In jail for being in debt

[The Straight Story]

In jail for being in debt


As a sheriff's deputy dumped the contents of Joy Uhlmeyer's purse into a sealed bag, she begged to know why she had just been arrested while driving home to Richfield after an Easter visit with her elderly mother.

No one had an answer. Uhlmeyer spent a sleepless night in a frigid Anoka County holding cell, her hands tucked under her armpits for warmth. Then, handcuffed in a squad car, she was taken to downtown Minneapolis for booking. Finally, after 16 hours in limbo, jail officials fingerprinted Uhlmeyer and explained her offense -- missing a court hearing over an unpaid debt. "They have no right to do this to me," said the 57-year-old patient care advocate, her voice as soft as a whisper. "Not for a stupid credit card."

It's not a crime to owe money, and debtors' prisons were abolished in the United States in the 19th century. But people are routinely being thrown in jail for failing to pay debts. In Minnesota, which has some of the most creditor-friendly laws in the country, the use of arrest warrants against debtors has jumped 60 percent over the past four years, with 845 cases in 2009, a Star Tribune analysis of state court data has found.

Not every warrant results in an arrest, but in Minnesota many debtors spend up to 48 hours in cells with criminals. Consumer attorneys say such arrests are increasing in many states, including Arkansas, Arizona and Washington, driven by a bad economy, high consumer debt and a growing industry that buys bad debts and employs every means available to collect.

http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=95692619

[Taverner]

1. Yay! Let's go back to Serfdom!

[gmoney]

2. "This land is your land, this land is my land..."

Or not.

[Statistical]

3. in jail for failing to obey subpoena . Imagine that.

[sandnsea]

6. No

They're in jail because judges have decided to issue arrest warrants for failing to pay court ordered debt.

You don't even have to appear on a civil debt case. Failure to appear just means the other person wins. It has NEVER meant that someone could be put in jail.

This is insanity.

[Statistical]

8. Yes.

Todd Lansky, chief operating officer at Resurgence Financial LLC, a Northbrook, Ill.-based debt buyer, said firms like his operate within the law, which says people who ignore court orders can be arrested for contempt. By the time a warrant is issued, a debtor may have been contacted up to 12 times, he said.

"This is a last-ditch effort to say, 'Look, just show up in court,'" he said.

Go to court -- or jail

At 9:30 a.m. on a recent weekday morning, about a dozen people stood in line at the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis.

Nearly all of them had received court judgments for not paying a delinquent debt. One by one, they stepped forward to fill out a two-page financial disclosure form that gives creditors the information they need to garnish money from their paychecks or bank accounts.

This process happens several times a week in Hennepin County. Those who fail to appear can be held in contempt and an arrest warrant is issued if a collector seeks one. Arrested debtors aren't officially charged with a crime, but their cases are heard in the same courtroom as drug users.

Greg Williams, who is unemployed and living on state benefits, said he made the trip downtown on the advice of his girlfriend who knew someone who had been arrested for missing such a hearing.

[sui generis]

11. and you don't see anything wrong with a third party creditor

buying a $100 debt, and tacking on 3000 dollars in "court and legal" costs at 50% interest, and having the courts be their enforcement butt-monkeys?

I do see something wrong with that. If the debt was sold to a third party profiteer for pennies on the dollar the loss on the debt is still assigned to the borrower's simple income for taxes. The entire debt is collected again however from that third party, usually several times over.

The industry of debt collectors is already quasi-legal - your state may prohibit a U.S. company from calling more the six times a day and not more often than 60 minutes apart, however a call center in India can call you 100 times a day, and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

The purpose of a civil court should not be to assign judgments in absentia, and often in acquiring your debt you waive the right to contest in favor of arbitration or even summary judgment. No, this system smells like a dead rat that's starting to bloat a little . . .

[sandnsea]

12. This is not a subpoena, it's a final judgment.

And that has ALWAYS been the end of debt collection in the past. There has NEVER been contempt of court for not paying debt - NEVER.

This is crazy.

[fishbulb703]

22. Wrong.

The crime they committed was failing to disclose financial records to the court, as ordered by subpoena, after a final judgement. Did you read the article?

[sandnsea]

27. That, in itself, is never done

Do you get it?? Courts don't hound people over $250 debts, it's NOT DONE. They don't go even further and issue show cause orders and contempt of court.. and then go even farther and issue warrants for arrest. This is insane.

As I said below, most states don't even do this for child support or even fines, let alone $250 credit card bills.

And did you read the rest of the article? The judges are just saying, I ordered you to pay the debt, you didn't, you're in contempt. That is way way wrong.

But, as usual, it won't be a problem until it hits some upper income woman with a sob story. That's the way it always is in this country.

[depakid]

30. All you have to do is draft up the appropriate document and submit proof of service

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/18.265

If the judgment debtor doesn't appear, the court can and will eventually issue a warrant. Where the process has really been abused over the years is with unpaid medical bills- where the judgment debtor is often ill or in some cases dying.

[sandnsea]

32. No, the court doesn't

They just don't. You find me someone in Oregon who has had a warrant issued and then gone to jail, over unpaid debt or any kind. I've never even heard of someone having a warrant issued over debt.

[depakid]

35. If you don't comply with an order on one of these, you most certainly can be cited for contempt!

And I've seen more than a few of these. Granted that an FTA in one of these matters isn't perfunctory, as it is with traffic and criminal matters, but it can and does happen.

See for yourself:

ORS 18.270 - Written interrogatories

(1) At any time after a judgment is entered, a judgment creditor may serve written interrogatories relating to the judgment debtor's property and financial affairs on a judgment debtor. The interrogatories may be personally served in the manner provided for summons or may be served by any form of mail addressed to the judgment debtor and requesting a receipt. Service by mail under this paragraph is effective on the date of mailing. The interrogatories shall notify the judgment debtor that the judgment debtor's failure to answer the interrogatories truthfully shall subject the judgment debtor to the penalties for false swearing as provided in ORS 162.075 and for contempt of court as provided in ORS 33.015 to 33.155.

(2) Within 20 days after receipt of the interrogatories, the judgment debtor must answer all questions under oath and return the original interrogatories to the judgment creditor.

(3) Failure of the judgment debtor to comply with the provisions of this section is contempt of court, and the judgment creditor may commence proceedings under the provisions of ORS 33.015 to 33.155.

[sandnsea]

38. Again, find a case n/t

[depakid]

39. I don't need to "find one" -I've seen them and dealt with them for myself

Both in Oregon and California.

[sandnsea]

40. Then you should be able to find an article

or a court case at findlaw or in the county files.

[depakid]

42. Look yourself- or ask another lawyer what they think

My advice is that if you get served, you'd better comply- and you'd better be very careful how you answer the questions.

[TroglodyteScholar]

23. Who said the contempt was for not paying debt?

It's for failure to appear. If you spit in the court's face, don't be surprised when you get brought in.

[sandnsea]

25. It wouldn't be news if it were normal

If this were a medical debt, I bet people would suddenly "get it".

In the past, debt is pretty much settled at the final judgment. There is occasionally continued litigation for garnishments, etc.

Very very rarely a judge will get involved at that stage. But they have not issued any show cause orders for not appearing at them, and they have never ever ever issued arrest warrants over not appearing, even if they did find you in contempt of court. They don't even do this over child support in most states.

It really makes me vomit that anybody would justify this shit.

[Statistical]

28. Pretty simple solution.

If you get ordered to appear in court ...... (DRUMROLL) ...... APPEAR IN COURT!

Crazy concept I know to actually do what the court orders.

[sandnsea]

33. Simpler Solution

Judges should do what we elected them to do - keep rapists and murderers in jail, and maybe environmental and corporate pillagers -- and leave peons with $250 of debt the fuck alone.

[TroglodyteScholar]

36. I'm not justifying anything.

I'm saying she disregarded the court entirely. Is it not up do the judge's discretion how to respond to such blatant disrespect for the legal system?

[laughingliberal]

31. True. Now our law enforcement officers are becoming collection agents. Unbelievable! nt

[Yavin4]

4. If They Don't Serve You The Warrant...

Then how can they arrest you? How do they know that you are receiving the warrant?

[sandnsea]

7. They "serve the warrant" when they arrest you n/t

[sandnsea]

5. When the hell did this become legal??

It's bad enough when they locked people up for fines. When did they decide they could lock people up for debt?? I've never heard of such a thing.

[Statistical]

9. Nobody was locked up for debt.

Creditors secured a court order for person to appear in court to provide information for garnishment.

Failure to appear is violation of a court order and you can be arrested for contempt.

[sandnsea]

13. For a criminal charge

They have never done this for debt, never. And they have never required anyone to appear in court to provide garnishment information. This is crazy.

But it'll take someone in a McMansion getting arrested before it'll become a boohoo crisis.

Why do we alway shit all over people when we assume they're poor??

[Rex]

14. She was locked up for failure to pay a debt! How can you say she wasn't?

If she had never incurred the DEBT, she would not be in jail. Hence, her not paying her credit card debt directly put her in jail. All the surrounding circumstances would have no bearing on the story, if not for the debt owed.

[TroglodyteScholar]

24. So showing up for court should just be optional?

Sure, the DEBT is what began the unfortunate series of events...but the time in jail was specifically for giving the court the brush-off. Who knows, maybe she could have..oh, I dunno, reasoned with the court if she had taken her situation seriously at all and bothered to show up.

[sandnsea]

34. She'd have been arrested on the spot

Well no judge, I am not going to give you my bank account number so they can take all my money so I can't pay my rent and end up homeless. And no judge, I am not going to tell you where I work so they can garnish my wages, so again, I can't pay my rent and end up homeless.

And then she ends up in jail sooner rather than later.

For owing a debt.

That's the bottom line.

[TroglodyteScholar]

37. No, the bottom line is much simpler.

She essentially said "fuck off" to a sitting judge. You can't do that and expect there to be no consequences.

[Statistical]

26. No she was locked up for not appearing in court.

If she had the debt and appeared in court she wouldn't have gone to jail.

It would be like saying a bank robber who runs a red light and attracts suspicion of Police was sentenced to 30 years in prison for running a red light. No he would be sentenced for robbing a bank.

The court ordered her to appear, she didn't appear, a bench warrant was issued for her arrest.

Generally speaking ignoring a subpoena is a bad idea.

[GReedDiamond]

43. "Generally speaking ignoring a subpoena is a bad idea."

Unless you are KKKarl Rove, or some piece of shit like that.

Why is it only scum like Rove can get away with defying a subpoena?

The "Justice System" works for those with The Big Bucks and/or connections to corrupt crony politicians and/or judges, the rest of us can just suck it up, correct?

[Pithlet]

46. You' aren't getting it. Debt shouldn't be a criminal matter to begin with.

Our courts and police shouldn't be abused in this manner. They aren't meant to be appropriated for collections in this way. There is such a thing as a default judgment. That is how it should be handled. Period. The corporations who get these orders are shady to begin with. They are abusing the courts and it shoudn't be allowed. I was the target of one of them. They were relentless. And the debt wasn't even mine to begin with. I told them to take a hike. The debt wasn't mine. I'm glad the cops never showed up at my door to arrest me because I refused to pay. Luckily I live in an area that doesn't pull that shit. Often times these people end up arrested because they didn't even know they were supposed to appear in court because these shady people do the bare minimum required to notify them of the judgment. I

[Statistical]

50. It isn't a crminal matter. It is a civil one.

However failing to appear in court when ordered is contempt.

It wouldn't matter what the hearing was for failing to obey the court can land you in jail.

If it was a criminal case and she was a witness and blew off the judge she could be held in contempt.
If it was a civil case and she was a third party and blew off the judge she could be held in contempt.

If a judge orders you to appear in court then you should appear in court.

[dflprincess]

18. However, per the article,

once tax money has been spent to arrest you and haul you down to the sheriff's office you may avoid any jail time - even overnight - by filling out a financial disclosure form that will allow the collection agency to attach your bank account or paycheck. You won't even have to appear in court to explain why you ignored the summons.

If you don't have a bank account or a paycheck to garnish or don't fill out the form for another reason, you will go to jail and odds are bail will be set in the amount of the debt. If you manage to raise that, the bail money will be turned over to the collection agency.

Not every county in Minnesota is doing this - some of them do not have the staff available to act as debt enforcers. The ones that can afford to do this should have their budgets cut and the money put toward some of the programs that have been cut that actually help people.

[closeupready]

15. It happens in Dubai. Maybe we are trying to gut our civil liberties.

n/t

[JCMach1]

51. Even in the UAE, they go for the thin veil of legitimacy... most big purchases require giving

a check for the total amount as 'security'. When you don't pay, company X would cash the check which would then, of course bounce... Now, company X has you for writing a 'bad' check.

It is a VERY thin veil though. Unfortunately, consumers are under siege around the world.

[Obamanaut]

10. Same story on this thread, also first page of GD.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8521816&mesg_id=8521816

[hamsterjill]

16. Frightening!

So, essentially, if I'm understanding this correctly, a person can go to jail for failing to pay an UNSECURED debt, but would get off easier if they, say, walked away from a house mortgage, being a SECURED debt.

Credit cards are a two way street. Yes, people obtain credit cards and misuse them all the time. They have a responsibility to pay them, but sometimes life gets in the way, etc., and they cannot.

But the second part of that equation is that the credit card companies have been irresponsible many times in lending to people who have no way of paying back the debt.

So what do the credit card issuers get for using bad judgment in THEIR lending practices? Are they being put in jail for their bad judgment? I don't think so!

[sandnsea]

17. The kind of debt isn't the issue

If the bank said you still owed money on your house, they could take you to court for the money instead of filing a foreclosure. Or they can sell the house in foreclosure and hold you liable for the balance.

In any debt case that goes to court, there's a judgment entered. After that judgment, the creditor can put liens on things, garnish wages, take money out of bank accounts, etc. In the past there was never any attempt to put people in jail for not complying with those actions, after the judgment. Now they are starting to say that not complying with the final judgment to pay is contempt, or not complying with court orders to give your bank account number so they can take the money out, is contempt.

And you can always be arrested and jailed for being in contempt of court. In other words, if you get a judge who doesn't give a crap about the idea of no debtors prison, he can order you to do whatever he wants, hold you in contempt, and then lock you up.

And that people on this board don't get it, well it's just infuriating.

[hamsterjill]

20. I get it.

I was simply expanding on the issue in a different direction.

It amazes me that it has come to this in America. Sometimes I barely recognize where I live any more.

Jailing someone who owes money makes no sense as the debtor cannot be earning wages to pay the debt while he/she is locked up! It's all about "scare tactics".

[sandnsea]

21. I didn't mean you

When I referred to people who don't get it. I knew you understood what they were doing. I was just saying it could happen to someone on their house too. I guess there's different rules for refinances than original mortgages too, according to a few posters here. That's scary because I'm sure most people don't know.

No, I was referring to other people who don't get it and are defending putting these people in jail. It's unreal.

[hamsterjill]

45. No problem.

I think we're all on the same page. We all know this is extreme and I think we all fear what is going to happen next when things like this are allowed to become commonplace.

[B Calm]

19. In some South America countries you can pay your way out of debtors

prison by prostitution.

[L0oniX]

29. "I'm free to do want I want any ol time" © Chase

[Dappleganger]

41. What bankers have gone to jail for not paying on their debts?

Oh, right...they're given a taxpayer bailout and a hefty bonus.

[miscsoc]

44. wow, society is really regressing to the early nineteenth century

.

[lib2DaBone]

47. If you are arrested for private Debt.. you can't even do Community Service..

Community Service or Prison Work Detail doesn't apply to private debt. The tresspass is not against the court.. its against the BANKS. So there is no way you can work it off.. especially sitting in jail.

How about if we Waterboard or start pulling out fingernails to get people to give up their "secret Stashes" of cash?

Bamboo under the finger nails? Cigarette burns to the face and neck? C'Mon.. we know people are holding back.

All Hail God Goldman Sachs and his Police Force.

[moriah]

48. Even in Minnesota this is unconstitutional!

Minnesota State Constitution:

Sec. 12. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT; PROPERTY EXEMPTION. No person shall be imprisoned for debt in this state, but this shall not prevent the legislature from providing for imprisonment, or holding to bail, persons charged with fraud in contracting said debt. A reasonable amount of property shall be exempt from seizure or sale for the payment of any debt or liability. The amount of such exemption shall be determined by law. Provided, however, that all property so exempted shall be liable to seizure and sale for any debts incurred to any person for work done or materials furnished in the construction, repair or improvement of the same, and provided further, that such liability to seizure and sale shall also extend to all real property for any debt to any laborer or servant for labor or service performed.

It sure as hell is in Arkansas:

No person shall be imprisoned for debt in any civil action, on mesne or final process, unless in cases of fraud.

The Indiana Supreme Court also threw this out saying it was unconstitutional.

[moriah]

49. Here's one more Trib article on the subject:

http://www.startribune.com/local/95693219.html?page=1&c=y

Herman Button listened in stunned silence as a judge in Perry County, Ind., threatened him with jail time unless he agreed to pay $25 a month toward an eight-year-old housing debt.

Unemployed and living on a disability check, Button decided to fight back after the January 2009 hearing. He and an attorney from Indiana Legal Services appealed, citing the Indiana Constitution's Bill of Rights, which says "there shall be no imprisonment for debt, except in case of fraud."

To Button's surprise, a state Appeals Court judge agreed. "I'm no lawyer, but I knew we abolished debtors prisons in this country a very long time ago," said Button, 50, who now lives in Hawesville, Ky."

Now, a quote from the Illinois constitution before I post what happened in Illinois:

"No person shall be imprisoned for debt unless he refuses to deliver up his estate for the benefit of his creditors as provided by law or unless there is a strong presumption of fraud." ("Deliver up his estate" means to fill out a financial disclosure form)

Jack Hinton of Kenney, Ill., was sentenced to jail indefinitely in January after he fell behind on a court order that he pay $150 a month on a debt of $6,440.

According to a court transcript, Hinton, then a self-employed roofing contractor, said he broke his neck and back in a fall from a roof and filed for disability. The judge got upset after learning that Hinton used $1,000 for other bills rather than his court-ordered payments. Hinton was ordered to the county jail indefinitely until he could come up with $300.

After three hours in a holding cell, his wife got him released by borrowing $300 on a credit card. He is considering a challenge to the ruling on constitutional grounds. "I couldn't pay, and I was stuck in jail until I did," he said. "How is that any different from debtors prison?"