|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 1:34 pm Post subject: Poor No Longer To Be Held For Unaffordable Bail |
|
|
| Quote: | The U.S. Justice Department said that holding defendants in jail because they can’t afford to make bail is unconstitutional—the first time the government has taken such a position before a federal appeals court.
On Thursday, Loretta Lynch’s DOJ filed a friend of court (amicus) brief in federal court saying that mandating inmates pay bail to be released before a trial violates their civil rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides equal protection under the law.
The brief read in part: “Bail practices that incarcerate indigent individuals before trial solely because of their inability to pay for their release violate the Fourteenth Amendment” and “result in the unnecessary incarceration of numerous individuals who are presumed innocent.”
NBC reports that the filing came in the case of Maurice Walker of Calhoun, Ga. He was kept in jail for six nights after police arrested him for being a pedestrian under the influence, a misdemeanor. Calhoun was told he could not get out of jail unless he paid the fixed bail amount of $160.
“Fixed bail schedules that allow for the pretrial release of only those who can play, without accounting for the ability to pay,” the government said, “unlawfully discriminate based on indigence.”
A federal judge in January ruled in Walker’s favor, ordering the city to let those arrested on misdemeanors be released on their own recognizance.
On appeal, the city of Calhoun said the preset amounts of the city’s bail schedule are tied to the seriousness of each offense and are specifically allowed under Georgia law; it also argues that “recognizance bonds greatly reduces the incentive for defendants to appear.” |
Unaffordable Bail
This is HUGE. Countless people end up losing jobs, shelter, and opportunity simply for not being able to afford to pay bail. It's never made sense to me that someone could have their liberty abridged prior to being found guilty for anything that isn't a serious crime. This country is far too bail happy. Bail should be for serious offenses where there is a question that a citizen might legitimately abscond instead of pay his debt to society for a serious offense. Making someone come up with bail to buy their freedom back due to something as inane as public intoxication is just wrong. Glad to see this Justice Department finally being so proactive about the administration of Justice.
This will also save local jurisdictions a wad of cash. It's fiscally stupid for the city to pay $70/night to hold someone in hopes of garnering a $160 fine. In the case in question, the municipality spent in the neighborhood of $400 in lieu of a $160 fine. That's dumb.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 21, 2016 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Just to be clear, this is the position that the DoJ has taken in an amicus brief. We shall see whether the courts agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thugnomoe
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 14660
Location: unfortunately not Los Angeles anymore
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
you can also avoid paying bail if you don't commit crimes.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52654
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thugnomoe wrote: | | you can also avoid paying bail if you don't commit crimes. |
Except for the part about not everyone who is arrested is actually guilty of a crime, but nice try.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames
Jason Isbell
Man, do those lyrics resonate right now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Still unclear on how they determine affordability.
I know a guy who makes $60K and can't always afford to pay his mobile phone bill on time due to insufficient funds.
Would he count? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thugnomoe
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 14660
Location: unfortunately not Los Angeles anymore
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DaMuleRules wrote: | | Thugnomoe wrote: | | you can also avoid paying bail if you don't commit crimes. |
Except for the part about not everyone who is arrested is actually guilty of a crime, but nice try. |
no argument there.. but you can also stay away from the fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29286
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thugnomoe wrote: | | DaMuleRules wrote: | | Thugnomoe wrote: | | you can also avoid paying bail if you don't commit crimes. |
Except for the part about not everyone who is arrested is actually guilty of a crime, but nice try. |
no argument there.. but you can also stay away from the fire. |
Easier said than done. Some individuals have no choice but to live in low income neighborhoods where crime is regular and police descriptions of suspects are ... general.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Freedom is one of our most valuable commodities and should only be abridged when someone has committed a seriously aggregious act against society. Abridging ones freedom is meant to be an act of last resort. Unfortunately we've dangerously lost our way and treat the abridgement of freedom as a first resort and there are few manners of thinking that are a greater threat to freedom than that. We've become so warped in our reasoning as a people that we'd dare think it's somehow ok that someone who commits a minor offense should have a pricetag placed on his freedom. It's how those who view themselves as ultimately wards of the state think. That their freedom is not innate but rather just rented and failure to pay a fee for that rental is sufficient reason for the state to reclaim it's ward.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | Still unclear on how they determine affordability.
I know a guy who makes $60K and can't always afford to pay his mobile phone bill on time due to insufficient funds.
Would he count? |
If the goal is equal protection then no one should have to pay. Or have they re-defined "equal"?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dont_be_a_wuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2012
Posts: 21459
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dont_be_a_wuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2012
Posts: 21459
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Still unclear on how they determine affordability.
I know a guy who makes $60K and can't always afford to pay his mobile phone bill on time due to insufficient funds.
Would he count? |
If the goal is equal protection then no one should have to pay. Or have they re-defined "equal"? |
They have. They mean it to mean equitable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Yeah, there are 45 million people who are below the poverty line in America. They simply don't have $150 sitting around. Many courts reduce your fine for every day you sit in jail. Usually about a $50/day credit. So a guy walks out a bar with his friends and then remembers that his wallet is still sitting on the bar. His drunk buddies don't notice that he didn't get in the Taxi with them and they take off. When he get's back outside he doesn't see them and can't afford the whole fee for a Taxi alone, so he starts walking. A cop notices his drunken walk and stops him. He get's arrested for being drunk in public and instead of being taken to a drunk tank to sleep it off, he's booked into jail. He goes to court and receives a $150 fine. He tells the judge that he only has $15 on him and if he is forced to sit in jail then he'll lose his job and also won't be able to pay the arrears on his rent so he'll lose his apartment. After a week he's finally released from jail with no job, no place to live, and has gone from a low end, but productive member of society to ground zero. So now it's off to the taxpayer funded shelter to sleep, and then try to find a job without an address, phone, non smelly clothes. All because he couldn't afford to pay a $150 fine for the crime of walking home drunk from a bar. And the taxpayer is picking up the tab for helping to take him from one of the ranks of the working poor to homelessness. It's a stunted process that doesn't help the individual and places unnecessary and avoidable burdens upon society since we taxpayers now get to pay thousands of dollars trying to recoup a $150 fine because someone decided to walk home drunk from a bar. Oh the crimany. 
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dont_be_a_wuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2012
Posts: 21459
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
No idea really, but I know I would pay $150 rather than stay in jail another week. If someone would rather stay in jail than pay $150 it might be a pretty good indicator that the bail is too high for their ability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
No idea really, but I know I would pay $150 rather than stay in jail another week. If someone would rather stay in jail than pay $150 it might be a pretty good indicator that the bail is too high for their ability. |
You and me both.
But I think the point of this, was to avoid putting people in jail if they can't afford it. So, it would kind of defeat the purpose to put someone who says they can't afford it, back in jail for a week, and then say yup, he was right, he couldn't afford it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25089
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
No idea really, but I know I would pay $150 rather than stay in jail another week. If someone would rather stay in jail than pay $150 it might be a pretty good indicator that the bail is too high for their ability. |
You and me both.
But I think the point of this, was to avoid putting people in jail if they can't afford it. So, it would kind of defeat the purpose to put someone who says they can't afford it, back in jail for a week, and then say yup, he was right, he couldn't afford it. |
The lawyers in LG prob have better answer but maybe if you don't pay income tax (meet criteria for low income), on welfare or other proofable financial difficulty? or maybe set it up to income of poverty line (single - $11000, fam of 2 - $16000, fam of 3... and so on)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dont_be_a_wuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Mar 2012
Posts: 21459
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| governator wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
No idea really, but I know I would pay $150 rather than stay in jail another week. If someone would rather stay in jail than pay $150 it might be a pretty good indicator that the bail is too high for their ability. |
You and me both.
But I think the point of this, was to avoid putting people in jail if they can't afford it. So, it would kind of defeat the purpose to put someone who says they can't afford it, back in jail for a week, and then say yup, he was right, he couldn't afford it. |
The lawyers in LG prob have better answer but maybe if you don't pay income tax (meet criteria for low income), on welfare or other proofable financial difficulty? or maybe set it up to income of poverty line (single - $11000, fam of 2 - $16000, fam of 3... and so on)? |
I wonder how you work on preparing all those documents from a cell? Maybe having food stamps, medicaid, or TANF can be a qualifier, and they can handle it with the persons case worker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | governator wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | dont_be_a_wuss wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Interesting. I wonder how they determine affordability.
Like what if you could have afforded it, but you spent your money on dumb (bleep). Then I think it shouldnt count. So this guy had enough money to drink and get drunk but could not afford $160?
If you're a good, upstanding citizen but made a simple mistake and while you have made sound, basic financial decisions, can't afford it, then I'm all for it. |
Many of them are in jail, and cannot spend the money to get drunk if they wanted to. A girl I was dating got a DUI, and I went to court with her. At the start of court they would bring a convict up to the window in orange scrubs, and the judge would say, "you owe the court $150 to be released, do you have any way of paying that today?" The guy was like, I am in jail, I didn't have it last week, how could I get any money in jail? Judge tells the guard to take him back to jail for a week until he can pay. (I think he got credit for each week or something, not up on all the ins and outs.) |
Ok, but how do they determine whether someone is able to pay? Their word? If they "look" homeless? |
No idea really, but I know I would pay $150 rather than stay in jail another week. If someone would rather stay in jail than pay $150 it might be a pretty good indicator that the bail is too high for their ability. |
You and me both.
But I think the point of this, was to avoid putting people in jail if they can't afford it. So, it would kind of defeat the purpose to put someone who says they can't afford it, back in jail for a week, and then say yup, he was right, he couldn't afford it. |
The lawyers in LG prob have better answer but maybe if you don't pay income tax (meet criteria for low income), on welfare or other proofable financial difficulty? or maybe set it up to income of poverty line (single - $11000, fam of 2 - $16000, fam of 3... and so on)? |
I wonder how you work on preparing all those documents from a cell? Maybe having food stamps, medicaid, or TANF can be a qualifier, and they can handle it with the persons case worker. |
Here is how it's determined in Seattle:
| Quote: |
If you are unable to pay a ticket or fine in full, you may request a time payment plan from the Financial Compliance staff at the first floor counter. A $10 administration fee will be added and included in the plan. Minimum monthly payments are $50 unless you are receiving government financial assistance, in which case you may be eligible for lower monthly payments or to work at a local charitable organization instead of paying. |
The judge isn't part of the payment equation here. He/She just determines guilt/innocence then directs you to the Financial Dept to arrange payments. All financial arrangements are made with them, so a Judge doesn't even need to know whether or not you can pay as that's not their job.
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
And if they don't pay?
This isn't going to work for a bum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Also found these payment instructions given to inmates who have just been found guilty and owe a fine. They are directed to immediately goto the Financial Services Office and arrange their payment after their release from custody. And it indicates the penalties for failure to comply. So basically, until you prove to the court that you can't be trusted to deal with the court responsibly, the court will assume you to be innocent and compliant, as it should. If you qualify for community service, then you've a time limit to complete your duties which deduct from your fine responsibility at a rate of $10/hour of community service.
| Quote: |
TIME PAYMENT
If you require additional time to pay it is your responsibility to submit a time payment application directly to Transworld Systems Inc before your payment deadline. The terms of this plan are:
One-time set-up fee of $12.00
Monthly fee of $5.00
Minimum monthly payments are 10% of your amount due if $1,000 or less; 5% if over $1,000 or $25.00, whichever is greater.
Time Payment Application
To apply for a time payment plan you must do the following:
Complete the Transworld Systems Inc Time Payment Application. Applications are available at any King County District Court location.
Send the completed application, your $12.00 set-up fee AND your first monthly payment directly to the Transworld Systems Inc. address on the application. Completed application and payment must be received by your due date.
Incomplete information or lack of appropriate payment may result in denial of your application and your account may become eligible for collections.
Please keep in mind that Transworld Systems Inc. has no information regarding your fine(s) until the completed paperwork and initial payment are received and the account is set-up in their system.
Benefits
Establishment of a realistic monthly payment.
Making regular payments will not affect your credit rating.
Compliance with the plan provides you with additional time to pay your fine(s) and avoid your account being sent to collections.
Ability to pay amounts larger than your monthly payment or in full at any time can avoid further monthly fees.
You will receive a monthly statement with a return envelope to mail your payments.
Penalties
Failure to remain current with your payments will result in your account being placed in default status.
Default from the payment plan will be reported to the Court and additional monetary penalties may be added.
If this involves a traffic violation the Court will notify the Washington State Department of Licensing which may result in a suspension of your privilege to drive.
Accounts that default will be referred to a collection agency and you will be responsible for additional collection fees. |
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
