The Oregon legislature has passed a bill that amends state law related to what can be garnished after obtaining a judgment for an unpaid debt. The bill, called the Family Financial Protection Bill, is sponsored by state Rep. Nathan Sosa, a Democrat, and now heads to the desk of Gov. Tina Kotek for her signature or veto.
Among the protections it puts in place or changes are:
- Raises the amount of wages that are protected from garnishment. This changes yearly, from $254 for a one-week period in 2024 to $487 in 2026
- Protects $2,500 in a consumer’s bank account
- Increases protections to prevent consumers and homeowners in Oregon from losing their homes during debt collection proceedings
- Improves protections for consumers under the state’s Unfair Debt Collection Practices Act
- Extends the amount of time consumers have to file a complaint to three years from the date of injury
- Protects consumers from unfair attorney’s fees resulting from civil lawsuits for unlawful collection practices
Among the changes to the state’s debt collection law is this change to the list of unlawful collection practices:
- Amending this provision — “Knowingly collects any amount, including any interest fee, charge or expense incidental to the principal obligation, unless the amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law” to this: “Collects or attempts to collect or threatens to collect a debt or any interest fee, charge or expense incidental to the principal obligation, by any means, including through legal action, while knowing or having reason to know that the debt does not exist, is not owed by the debtor or is not allowed by the contract creating the debt or by law. The fact that the debt collector obtains a judgment for less than the amount sought in the complaint or fails to obtain a judgment at all does not by itself establish a violation of this section.”
As well, the bill amends a provision allowing a judge to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party to being able to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing plaintiff. The prevailing defendant may only be awarded attorney’s fees “if the court finds that the plaintiff had not objectively reasonable basis for bringing the action or asserting the ground for appeal.”
