logo

Debtconsolidationcare.com - the USA consumer forum

Forums
  • Latest topic

lawyer garnishing PLUS debiting my bank account!

Date: Wed, 10/18/2006 - 08:41

Submitted by dbaker6
on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 08:41

Posts: 1600 Credits: [Donate]

Total Replies: 41


I moved out of a slum apartment that I had been in for six years, paying high rent. When I first moved in, it was worth what I paid. It was in a nice neighborhood and was actually a very nice apartment before this slum lord took over. I held onto the rent, hoping he would repair things that needed repaired (like the toilet water from the bathroom leaking all over the stove in the kitchen). He eventually got things fixed, but only after several attempts. The maintenance guys he had working for them would have fit right in on "Laurel and Hardy." These are guys who when a neighbor locked her keys in the house, went to the office to get the key for her apartment. Even though she told them it wasn't the right key, they attempted to "fit" the key into the hole and when that didn't work, as God is my witness, actually tried HAMMERING it into the hole. I lie not! I know the right thing to do would have been to put the rent in escrow and call the health department, but I was just sick of this place and him, so I moved out. I contacted the lawyer/slumlord two days later to make payment arrangements. He said he'd call me back the next day. He didn't, so three days later, I called again. He said he would call me in a few days. I didn't hear from him again until almost a year later at which point he stated in a letter this was his "final attempt to collect from me." He states he had sent several previous noticed, all of which I ignored. I haven't received any notices from him. He started debiting the account, as agreed, and a few days later, I get a letter from him with a court case # on it, stating he would only accept debits, which was confusing because, duh, that had already been discussed. It was going along okay until I had problems with my payday loans, which made one of his debits bounce. I immediately contacted him and he never returned my call, so a week later I called the apartment complex and left my new banking information with the secretary, not wanting him to try to debit the old account and have it bounce again. Later that day, I received papers in the mail stating that a judgment had been made against me and my wages were being garnished 25% starting that payday. There was a postcard that you could send in if you contested it. I sent it in and then learned the chances of them reversing it would be pretty much zilch, so I sent a letter to cancel it. Okay, the courts have garnished two of my paychecks so far, which I expected. Then I came to find out that he has been trying to debit my account in addition to the garnishments. I called the courthouse, and the man I spoke to said the checks that were being garnished were being held in court until after the hearing Monday (which I had sent a letter of cancellation for a couple days ago). I called the bank and they put a stop payment on it. She said she can reverse two of the charges but not the third. In the meantime, every day it's racking up $7 more for the money not being in there. What should I do?


Thanks, finsfan13. The landlord, who is also a lawyer is the one trying to debit my account in addition to receiving the garnishment. The court is garnishing my wages until the amount is paid off ($4,500), which will probably be around the end of January/beginning of February. I just sent a letter of cancelation for the hearing because once the judgment was handed down, I didn't think it could be reversed. I sent the cancellation before I knew he was trying to debit my account. I just left a message for a general practice lawyer and hopefully will hear from him soon and go from there. I also plan on reporting him to the Bar Association. That would be considered unethical, wouldn't it? (that's what they investigate, is unethical conduct). Anyway, thanks again for your advice. I'm really glad you're here. You've been such a big help to me!


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 14:03

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


Thanks, I appreciate your compliment!! What a mess, I don't think I've ever seen such a bunch of junk. Here's something for you, though..A garnishment can only last 90 days, so even if it's not paid off by the end of the 3 months, it has to end. Of course, usually the creditor just gets another judgement, but I have seen people make arrangements before the second round starts.

He definitely sounds unethical...I'm sure the lawyer you called will help you out. I hope it was just a mistake on the part of your landlord, and not intentional.


lrhall41

Submitted by finsfan13 on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 16:07

( Posts: 6919 | Credits: )


that's the problem - the landlord IS the lawyer! and it was definitely intentional! Thanks for telling me about garnishments only being able to last 90 days, though. I don't think I'll be able to work anything out with this jerk, but even if I get a brief reprieve in between, it would be something. By the way, I called two lawyers. The first said he can get the money any way he can. The second was a little more helpful. He said it depends on the wording in the judgment, so I guess I need to get a copy of the judgment. Like I said earlier, though, I called the court house this morning, and the man I talked to said there was nothing in the case about debiting my checking account, so he's doing that on his own.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 16:29

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


I don't think so. From what I understood, it has to go through the court and basically has to be stated in the judgment. I'll be going to the courthouse tomorrow to try to get a copy of the judgment.

If there can be, though, I'll close my bank account and have work start sending me paper checks and just keep the money on me. It's not like I ever have any left over. It all goes for bills and food.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 16:41

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


Okay, Finsfan, guess what? I talked to another lawyer. She said that the lawyer can't garnish wages AND debit my account. She also said no judge would order garnishment of wages and a bank account, it's one or the other. She said he's in contempt of court because he's going against what the judge ordered. She said I should go down and file a "Motion of contempt" with the courthouse. I told her I really don't have money for a lawyer. She said I can ask the courthouse clerk to help me fill it out. So I guess I'll do that, as well, when I got down there tomorrow. Will also be going to the library so I can print out a complaint form with the Cleveland Bar Association. He's got me mad now, and anybody that knows me knows I'm generally easy going but when you get my temper up, there's no stopping me! I'll let you know how it goes.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Wed, 10/18/2006 - 18:12

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


I don't know. Would they do that? The other thing is, I called the courthouse before I went down to see what it would cost because, of course, my funds are very limited now. I talked to one guy who asked me what it was for. When I explained it to him, he said, "Oh, I talked to you yesterday. He has no bank attachment. This is very unusual. I'm going to transfer you." Then I talked to this lady who had me explain in detail what was going on. I gave her my case number. She said, "He can't DO that. There's no order here. Where is he getting his order?" Then she asked how he got my bank info if not from the courts. I explained to her that we had previously set up payment arrangements and that I had given him my new account info before I received the garnishment papers. She said, "Well, I see you have a hearing Monday. Good." I told her I had canceled it. She said, "No. You've got to go to the hearing. You need to stop him." She said she would watch for the cancelation letter and throw it out. Then she said, "Call the news stations. Maybe they'd do a human interest story. Do whatever you can to get him. But you didn't here that here." She said in the 25 years she had been there, she had NEVER heard anything like this. I did e-mail Carl Monday. I don't know who to e-mail on the other channels. Any idea? Anyway, I'll keep posting.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 04:08

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


I tried e-mailing Nancy Grace but kept getting a page that said I wasn't authorized (then it brought up an advertisement for one of the cable stations). Anyway, the newspapers were a good idea. I did e-mail the Plain Dealer. I'm also going to e-mail Oprah and a few other places.

I'm not getting my hopes up, but that would be wonderful if they cancel it. Even if they don't, I 'd love to see this guy get what he deserves. I've been busy today getting all my paper work together and all. My son said he wanted to come with me as well as a friend of mine. My son's going to take off work Monday morning to go. It should be a public hearing, right - so they should be able to go in? You know, I hate it because when I get really angry, I cry and then can't say what I want to say! So I'll need all the moral support I can get! Keep your fingers crossed. I'll post here about what happens. Thanks - again.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 17:02

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


dbaker, I wonder how many other former tenants this slumlord/lawyer is doing this to. With you filing your complaint with the bar association and showing up at court, you may have exposed a little crime spree this jerk is committing on former tenants. It will be interesting to hear the outcome of your hearing.


lrhall41

Submitted by WHEREAMI? on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 17:09

( Posts: 5263 | Credits: )


Thanks, Steelers1. Actually, I know he's done it to at least a few other people - two of my former neighbors, at least. The one lives in Chicago. The other one used to live in another apartment in Fairview but moved and quit the job she was at. Her ex-husband lives across the street from my sister, and I'm debating whether I should go there and ask him to have her give me a call. She was very up in arms when she moved out, so I know she'd love to hear what's going on. I'll let you know what happens. Thanks for your support!


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 17:18

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


I was thinking of that. Wouldn't that be great? Actually, there's this older lady that lives in one of the complexes there, too. I feel so sorry for her. She's 89 years old, lives by herself, is still independent and is able to function on her own remarkably well for her age. She still drives (which I don't know if that's a good thing, but I've told her I would take her shopping or go for her or whatever, but she refuses and doesn't have any children. Her closest relative is her brother who lives in Texas). Anyway, she's petrified to go out in the winter, only because she has to deal with the ice to get to her car. Either I or one of my sons go over to walk her to her car when she needs to get out and it's bad outside. But my point is, she's always complaining about the landlord and says it was never like that when she moved there (she was 32 when she moved there, which would make it 50+ years ago), so she definitely would know what it was like before this guy took over. I might be able to at least get a statement from her. Anyway, I'll see what happens Monday first and go from there.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 18:05

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


I can't wait to hear what happens Monday..I'm like you, I get really emotional when I'm angry, and the tears start to flow. I think that'll be a good thing, let them see how pissed off you are. I think it's a great idea to get as many people as you can involved in this..I really think this one's going to work out in your favor.

Good luck..I'll be thinking of you on Monday, can't wait to hear the results.


lrhall41

Submitted by finsfan13 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 20:31

( Posts: 6919 | Credits: )


Thanks, finsfan. I'm trying to get all my facts together. I don't know ANYTHING about this stuff. The only time I've ever been in court is for my divorce. Okay, the papers that he sent had centered in bold across the top, "In the Rocky River Municipal Court (next line) Cuyahoga County, Ohio, and then he lists plaintiff versus defendent and then has the case number and judge (which is left empty) and then Judgment Creditor's first set of post-judgment interrogations propounded to judgment debtor, and then it goes into the body. Is he allowed to put all that if the court never even ordered the interrogation? My son (Jason) told me to bring everything I can think of.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Fri, 10/20/2006 - 20:57

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


A garnishment can only last 90 days, here is some information regarding the law

Quote:

Fact Sheet #30: The Federal Wage Garnishment Law, Consumer Credit Protection Act's Title 3 (CCPA)


This fact sheet provides general information concerning the amount that may be withheld from a person's earnings under the CCPA and the law's protection from termination because of garnishment for any single debt.

What is a wage garnishment?
A wage garnishment is any legal or equitable procedure through which some portion of a person's earnings is required to be withheld by an employer for the payment of a debt. Most garnishments are made by court order. Other types of legal or equitable procedures include IRS or state tax collection agency levies for unpaid taxes and federal agency administrative garnishments for non-tax debts owed the federal government.

Wage garnishments do not include voluntary wage assignments - that is, situations in which employees voluntarily agree that their employers may turn over some specified amount of their earnings to a creditor or creditors.

Which Federal law regulates wage garnishment?
Title III of the Consumer Credit Protection Act limits the amount of an employee's earnings that may be garnished and protects an employee from being fired if pay is garnished for only one debt. Title III is administered by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor's Employment Standards Administration. The Wage and Hour Division has no other authority with regard to garnishments. Questions over issues other than the amount being garnished or termination should be referred to the court or agency initiating the withholding action. For example, questions regarding the priority given to certain garnishments over others are not matters covered by Title III and may be referred to the court or agency initiating the garnishment action.

To whom does the law apply?
The law protects everyone receiving personal earnings, i.e., wages, salaries, commissions, bonuses, or other income - including earnings from a pension or retirement program. Tips are generally not considered earnings for the purposes of the wage garnishment law.

The law applies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories and possessions.

What is the protection against discharge when wages are garnished?
The CCPA prohibits an employer from firing an employee whose earnings are subject to garnishment for any one debt, regardless of the number of levies made or proceedings brought to collect that debt, because of the single garnishment. The Act does not prohibit discharge because an employee's earnings are separately garnished for two or more debts.

What are the restrictions on wage garnishment?
The amount of pay subject to garnishment is based on an employee's "disposable earnings," which is the amount left after legally required deductions are made. Examples of such deductions include federal, state, and local taxes, the employee's share of State Unemployment Insurance and Social Security. It also includes withholdings for employee retirement systems required by law.

Deductions not required by law - such as those for voluntary wage assignments, union dues, health and life insurance, contributions to charitable causes, purchases of savings bonds, retirement plan contributions (except those required by law) and payments to employers for payroll advances or purchases of merchandise - usually may not be subtracted from gross earnings when calculating disposable earnings under the CCPA.

The law sets the maximum amount that may be garnished in any workweek or pay period, regardless of the number of garnishment orders received by the employer. For ordinary garnishments (i.e., those not for support, bankruptcy, or any state or federal tax), the weekly amount may not exceed the lesser of two figures: 25 percent of the employee's disposable earnings, or the amount by which an employee's disposable earnings are greater than 30 times the federal minimum wage (currently $5.15 an hour).

For illustration, if the pay period is weekly and disposable earnings are $154.50 ($5.15 X 30) or less, there can be no garnishment. If disposable earnings are more than $154.50 but less than $206.00 ($5.15 X 40), the amount above $154.50 can be garnished. A maximum of 25 percent can be garnished, if disposable income earnings are $206.00 or more. When pay periods cover more than one week, multiples of the weekly restrictions must be used to calculate the maximum amounts that may be garnished. The table and examples at the end of this fact sheet illustrate these amounts.

What about child support and alimony?
Specific restrictions apply to court orders for child support or alimony. The garnishment law allows up to 50 percent of a worker's disposable earnings to be garnished for these purposes if the worker is supporting another spouse or child, or up to 60 percent if the worker is not. An additional 5 percent may be garnished for support payments more than l2 weeks in arrears.


Are there any exceptions to the law?
The wage garnishment law specifies that the garnishment restrictions do not apply to certain bankruptcy court orders, or to debts due for federal or state taxes.

If a state wage garnishment law differs from the CCPA, the law resulting in the smaller garnishment must be observed.

What about non-tax debts owed Federal Agencies?
The Debt Collection Improvement Act authorizes federal agencies or collection agencies under contract with them to garnish up to 15% of disposable earnings to repay defaulted debts owed the U.S. government. The Higher Education Act authorizes the Department of Education's guaranty agencies to garnish up to 10% of disposable earnings to repay defaulted federal student loans. Such withholding is also subject to the provisions of the federal wage garnishment law, but not state garnishment laws. Unless the total of all garnishments exceeds 25% of disposable earnings, questions regarding such garnishments should be referred to the agency initiating the withholding action.

EXAMPLES OF AMOUNTS SUBJECT TO GARNISHMENT BASED ON THE $5.15 AN HOUR MINIMUM WAGE
The following examples illustrate the statutory tests for determining the amounts subject to garnishment.

An employee's gross earnings in a particular week are $235.00. After deductions required by law, the disposable earnings are $205.00. In this week $50.50 may be garnished, since only the amount over $154.50 may be garnished where the disposable earnings are $206.00 or less. The employee would be paid $154.50.

An employee's gross earnings in a particular workweek are $240.00. After deductions required by law, the disposable earnings are $210.00. In this week 25 percent of the disposable earnings may be garnished. ($210.00 X 25% = $52.50) The employee would be paid $157.50.

A garnishment order is received after the second work day of the week. It requires a garnishment based on wages earned up to that day be withheld. The employee is paid $60.00 a day. Since less than $154.50 has been earned, no garnishment is permitted. However, if another garnishment is received when the workweek is complete, or in states where continuing garnishments are issued, the employer will withhold on the basis of the earnings for the entire week.

An employee paid every other week has disposable earnings of $400.00 for the first week and $40.00 for the second week of the pay period, for a total of $440.00. In a biweekly pay period, when disposable earnings are above $412.00 for the pay period 25% may be garnished. It does not matter that the disposable earnings in the second week are less than $154.50 - 25% of the $440.00 ($110.00) is subject to garnishment.

An employee on a $320.00 weekly draw against commissions has disposable earnings each week of $285.00. Commissions, paid monthly, total $2,000.00 for July after deductions required by law. Each draw and the balance due at the monthly settlement are separately subject to the law's restrictions. Thus, 25% ($71.25 in this example) of each draw may be garnished. At the end of the month, the $1,140.00 previously drawn is subtracted from the $2,000.00 settlement figure, and 25% of the balance may be garnished. In this example, the garnishable amount is $215.00.

Pursuant to a garnishment order (with priority) for child support an employer withholds $90.00 a week from the wages of an employee who has disposable earnings of $240.00 a week. A garnishment order for the collection of a defaulted student loan is also served. The limit for normal garnishments of 25% applies to the debt for the outstanding student loan. Under the formula for normal garnishments, a maximum of $60.00 (25% of $240.00) is garnishable. The $90.00 support payments may be withheld, because the normal restrictions do not apply to court orders for support. No withholding for the defaulted student loan may be made, because the amount already withheld is more than the amount that may be withheld for normal garnishments. Additional withholdings could be made to collect support, delinquent federal or state taxes and certain bankruptcy court ordered payments.


http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs30.htm


lrhall41

Submitted by PDLFREE on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 05:55

( Posts: 1245 | Credits: )


Mishele: Actually, the lawyer sent a paper in the mail that looked to me like it was from the courthouse (it had The Rocky River Municipal Court typed in bold letters across the top, etc.). When I called the lawyer to ask about it, he said that was just a formality and, if I signed and returned it, he would agree to the $100 every pay until the debt was paid. So I thought this was the judgment and signed and returned it. In it, it said I waive my right to a summons to the hearing. Now that I think back, that part did confuse me because I thought this was the judgment from the hearing. The last line even ends with "without further order from this Court." My friend said it's not from the court, though, because it doesn't have the seal and no judge's name or signature or even the clerk of court's signature is anywhere on the paper. I know I must sound pretty naive, but as I said previously, the only time I've ever been in court was for my divorce, and that was very brief. Anyway, what I was leading up to is I basically signed my rights to be summoned for the hearing, so the judgment, of course, was made in his favor. On the paper I got about contesting the garnishment, it said in bold that this was solely for consideration of the garnishment, that no objections to the judgment itself would be heard or considered, so I don't know how far I'll get on that score. Hey, if you have any ideas on how to get ahold of Nancy Grace, let me know. I went to CNN's website and, after typing my story, it said I couldn't go to that page (something about Time Warner cable - I have Cox cable). Anyway, I tried all the links I saw for her and couldn't get my story submitted. Thanks, Mishele.

Ashley06: Thank you SO MUCH for the garnishment laws that you posted here. That was really nice of you to do. I get paid production, however many lines I type per pay period is what my pay is based on. Right now, we have lots of OT, but my supervisor says that will stop in the near future. My employer gives us an average hourly amount that we made based on lines over a certain amount of time (I think it's six months) in order to calculate our PTO pay, so I'm going to bring that letter and see if they would figure in what I would make during a normal pay period. I'm hoping they don't say to come back when work does slow down and they would re-figure it then. Anyway, I read somewhere that in one county in Ohio (unfortunately not the one I live in), if you have a dependent at home, the chances are they'll lower the amount to be garnished. I am the sole supporter of three teenagers, so I'm hoping I can use that.

Anyway, tomorrow morning is the hearing, so I'll let you know how it goes. Say a prayer for me. Now I'm getting nervous. Thanks again, guys, for your support!


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 07:02

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


Good luck dbaker! I can understand that you are nervous, I would be as well. Finsfan knows alot about garnishment, maybe you can pm her. I think if you show up and declare something like hardship you can get your payments lowered. Don't quote me on that, I would pm finsfan. But I think you are going to do well, let us know the outcome. Again GOOD LUCK!!


lrhall41

Submitted by WHEREAMI? on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 08:02

( Posts: 5263 | Credits: )


Thanks for the clarification, now I understand better. It seems pretty sneaky to me though. I know that a court summons is one that you usually have to sign for. We had to when we first started our foreclosure process this past summer. We worked everything out with the lender so we didn't have to go to court. We had to write a response to the clerk of courts though with proof of our arrangment with the lender. Then we got something a couple of months ago about further proceedings but that was signed off on since we had been sticking to our payment arrangements though. They also received something from the lender's lawyer stating this as well. It was a nerve wracking experience though. I've come to find out since then that our mortage company was sued by many states, including my own, for several law violations. We might actually get some kind of settlement from the state or we might not. I know once we can refinance, we are going to.


lrhall41

Submitted by Cow & Chicken on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 09:39

( Posts: 3571 | Credits: )


Sounds like my double dipping experience

My auto finance company took a double payment for my auto loan out of my checking account. When I contacted them I was told it was their error and the money would be repaid as well as any fees occurring to my checking account within 48 hours after faxing them the evidence from my bank that this indeed did happen. I complied.

After 5 days the money was not repaid. After contacting them 2 more times, I was told each time they were investigating the situation, after I had already faxed them the proof they requested, and the funds would be in my account within 48 hours.

Meanwhile, a number of checks bounced creating insufficient funds fees on my checking account for over $600.

On the fourth time I contacted them I was told the situation was investigated and it was all my fault and they would not repay the insufficient funds fees, however, they would refund the second of the two payments within 48 hours. By the way it took approximately three weeks to get that payment back into my account.

I requested a copy of the investigation and was told they would not comply I was to take their word it as it was my fault.

I have documentation that it was not my fault via bank statements, the double payment was posted the same day. They state I posted the payment on two different dates.


lrhall41

Submitted by PDLFREE on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 10:18

( Posts: 1245 | Credits: )


Thanks, guys. I really hope I can get this guy, not just for me, but for others that he's done this to, as well, and to prevent him from doing it to more people. Finsfan, I'm going to PM you about a few things. If you get a chance to get back to me tonight, it would be much appreciated.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 15:05

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


Well, I went to the hearing today and felt like I was just going in circles. The judge wasn't hearing anything I was trying to say. I tried to bring up the fact that I was never even notified of the original hearing. She didn't want to hear it. By the way, the lawyer didn't even come - he sent someone else who basically didn't know what was going on outside of what she read in his notes. Anyway, she told the judge that I had defaulted three times in a row. I attempted (attempted being the main word here) to tell the judge that I defaulted because he had no business withdrawing from it because the garnishments were already being executed. I swear, I explained to her three times that the garnishments began September 25 and the defaults this lawyer was referring to were in October, AFTER the garnishment began, BECAUSE I THEN DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY LEFT IN MY ACCOUNT! Three times she told me, "Well, of course they went after garnishment if you defaulted three times in a row." Do you believe this? It was like going around in circles. Then I asked if I could reduce the amount they were taking out, all prepared to show her my earnings versus my living expenses. She immediately said, "You didn't come to the first hearing, and now we're supposed to reduce the garnishment just because you want us to, because you say it's a "hardship?" (very sarcastically). You can talk to a lawyer, but I doubt very seriously that you'll get anywhere because you didn't even show up for the hearing." To which I again attempted to explain I wasn't given notice. The only thing I did manage to get her to do was to order him not to debit any more from my account. She said since I had given him my banking information, I gave him the right to debit my account, even after I told her that was before I knew of the garnishment. So much for our justice system. For THIS we pay tax dollars? Unbelievable.


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Mon, 10/23/2006 - 10:34

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


Thanks, you guys. I knew I could count on you for support. I'm feeling a little better about it. At least I'll get it over with and never have to deal with the creep again. My son is still furious. He says we should picket in front of the leasing office of the apartment complex he owns. Can we do that?


lrhall41

Submitted by dbaker6 on Thu, 10/26/2006 - 18:20

( Posts: 1600 | Credits: )


well, I suppose you could, but it seems like you'd run the risk of being arrested...

I'm gonna look at some stuff at work tomorrow, see if I can find something out for you. Have you asked about filing an appeal? This is your right, and you'll be able to prove hardship..I'll get the exact info from my handbook tomorrow for you and pm you as sonn as I get home.


lrhall41

Submitted by finsfan13 on Thu, 10/26/2006 - 18:22

( Posts: 6919 | Credits: )