Brit3964

The bit I find particularly disturbing is not being told what you have been arrested for. I thought cops have to tell you that

In jail for being in debt

You committed no crime, but an officer is knocking on your door. More Minnesotans are surprised to find themselves being locked up over debts.

As a sheriff's deputy dumped the contents of Joy Uhlmeyer's purse into a sealed bag, she begged to know why she had just been arrested while driving home to Richfield after an Easter visit with her elderly mother.

No one had an answer. Uhlmeyer spent a sleepless night in a frigid Anoka County holding cell, her hands tucked under her armpits for warmth. Then, handcuffed in a squad car, she was taken to downtown Minneapolis for booking. Finally, after 16 hours in limbo, jail officials fingerprinted Uhlmeyer and explained her offense -- missing a court hearing over an unpaid debt. "They have no right to do this to me," said the 57-year-old patient care advocate, her voice as soft as a whisper. "Not for a stupid credit card."

http://www.startribune.com/local/95692619.html

Ray

typical bad reporting ..she was not arrested for a bad debt ... she was arrested for not turning up at court

or called failure to appear in my day

Brit3964

Yes but should they not being saying why they are arrested?

fatbrit

Yup!

Sensible explanation here: http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/ne...23-36-news.php

Ray

who says they did not ....

Brit3964

The article claims some are not being told the reason of their arrest. The link FB sent explains it better:

"This transit happens when a judge signs a capias, a civil warrant for arrest on the basis of failure to appear in court."

Presumably because it is a civil arrest the cops don't have to mention why the arrest occurred? If it's true people are not being told why they are arrested it still seems a bit odd to me. Do they think the person might do a runner?

fatbrit

They are being arrested for dissin' the court, not the debt collectors. You can piss the collectors off as much as you want......but not the court.

Ray

Be very careful not to believe these types of stories when they dramatise it

many years ago I was surprised to read in the evening news how three men had smashed the front door down to enter this house

when in fact we had walked into the unlocked back door

Scouse Express

Didn't realise you were a Scouser, too, Ray!


Jim.

Michael

I suspect that most of the time that the police gets involved is when a garnishment order is pending.

First the debt collector will need to get a judgment (either by default by the debtor not showing up or by the debtor losing the case) and the debtor is ordered to pay.

When the debtor doesn't pay, the debt collector goes to court to try to get a garnishment order. The court then sends the person a document to fill out describing income, employers name, bank account numbers, and expenses so that the judge can determine the amount to be garnished. The debtor refuses to fill out the paper work so the judge issues a summons to court to get that information. The person doesn't show up at court so the judge issues a warrant.

In many states, the debt collector has to acquire the employer name and bank account numbers on their own prior to garnishment proceedings and the court will only issue a subpoena to the employer and bank to provide information about account value and income. The only information needed from the debtor is his information on expenses but the judge can issue the garnishment order without that information if the debtor refuses to answer that information (probably to the determent of the debtor). Apparently in Minnesota, the court can be used to get all the information from the debtor.