Many states have taken action during the coronavirus pandemic to try and protect consumes, including issuing moratoriums on the issuance of new garnishments and protecting funds from stimulus programs that have been deposited into the accounts of individuals. But ProPublica has published an article that looks at individuals who had garnishments that were already in effect when the pandemic hit and how those individuals have continued to see their paychecks garnished. The article also mentions the “thousands’ of new lawsuits have been filed during the past three months, waiting for courts to re-open.
In particular, the article looks at the collection practices of Capital One, which has continued to garnish the wages of individuals who have had judgments issued against them, including an employee of a New York City hospital who argues that his garnishment is a result of his now-deceased father taking out a credit card in his name and not repaying it.
The article also specifically mentions Encore Capital, which filed 1,600 debt collection suits in April, according to filings in eight states that were analyzed by ProPublica. Encore did say in the article that it has ceased all collection efforts for any consumer who has notified the company that he or she has been “directly impacted” by COVID-19.
Existing garnishments are one area of debt collection that has been unaddressed by lawmakers and regulators during the pandemic, according to the report. Evictions and foreclosures have been halted, many individuals were able to obtain forbearances on their student loans and car loans, and many states stopped new garnishments from being issued. But existing garnishments were allowed to continue because they were considered “essential matters,” according to a spokeswoman for the New York State Court system.
Some individuals, with the help of an attorney, were able to put a hold on existing garnishments, according to the article, but only those who were proactive.
