need to answer credit card lawsuit.

[crapandgarbage]

i have a two cc accounts written off by nfcu (8000) and (5200). i talked to nfcu and they say they do not own accounts.  the accounts were sold to asset and i am being sueing by asset.

first question is, why did they only sue of the 8000 and not the entire amount? what benefits them going after the 8000 and seperating the two? .can they get judgement and come back later for the 5000?

the accounts are not out of sol. im in florida.  currently on unemploymet.

how does unemployment effects a judgement? how will unemployment effect asset willingness to settle?

[HoldingOntoHope]

I do not know the answers to the Florida specific questions but I can tell you that they can in fact get separate judgments on the two separate credit accounts. The first point is that their filing a suit has not yet resulted in a judgment so you need to act and respond. Go over the paperwork that you were served and if you are unsure how you need to proceed then find a friend who is familiar with the process or seek out a Legal Aid type situation that helps low income people with legal problems. If they do get a judgment then they will have the right to put claims on money or property of yours for the length of time the judgment is in effect. In California that is 10 years and they can get a renewal for another ten years after that. Additionally it may show up on your credit reports if one of the reporting sources finds it after it is recorded by the county court.

The best thing if you can do it is to get a hold of the attorney firm whose name is on the plaintiffs section and see if you can make arrangements for payments or a lump sum settlement of the obligation. If you go this route then make sure you get the full agreement in writing. I know some income is excluded from garnishment by a judgment such as social security but I don't know if unemployment compensation falls in this category. Whatever you do if you simply ignore this they will get a default judgment and your financial life will be affected for a long time.

[RobertEG]

While there may be commonaltity in the parties involved, each debt requires its own hearing of the facts by the court.

Depending upon the procedures of the court, they might be addressed by consolidation into one action, or require separate actions.

I would suppose the plaintiff chose to have each, should they decide to pursue both, heard separately.

You might, should they file on both, be able to motion the court for their consolidation, but that is an issue for the court.

Yes, they are two separate legal issues, each of which they can pursue.

If they obtain a judgment, it is first a finding by the court of the legitimacy and thus obligation for the debt. 

The second issue is its repayment.  The judgment will set an order for its satisfaction, and will have a time for its enforceabililty, normally 10'ish years.

If the defendent does not satisfy within the initial period set by the court, the prevailing plaintiff can go back to the court and request an order for specific satisfaction, such as by attaching property or garnishment of wages.  Insolvency, meaning your liabilities exceed your assets, is part of what will be considered by the court.  They cant take water from a dry rock.

I suggest that in any legal proceeding, including the initial trial, that you have with you a full, notarized statement of your net assets and liabilities, including the sought after debt.  Your ability to pay is a matter that the court will ultimately decide, so it is prudent to be armed with that showing at any stage of the proceeding.

Most debt collectors will investigate the ability of a consumer to pay prior to bringing legal action, as it is definately relevant to any order to ultimately pay.

They, apparently, have chosen to jump the gun.  I would exercise a bit of caution if you are planning to assert insolvency, as offering now to pay the debt kinda flies in the face of later assertions of inability to pay. 

Have you consulted an attorney?  When is your response due back to the court?  What are you planning to assert in that response?