@Anonymous wrote:Yes.
Did your opponent's lawyers offer you this in exchange for a payment plan?
A judgment in offer is just like a judgment, except for that it isn't file immediately. They use this agreement to ensure payment from you. If you miss a payment, they can file it and it will be a judgment against you.
Even if you do agree to this, watch out! I know of many other consumers who have done this and were done in by unscrupulous and sleazy debt collection lawyers who will file based on a small minor technicality error on your part.
One such story involves someone who agreed to one in exchange for three payments on a $1300 debt. The lawyer wanted three monthly payments of $433.33. The consumer paid each installment on time, but failed to notice that they only paid $1299.99 of the debt. The lawyer for the collector waited 30 days after the third payment, and filed the judgment on day #31. The consumer was done in over a matter of $0.01!
If I was in your position, I would try to have the standing of the lawyer to sue over your alleged debt be put into question. There is a 99% chance that they technically can not collect, so they cannot sue you.
I would also try to see if I can derail their strategy by getting them into private arbitration.
What are you basing this on? I assume you mean you would challenge the standing of whomever the lawyer represents, not the actual lawyer. But why do you think there is a 99% chance there is no standing? OP doesn't seem to be challenging the validity of the debt. It's not clear whether they are being sued by the original creditor or a debt collector. If the OC, don't know what the standing challenge would be. If a debt collector, it's possible they don't own the debt, but 99% chance they don't have standing. That seems to be overstating it.
Starting Score: ~500 (12/01/2008)