Collection agency - Orders of Court

[hoosierpapa4]

I am trying to determine if this guy from the collection agency is full of it or what.

Fact, non-custodial parent is ordered to pre-pay 6% (through child support withheld), the other party is to use this 6% to pay for uninsured medical, dental, prescription etc., thereafter, it's split 75% / 25%.  Indiana laws apply.  Dentist has taken to collection the amount owed for Ortho work completed for dependent.  Custodial parent has entered into payment agreement, recognizing the obligation with dentist but has renigged on payment agreement (which is why it's in collections).  It was proven at trial that Custodial parent was not, has not, and did not meet the 6% on any uninsured medical, dental, prescription etc. payment on behalf of children at trial (never exhausting the 6% prepaid).

Collection guy says that the Orders of the Court from Civil proceedings (divorce, post-decree matters etc.) aren't worth the paper that they are written on.  In fact, he told me that you could use it (after crumpling it up) as toilet tissue.

1) Is this guy full of it?

2) Can the Courts ignore the previous orders of the Court and award the collection agency via 50/50 split of what's owed to Dentist?

3) If this is true, then why should any of us abide by the orders of the court...  Shouldn't we all just testify that we didn't do XYZ because we can't or couldn't afford it, or that it was just a big misunderstanding...

What really smokes my tail is that I gave the X over $64,000 in child support over the last 2.5 years and she wouldn't pay the deductibles for the childrens care.

[socrateaser]

>Collection guy says that the Orders of the Court from Civil
>proceedings (divorce, post-decree matters etc.) aren't worth
>the paper that they are written on.  In fact, he told me that
>you could use it (after crumpling it up) as toilet tissue.
>
>1) Is this guy full of it?

Rule #1 for dealing with collection agency. When the agent calls, you tell him/her immediately, that you will be happy to deal with this matter, but only in writing.

Rule #2, when you first receive a written demand for payment, your response is: (a) Produce evidence that you owe the debt. (b) Produce evidence that the agency is expressly authorized by the alleged creditor to collect on or negotiate on the debt, and provide the exact terms and conditions of the agency's contract with the creditor. (c) Notify the agency, in BIG BOLD WRITING, that all oral communications between you and the agency will be RECORDED, and that by engaging in oral communication with you, that the agency is impliedly consenting to the recording and to its subsequent use as evidence in any future legal action between you and the agency. (d) state, that your position is that you do not owe any amount to the creditor or the agency.

This will usually prevent future phone contact, and force the agency to provide proof of the debt as is required under federal law.

Make certain that you have a means of recording any future calls, should they occur.

>2) Can the Courts ignore the previous orders of the Court and
>award the collection agency via 50/50 split of what's owed to
>Dentist?

You are liable for whatever your court orders state, regardless of whether or not you have personally obligated yourself for services rendered. Professionals are entitled to payment for services rendered to a minor child, on the legal theory of quantum meruit. You are the parent of a minor child who has received a necessity (medical care), and you are thus bound to pay for it. Now, if the other parent owes a certain portion, or all of this debt, based upon the court orders, then if you are sued by the collection agency, you can file a third party suit against your ex and bring her to small claims court so as to have a judgment rendered against her for her portion of the debt. If it turns out that your ex owes the entire debt, then that is known as indemnity, and you will be dismissed from the case, and your ex will be on the hook.

At the moment, the agency has no "legal" right to obtain payment from you, on the contract for services itself, however, in small claims, a judge will overlook the lack of a proper pleading, will find the quantum meruit theory and give judgment to the collection agency.

You have other possible defenses, such as demonstrating that the services were not reasonably necessary healthcare (assuming that they weren't). If so, then you couldn't be held to pay, because the professional can't get compensation for something that was not reasonably necessary to the child.

Once again, as a practical matter, small claims judges give doctors their money about 99.99% of the time, so unless you have a real good reason for taking this to court, your best move is to calculate what you would owe on this debt, were your ex to have done everything correctly, and then, if there's something that you owe, write the agency and explain how you come to that amount and suggest that this is all that the agency is likely to get from a judge, therefore that is the amount you are willing to pay.

Also, if you want to keep your credit record clean, then you NEVER agree to settle the debt. What you agree to is a RELEASE from the debt and all future action by the agency or the creditor on the issue.

In legal words:

"In consideration for Agency _____, and its principal creditor ______, releasing me from any and all obligation for the debt described as _______, I hereby agree to pay Agency $X, no later than ??/??/??. Agency and creditor agree as additional consideration for this release, that they will immediately notify any and all credit reporting agencies that display a negative entry with regard to the above-described alleged debt, that my account is now and always has been current, paid in full, and never late, and that they will further, accept a fiduciary duty to continue to inform the credit reporting agencies as may be necessary to having any negative information in my credit record permanently deleted from the credit reporting agencies' records."

Agreed to by the parties, ??/??/??

______
agency, by

_____
creditor, by

_____
me

>
>3) If this is true, then why should any of us abide by the
>orders of the court...  Shouldn't we all just testify that we
>didn't do XYZ because we can't or couldn't afford it, or that
>it was just a big misunderstanding...

Irrelevant. See above.

>
>What really smokes my tail is that I gave the X over $64,000
>in child support over the last 2.5 years and she wouldn't pay
>the deductibles for the childrens care.

And, you thought that the communists lost the cold war, huh?