screw the unsecured creditors like you. You can show up at the hearing, but it will probably last for all of two minutes. You have the right to ask questions with him under oath. Ask away and don't be detered by the trustee as he tries to cut you off.

He gets paid x dollars per case, so if you take time that comes out of his return per hour. Be prepared to be extremely obnoxious to the trustee in asserting your right to ask questions if necessary. "I am sorry Mr. Trustee, I thought I was entitled to ask questions of the debtor concerning his ability to pay. Am I right about that?"

I don't know what going to file means. He either has or he hasn't. Maybe he is just using a threatened bankruptcy to force a settlement. If you can settle for some cents on the dollar, you should probably do it. Don't let your valuable gray matter be occupied by a stinkin $3,000 claim.

You're biffed. If the guy files for bancruptcy you won't see your money. I had the exact same thing happen to me. A company went bancrupt and owed me rent from a commercial office building I used to own. Nothing I could do about it.

If this guy goes bancrupt it's on his record for seven years and getting credit becomes difficult in that time.

Bankruptcy is federal; doesn't matter what state. You should call the bankruptcy court in Illinois. If your tenant has filed for bankruptcy, there should be an automatic stay of all proceedings. It is a big-time no, no to violate the automatic stay and seek collection against a debtor. Think about it this way: the bankruptcy laws are intended to marshall all of the debtor's assets and dole them out to all of the creditors fairly and in accordance with secured interests. Make sure you file a claim in the bankruptcy court. [Now, if he's filed fraudulently, the case will be dismissed and then you can pursue the assets.]

I'm not making any statements about whether this system is right or wrong, just telling you how it it. You might want to write this one off. Your tenant is what we refer to as "judgment proof."

You can't get blood from a rock. This loser will probably change jobs, move, etc. and you will end up spending good money and time chasing after him. Take the tax loss and let it go.

---

Ken St. Pe'

I have been in a similar situation with a loser tenant. It depends on whether he/she filed for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13. In my case, she filed for Chapter 13, I filed my judgment and the trustee awarded me a small monthly amount. For me it wasn't so much about the money, but it was the principle, she skipped out owing a lot of rent, it takes an act of God to evict someone from "your" property. And perhaps it will make her think twice about stiffing the next person.

I'm an attorney although not an expert in bankruptcy and I hired a local firm to pursue it. In all, I probably spent more in fees that I got back, (that's why it's hard to always stand on principle), but she destroyed the house when she found out she was getting evicted. The house belonged to my grandparents, it was the first home they bought after scrimping and scraping. So along with principle, there was some sentimentality that drove me to try to collect.

---

_______________________

You know, when I first started practicing law, my firm put me on a couple of eviction cases. Those were the nastiest, street brawl kinds of cases; very expensive to prosecute and often yielded no money. Some tenants will do anything and they hire lawyers who will do anything. The thought of actually paying a legitimate debt or living up to a promise made means nothing to these people. Ugh! Give me a nice, civilized commercial dispute any day of the week.

Yes. I've heard that it makes family law look pleasant. A classmate clerks for an atty that does collection work. He said he once had the sheriff go in and take the family dog. He could have been BSing. But he did have a good sense of humor and probably would have at least tried.

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

"Give me a nice, civilized commercial dispute any day of the week."

Come on out to Golden State, it is not nearly as Blue as the election would have you believe. The unlawful detainer laws have been revised a couple of times such that the burden is unequivocably on the tenant. 10 days from service to trial. Of course the landlord has to jump through all of the hoops exactly right, but if it does, the tenant is toast.

As for nasty, try a commercial unlawful detainer. That is where the pro dirtbags hang out.

Thanks for the replies, here are some quick responses. I will get back with more detail tomorrow when I have a bit more time (need to go work out now).

1. The state is Indiana

2. During the supplemental hearing the loser said "he was going" to file BK- He indicated he had contacted an attorney.

3. The magistrate, based on the losers claims of unemployment as well as zero assets and the future filing of BK did not pass judgment and reset a new hearing for 1/11 to see if the loser had actually filed BK. I guess looking back i should have asked the judge to do something then

There is more to this- I will fill in the blanks in a bit

Tim

---

----------------------------------------------------------
I'm just a 10 cent rider on a $2,500.00 Bike