Who's most likely to sue?

[maxobk]

I've quit making payments in June of 2007 on all my credit cards with various balances. WaMu, Capital One, HSBC etc. Almost all of them charged off the balances and either assigned or sold the account to an outside CA by now. My question is that if the original creditor did not sue to get a judgment, is it more or less likely that a CA who purchased it will file something in court eventually?

[justbroke]

This depends totally on the CA. If they purchased it for hardly anything ($0.10 on the dollar), and the debt is significant (> $5K), they will come for you.

First, they do an asset investigation. If you pull your credit report, you'll see that they've been snooping around already. They're looking for things that they can attach a judgment to!

If you're judgment proof... they'll give up. However, if they find something, even your JOB (your income is an asset)... they'll go for it. It is all based on the probability of winning and securing a judgment at that point.

Please note that I'm not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV or the Internet. The values that I used are for illustrative purposes only. Nothing precludes a CA who bought a $1,200 account for $120 to file in small claims court! Yes... it's that simple and would only cost them $35 or so dollars to file!

[epiphany]

If you do some searches on this forum, you will find that there is neither reason nor rhyme for who gets sued by whom and for how much.

Some get sued for small amounts. Some for large amounts. Some are judgment proof, some are not. Some creditors sue one person and not another who has seemingly the same profile.

I think the pursuit of the judgment, besides the stuff that makes sense, like checking for assets, job, etc...in large part has to do with whether an individual employee has a bee in their bonnet on the particular day that they work your file.

It's a creditor crap shoot.

Best you can do is pay attention and respond when you need to.

ep

[GoingDown]

Capital One sued me over a $300 credit card. And I'm judgment proof. Being judgment proof doesn't mean you won't be sued, it just means that the judgment is worthless because there are no assets to attach a lien to, (or no assets worth attaching a lien to), and no wages to garnish (or they don't know where I work because I work temporary jobs, so they don't know where to garnish the wages).

But most creditors seem to follow the following criteria when they decide whether or not to sue you...

1. Can they call you at work? If so, BINGO! they hit paydirt! They know where you work, and they know that simply filing a lawsuit or even threatening to file a lawsuit will get you so scared of losing your job or getting the boss mad at you, that you go ahead a pay them.

2. Is there a mortgage on your credit report? They can slap a lien on your real estate and eventually get paid.

3. Is there a car payment on your credit report? Are you making that payment? You might be able to pay them, too.

4. Is there anything on the credit report that looks like you might be able to pay them? Recent positive activity looks promising for a lawsuit-- like opening new accounts, and paying them.

5. Checking the credit report is cheap and easy for them, but as a last resort, they use a private investigator or software that does the same thing-- look for assets such as real estate, cars, investments, checking accounts, etc.

I had a lot of credit cards charge off and only one of them sued me (one out of 14 sued). So, it is still rare for them to sue. Most of the time they do not sue.

If the original creditor did not sue you, it is even less likely for the junk debt buyer to sue you, unless they see something they like.

[maxobk]

If the original creditor did not sue you, it is even less likely for the junk debt buyer to sue you, unless they see something they like.

That is my assumption too, but you can never be sure. I stopped paying on all cards etc. in June, last year (about $50K). I'm pretty much judgment proof, with no visible employment, no assets and they only have my postal address, not my phone number. In fact I have not received one single phone call from the banks or CAs. I have an unlisted number which I thought would be soon discovered, but I guess I'm lucky. I'm slowly working on the forms for Chapter 7 and hope to file before the end of this year.

[GoingDown]

That is my assumption too, but you can never be sure. I stopped paying on all cards etc. in June, last year (about $50K). I'm pretty much judgment proof, with no visible employment, no assets and they only have my postal address, not my phone number. In fact I have not received one single phone call from the banks or CAs. I have an unlisted number which I thought would be soon discovered, but I guess I'm lucky. I'm slowly working on the forms for Chapter 7 and hope to file before the end of this year.

I would say you're probably safe. I doubt that you will be sued before you file BK by the end of the year.

The #1 thing they seem to look for is verifiable employment.

When I worked for a local contractor, Captial One was calling him trying to verify that I worked there, and getting very hostile with him because he didn't want to answer their questions. They are the only ones who have ever sued me.

He's now out of business. His old phone number is still on my credit report, but now when they call it all they get is a message from the phone company telling them the number was disconnected or no longer in service. I think this has helped me to avoid being sued by the other creditors, because it looks like I'm unemployed and unable to pay them anything.

[BKnTX]

Who Will Sue

Never mind.