Consumer complaint received 2020-01-15 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Other debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit
Company: H. Kent Hollins, Attorney at Law, P.A
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
In XX/XX/XXXX my bank account was garnished by the office of H. Kent Hollins. I had no idea what it was in regards to, but after over an hour on the phone with my bank I was advised that my best option was to authorize my bank to release the funds in the account to the garnisher, in order to have my accounts unfrozen as soon as possible. I was at the doctor with my daughter and was unable to pay her copay because of this freeze on my accounts ; in an emotional and confused state I agreed to allow my bank to release the funds. 

In XXXX of XXXX I received a letter from the law office of H. Kent Hollins, stating that I owed {$1100.00} to XXXX XXXX Bank. I had a checking account with XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, KS. In XX/XX/XXXX, I believe, I overdrafted the account in the amount of approximately {$500.00} and was unable to bring it current, so it was eventually sent to collections. I moved to Texas in XX/XX/XXXX and forgot about the debt. When I finally pulled my credit report years later, the account was not even shown as one in collections, so I had no reminder of the debt owed. 

Fast forward to XX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX, and I learned that the office of H. Kent Hollins had sued me and was awarded a default judgement against me, which enabled them to garnish my bank account. At the time I was sued, the original debt was already near or over 10 years old, no payments had been made within that time period, and thus it was a time-barred debt. However, I received no communication to let me know that I was being sued for this debt, so had no opportunity to show up in court to defend myself based on the statute of limitations for debt collections. The default judgement was awarded only because I was never notified that I was being sued. 

Moving on, on XX/XX/XXXX I called the office of H. Kent Hollins and explained that I couldn't afford to pay anything. I was told that in order to avoid more garnishments in the future, I had to pay in full or set up a payment plan. At the time, I was going through a terrible separation/divorce, and my daughter was very sick. I wasn't in the state of mind to think to look up these laws and argue that this debt was too old to be collected on. Knowing that any future garnishments would literally leave myself and my children with no home, food, or vital medications, I agreed to a payment plan of {$25.00} per month. 

At the time the agreement was made, on XX/XX/XXXX, the balance owed was {$1100.00}. I have made a total of {$320.00} in payments so far, yet my current balance owed is {$1000.00}. The total balance has only decreased by {$170.00}, meaning this is accruing interest at a rate that would prevent me from ever being able to pay this off, at this point. 

I am aware that the time period for the statute of limitations can be reset if a payment is made on an old debt, but given that I was practically forced into making payments to unfreeze my bank account and then to avoid future garnishments, I think it would be absolutely unethical for the time frame to be reset in this case. I agreed only out of fear for the financial well-being of myself and my children, based on the threat of future garnishments.

Company public response: Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation