2Wheelgnnr
Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New Yorkistan
to get to the point. My wife has a default judgement against her...and in the past we had joint bank accts pre 2012 EIPA law and were frozen. usually the money was mine and we got it back....so now our bank/money is my name only.
its been 7 years since the last levy/judgement and I would like to add her back onto the account for various reasons. she cannot and does not have wages garnished as shes self employed. I know the creditor has to go out and get a new levy each time they freeze assets..but wonder if the EIPA law would protect us now so to speak in that we generally have less that 1740 in our acct at any one time.
on another matter of fact. I wonder if it would trigger a new asset search as we are thinking/getting ready to contact them to work out settlements or payment plans or something to get rid of this as we know it come up when/if we plan to sell our home as we want to move to S.C. and get this all behind us and dont want burden ourselves when we go to sell home with the judgement coming up.
I'm thinking since been 7 years sorta safe to add her back to the account but I would also think contacting them may start the process of asset search again and they would want to freeze that account. but part of me says the EIPA law would/should protect us in this case....but Ive read articles that (atleast) a while ago NY banks were not good about following the law and would still freeze accounts regardless of EIPA......
Now she just signs her checks over to me by endorsing it as pay to the order of XXXXX and I deposit them but bank starting to give me hard time about it and says they can no longer do this on checks cut from there bank...I'm asking them for the part of the banking agreement that states why this is but they don't like third party sign overs within their own bank or whatever. This is how the bank advised me three years ago to deposit her check but now they changed the rules????
Thank you all for any input.....again its 2 fold as want to start taking care of it now that back on our feet but dont want to start this bank trouble all over with banking problems**************..
Maybe with the pushback Im giving the bank we can keep up the way we've been doing it until taken care of..that would be best.
bank saying she has to start coming in and cashing them and since she does not have an acct. she would be charged like 15 bucks to cash each check.
New Yorkistan resident near Rochester NY.
P.S. Reading some state the EIPA amount is 1760 and in others Im reading say 1920 is protected? which is right?
to get to the point. My wife has a default judgement against her...and in the past we had joint bank accts pre 2012 EIPA law and were frozen. usually the money was mine and we got it back....so now our bank/money is my name only.
its been 7 years since the last levy/judgement and I would like to add her back onto the account for various reasons. she cannot and does not have wages garnished as shes self employed. I know the creditor has to go out and get a new levy each time they freeze assets..but wonder if the EIPA law would protect us now so to speak in that we generally have less that 1740 in our acct at any one time.
on another matter of fact. I wonder if it would trigger a new asset search as we are thinking/getting ready to contact them to work out settlements or payment plans or something to get rid of this as we know it come up when/if we plan to sell our home as we want to move to S.C. and get this all behind us and dont want burden ourselves when we go to sell home with the judgement coming up.
I'm thinking since been 7 years sorta safe to add her back to the account but I would also think contacting them may start the process of asset search again and they would want to freeze that account. but part of me says the EIPA law would/should protect us in this case....but Ive read articles that (atleast) a while ago NY banks were not good about following the law and would still freeze accounts regardless of EIPA......
Now she just signs her checks over to me by endorsing it as pay to the order of XXXXX and I deposit them but bank starting to give me hard time about it and says they can no longer do this on checks cut from there bank...I'm asking them for the part of the banking agreement that states why this is but they don't like third party sign overs within their own bank or whatever. This is how the bank advised me three years ago to deposit her check but now they changed the rules????
Thank you all for any input.....again its 2 fold as want to start taking care of it now that back on our feet but dont want to start this bank trouble all over with banking problems**************..
Maybe with the pushback Im giving the bank we can keep up the way we've been doing it until taken care of..that would be best.
bank saying she has to start coming in and cashing them and since she does not have an acct. she would be charged like 15 bucks to cash each check.
New Yorkistan resident near Rochester NY.
P.S. Reading some state the EIPA amount is 1760 and in others Im reading say 1920 is protected? which is right?
Last edited:
