Consumer complaint received 2018-07-25
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: AZ
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Credit card debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action
Sub-issue: Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit

Complaint:
This complaint stems from a card that I had with Bank of America, which through the process of a home loan modification, which was suggested by B of A, was closed back in XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX XXXX apparently bought the debt that B of A discharged and filed a lawsuit with XXXX XXXX Justice Court on XX/XX/XXXX according to court records. They then filed a motion for alternative service claiming that I was clearly attempting to avoid being served, however, according to their motion, they were attempting to serve papers in the middle of the day and the server noted that there were always vehicles missing from the carport when service was attempted. The court approved the motion for alternative service on XX/XX/XXXX, and on XX/XX/XXXX, there was an affidavit of service filed with the court. At this point in time I had no idea any of this was going on, and I was never served. 

Without being noticed of this action, I had no opportunity to appear, which is rather convenient for these kinds of junk debt cases where the standing of XXXX XXXX is questionable, and they have an issue with producing the required documents. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX petitioned for a default judgement, which was granted on XX/XX/XXXX. Again, I had no knowledge of any of this, which seems to be the standard with about 95 % of these kinds of cases in Arizona according to what I've seen in researching this issue in the last month since i found out about this action. 

According to court records, XXXX XXXX filed an application for a writ of garnishment on XX/XX/XXXX with my employer, with a return on XX/XX/XXXX, and an affidavit of service filed on XX/XX/XXXX. At this point, I still have no knowledge of any of this going on, nor does my employer. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I received an email from my payroll department with a second notice of garnishment attached denoting the amount that was now being withheld from my weekly paycheck due to this judgement from XX/XX/XXXX. This was the first time I was made aware of any of this. 

I made a trip to the justice court on XX/XX/XXXX and received copies of the paperwork filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX on behalf of XXXX XXXX, along with the attempted service and the alternative service. I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX, still dismayed, and was told that " the process server nailed the documents to my front door '' according to their file. I have a metal front door and a metal security door, so that is not even possible. They did not seem concerned with the lack of service, nor did they want to address any of the issues now that they have a garnishment in place. 

On XX/XX/XXXX I requested a hearing on the garnishment issue along with the withholding percentage. A court date was set for XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX I received a call from XXXX XXXX XXXX advising me that they would not be available for the coming court date and I should send them all my banking information so they could make a determination on my request for an adjusted withholding. When I declined to supply that, I was told they'd see me in court. On the morning of XX/XX/XXXX I showed up for court and was told the judge had just signed their motion to continue. It was at that point I was told I could file a motion to have the judgment vacated. I complied all the information, to include dates and a statement of facts and filed a motion to vacate with the court on XX/XX/XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a response to my motion, which I received on XX/XX/XXXX, stating that the time had expired for any kind of motion and there was no explanation of why it took so long for me to respond, therefore my motion should be denied and the judgement and garnishment should remain in place. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, we had a court date for the garnishment amount hearing. At that time I filed my reply to XXXX 's response again citing issues of the statute of frauds, being that XXXX and I never had any contract and they don't have standing, and noting that they had been fined {$170000.00} in Arizona for bad behavior in cases dating between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, and mine was filed in XX/XX/XXXX, so it fits the narative, as well as a class action suit filed in Michigan for fraudulent documentation. 

At this court date, I had the opportunity to go over this issue for the first time with XXXX XXXX, the attorney for XXXX XXXX, and he advised me that they would cut the garnishment amount in half if I would drop my motion to vacate, which struck me as odd. We went over the financials with the judge, and despite having {$5900.00} in monthly bills, and a take home check of {$6100.00}, he didn't see that the garnishment of close to {$2400.00} per month would create financial hardship. The court seems to be a rubber stamp for XXXX as this point, despite the service issues that are blatant, and my total lack of knowledge of the existence of this case. 

The amount they are claiming includes {$9900.00} for principle, {$4300.00} in interest, and {$140.00} in fees according to the default judgement from XX/XX/XXXX. They're currently claiming {$16000.00} in their paperwork that was sent to my employer in XX/XX/XXXX, which was the first time either of us found out about this issue.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation