newjerseynewsroom.com

Share this Twitter Myspace Digg Del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot Furl Yahoo Technorati Newsvine Facebook Export PDF Print E-mail

“Collection Mills” is not a technical term in any way, and using a term such as this can be misleading. You would be hard pressed to find ANY law firm that doesn't use computer software to print their documents. Saying that "the court generally will enter a default judgment" is a gross misrepresentation. The plaintiff's attorney CAN motion for a default judgment, but the court does not take this step, but ultimately, they would rule on the default judgment. Also, obtaining a judgment does NOT guarantee that a debtor's wages or bank accounts will be attached in a garnishment, as it is possible that a debtor's income is not applicable to be affected by these types of post-judgment collection remedies. Down playing a law firm’s employees by referring to them as ‘low paid clerical help’, does not in any way change the nature of these types of lawsuits. This seems to be what the aim is of this article. If the clerical help was paid a six-figure salary, would that change Mr. Robinson’s opinion on the validity of debt collection lawsuits? If a person is trained properly to handle the task, then why should their rate of pay make any difference? Mr. Robinson claims, “Most credit collection lawyers don't have this information readily available…” and “Often the amount claimed in the lawsuit isn't correct, or interest, fees or penalties are either improper or incorrectly calculated.” I would assume that “most”, would mean more than half, and this again, is purely an opinion-based statement, and grossly inaccurate. Stating, “Sometime lawsuits are actually filed against the wrong persons.” It should be specified that the lawsuits sometimes defendants are served upon a person who has the same name as the defendant, but is not the correct person. In this case, the incorrect party would have no implication in the legal matter. While it might be an inconvenience for the incorrect party, it certainly does not make them obligated to repay the debt. The statement "Judges are rebelling against the flood of suits that are clogging their calendars" is purely opinion-based. My question to Mr. Robinson would be where the line should be drawn when it comes to how many or what type of law suits should be filed with the courts: Should law suits be limited to only those that are criminal matters? Should a law firm be limited to only filing a hundred-law suit per year? “Gaming the system”, as Mr. Robinson phrases it, is not a sure way to escape debt, or paying less than owed. Consumers should educate themselves properly, so that they do not end up wasting time, money or resources in an attempt to reduce their debts. While settling a debt for less than what is owed is certainly a possibility, it is never a guarantee.