What is specifically asked in a "Discovery" from a collection lawsuit?

[Confuzed]

Can someone who has been through the process inform us on what is specifically asked during discovery. Do they hammer you with questions? Is it just a general presentation of bank accounts, properties, paycheck, vehicles etc?

I only have a job and a bank account, no property and was wondering if my bank account withdrawals/purchases will come under scrutiny in discovery. I know purchases and expenses are looked at carefully in a bankruptcy, but if you are sued and not filing a chapter 7/13, I would like to know if they ask for bank account statements to see where you spend your money or what details/how far do they go in a discovery?

Thanks?

[CompTweaker]

Yep, this one should get a lot of attention, LOL. I just saw this and Im about to hit the pillow (have to get up in 5 hours for work, no complaints though.....very,very, very grateful to even have a job right now), so I'll post something quick and maybe I can follow up on it with more info tomorrow if nobody else contributes (hopefully BB2u will chime in). For the record, I have been through this and am still currently in ongoing litigation with a case.

BTW, Im basing this off of my own state's RCP's and my own experience. This is not legal advice and is only intended for conversational purposes.

Alright, it sounds to me like you are referring to the interrogatories that may have been sent to you, the defendant (the alleged debtor) by the plaintiff (the collection agency, OC, or JDB). Discovery is allowed (within a certain time frame based upon your state's rules of civil procedures [RCP's]), by both parties to the lawsuit after a summons and complaint has been filed and served by the plaintiff, and an answer to that summons and complaint has been filed and served by the defendant. The main purpose of discovery is to determine what each side is legally holding in their hand that can be used to win the case in their favor.

Try to picture it as a game of poker:
Your opponent will try to get you to admit that you owe them through their interrogatories (if you do this, you have just showed them your hand). Maybe you owe them, and maybe you dont. What measures are you willing to take in order to have them prove that you do owe them?
Now there are a lot of questions that can be asked by the plaintiff and you are required to answer, but you do not have to answer with a definitive yes or no, nor are you required to provide them with your personal information that doesnt relate to the account, which as of yet, hasnt been proven to be yours, and that they have the legal right to collect on it.

So to tailor my response to your particular situation, what exactly is going on with you and this lawsuit, if one has been filed against you? Just the basic info is good enough (leave out the names and dates of yourself and your opponent)

Now on the other side of discovery sits the defendant.....and theres a lot he/she can use in his/her arsenal to request, from the plaintiff, in order to "discover" what exactly they plan on using to support their side in the lawsuit. And they are required to provide you with an answer to those requests.
Once again, more info from you is needed, such as is it the OC, or a JDB, along with what kind of account it is.

Technically, in most situations, you do not have to be scared of the plaintiff who is suing you. Fear and uneducation of the defendant's options are why most cases proceed in the plaintiff's favor.........."default, uncontested".

But until they win the lawsuit, get a judgement against you, and put you through a debtors exam, only then will they even be legally allowed access to your banking and asset info in order to take possession....and even then, certain exemptions may apply according to your states statutes, in order to protect those assets from seizure.

[junker]

if you are talking about a debtors exam, the following link shows some info that could be asked.....


http://www.junkfax.org/fax/action/debtorsExam.txt

[GoingDown]

Don't answer those questions. Those are just a collector's way of getting information from you voluntarily and easily and cheaply. Otherwise they have to go to court, get a judgment, and then file another series of paperwork to get a debtor's exam (which rarely happens, by the way).

The primary way a collector gets paid is by scaring a debtor into voluntarily coughing up money or information. When the debtor stops communicating with the collector, his or her job gets infinitely more difficult and a lot more expensive.

It has been my experience that they tend to give up when you make it difficult for them. I had about 20 credit cards charge off and none of them even call me anymore. One of them sued, but as of yet, they have never received a penny from me. And even they have stopped calling me.

What people don't realize is that for the most part this is a voluntary system and the collectors don't have the resources to go after people who won't cooperate with them and voluntarily pay them.

[CompTweaker]

Don't answer those questions. Those are just a collector's way of getting information from you voluntarily and easily and cheaply. Otherwise they have to go to court, get a judgment, and then file another series of paperwork to get a debtor's exam (which rarely happens, by the way)

My response is tailored to the "Discovery" that is going on after a lawsuit has been filed. And in mine and many states, if the defendant doesnt answer the plaintiff's discovery, (interrogatories, questions, etc.) with a response, then those questions are deemed admitted and then the plaintiff can file for summary judgement. Im under the impression that the OP was asking about this part of the discovery process.

[treehugger1]

The first thing here is whether or not the interrogatories are after a judgment has been entered. In some states, the attorney/plaintiff has the right to file these "questions," and send the interrogatories to you directly (the courthouse does not need to be involved.) In such cases, you can still refuse to answer, and thus the court can compel you to show up and answer the questions at a specific date. If you fail to show, then you could be in contempt of court. The court could order you to be arrested and brought before the local judge, etc. How likely is this? Depends upon where you live and whether the sheriff's department wants to spend their limited budget on holding debtors. As HHH and others have suggested, this scenario is very unlikely, but the "warrant" for your arrest could show up under a traffic violation stop etc. Would you be arrested? I can only say that for years I had a summer job where there was agency law enforcement presence. They were often pulling over folks with "warrants out for arrest." These crimes were criminal in nature; violence, robbery, etc. Even then, they often did not arrest the person unless the county/state holding the judgment was willing to "pay" for temporary incarceration, and transport of the individual. I know it's twisted, but that seems to be the way it works.

If the plaintiff/creditor does not have a judgment, then there is no reason to answer to any request in most states. Just because soemone filed a lawsuit does no tgenerally give them any power over compelling you to provide information, unless you set action into play by answering the original summons/suit.

Just opinions here. I'm certainly not an attorney.

[Confuzed]

THANKS for the great responses! I just have a paycheck, make 43k per year and direct deposit. I just changed banks as my previous bank issued 1 of the cards. No property, no assets except for money from paychecks. I noticed from tons of reading on here that it may be in my best interest to hold off a chapter 7 until when I really need it in case of some emergency, medical situation, etc because it is a 1 time thing for 8 years so I reconsidered jumping onto it. On the other hand I have 9 creditors, who knows, it is probably over 30k now with fees and penalties. All unsecured debt.

I have not been sued, just getting prepared and informed because I really would like to save my chapter 7 option for a true emergency. Usually most sites say to show up to court and not let them get a judgment (Budd Hibbs), but I see here that I should let them get one since they don't proceed to discovery after getting one?

This is a really confusing situation, I know I have posted before about chapter 7, but I really want to hold off. Just wanted to know what risk I run with a discovery. When you are drowning in debt with 9 credit cards and stop paying, you do have some cash surplus, but to start paying now wouldn't even help. I also am scared of dealing with bozo collection agencies who will scam me, and paying a few some partial payments wouldn't even put a dent in the debt. I am 9 months late on all cards except 1 which I am paying the minimum. Just want to be prepared with what is the worst that can happen in a discovery, whether it is pre-trial or after judgment via summons. Just want to be ready to make the right move if I am served. This is one big poker game. LOL.

[CompTweaker]

It really boils down to what will work best for you, and what you're willing to do to make it work out. Again, the state you're from matters very much, if you wish to mention it here.

I agree with you on your bk decision.....Im in the same boat. If its just unsecured debt and around 30K, maybe some would want to use the bk, but I wouldnt.
Im in a state which doesnt allow garnishment of wages (only IRS, child support, gov. backed school loans, etc) has decent judgement/bk exemptions, and my courts RCP's make it viable for a pro se person willing to learn the ropes to give it a go for themselves.

This is a site I use for more in depth information on fighting lawsuits:

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=177

My advice is, as you have time, spend an hour or so a day reading the stickies, and pay attention to case studies (the thread "hall of fame lawsuit winners" contain some). If you want to allow default judgements, thats up to you. Good luck.