Can i be sued for non-payment of medical bills while i am currently making $200 faithfully every month?

[quincy]

That’s not support. Not finding a gold nugget in the mine isn’t support there is none. It’s merely initial proof of failure to find gold.

Since contracts not written are accepted as valid in Michigan (presuming acceptable support), the issue is proving the claim the apparent agreement must be in writing, not the other way around.

You said there was court support for your statement. Where?

If you meant to say that a judgment debtor can get a court to order a judgment creditor to accept installment payments, THAT is true. And payments made, prior to a lawsuit by creditor against debtor, can be used as a guide for a court to the amount of installment payments.

But an unwritten and unsigned agreement made between creditor and debtor does not preclude the creditor from suing and getting a judgment against the debtor for the full amount owing - and then seeking garnishment of wages and attachment of assets to satisfy the debt. The debtor can then seek installment payments to be ordered by the court to prevent garnishment/asset attachment.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Since contracts not written are accepted as valid in Michigan (presuming acceptable support), the issue is proving the claim the apparent agreement must be in writing, not the other way around.

I disagree that the burden here in on qunicy to prove the agreement needed to be in writing. The initial burden is on on you. You made the statement that simply taking the payments on a debt and nothing more over a period of time may be construed by the Michigan courts as a contract. I'm not aware of any state in which that particular statement would be true. So provide the case law that supports what you said as being true. You started that line of inquiry, so support the claim.

 

[justalayman]

Actually others stated first that the agreement must be in writing so let them support their claim first since it was made first.

And your reading comprehension fails you.

This is from my first post


Depending on how long youve been making these payments and what if any actions the creditor has taken involving the debt, it can be an arguable point the creditor has agreed to a repayment plan by their actions.


Obviously not what you purported it to contain.

 

[quincy]

I disagree that the burden here in on qunicy to prove the agreement needed to be in writing. ...

Or on quincy, either.

Here is a link to Michigan's Statute of Frauds: https://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-566-132

Here is a link to Michigan Court Rule 3.104 on installment payment orders:
https://michigancourtrules.org/mcr/chapter-3-special-proceedings-and-actions/rule-3-104-installment-payment-orders/
And MCL 600.6201:
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-600-6201

 

[justalayman]

Or on quincy, either.

Here is a link to Michigan's Statute of Frauds: https://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-566-132

Here is a link to Michigan Court Rule 3.104 on installment payment orders:
https://michigancourtrules.org/mcr/chapter-3-special-proceedings-and-actions/rule-3-104-installment-payment-orders/
And MCL 600.6201:
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-600-6201
justalayman, look up "collateral promise."

Installment orders don’t apply because there is no judgment.

Y’all will have to point out where the statute of frauds applies. The only section that comes close would be 1(a) and unless you are the author of the original question, you simply don’t know that it applies. Since y’all are dead set on it applying you must have more info than I to base this on.

I also see no application of a collateral promise. In fact, if y’all want to get really down to it;

We have absolutely no idea of the l terms of the claimed original contract. I think y’all have been operating on speculation and nothing more.

We don’t know who the debt is owed to or why. We don’t know if there is a valid contract between the claimed creditor and debtor. For all we know the claimed debt owed is a mistake.

So, if you want to knock me for anything, maybe you need to introduce yourself to a wall first.


Quincy As to your statement about can the oc sue the od based on the facts at hand


Hell yes they can. I can sue a turnip demanding blood. Can you is never the proper question and because of that he answer to that question is really meaningless.

 

[quincy]

Y’all will have to point out where the statute of frauds applies. The only section that comes close would be 1(a) and unless you are the author of the original question, you simply don’t know that it applies. Since y’all are dead set on it applying you must have more info than I to base this on.

I also see no application of a collateral promise. In fact, if y’all want to get really down to it;

We have absolutely no idea of the l terms of the claimed original contract. I think y’all have been operating on speculation and nothing more.

We don’t know who the debt is owed to or why. We don’t know if there is a valid contract between the claimed creditor and debtor. For all we know the claimed debt owed is a mistake.

So, if you want to knock me for anything, maybe you need to introduce yourself to a wall first.


Quincy As to your statement about can the oc sue the od based on the facts at hand


Hell yes they can. I can sue a turnip demanding blood. Can you is never the proper question and because of that he answer to that question is really meaningless.

You are not going to provide support for your statement?

YOU were the one who mentioned statute of frauds so I provided a link. Perhaps YOU would care to explain how it applies.

The rest was for the original poster, on getting a payment arrangement after a judgment is entered.

 

[justalayman]

You’re not going to provide support for yours?

 

[quincy]

You made the claim. You provide the support.

 

[justalayman]

Courts will recognize an implied contract “where parties assume obligations by their conduct.” Williams v Litton Systems, Inc, 433 Mich 755, 758; 449 NW2d 669 (1989). “

 

[justalayman]

You made the claim. You provide the support.

But you made the claim the agreement must be in writing.. you have yet to support that in any way.

 

[quincy]

It can and has been accepted by courts to be a de facto agreement.

Even the statutes of frauds allow exceptions in some circumstances if the acts involved support the claim.

Courts will recognize an implied contract “where parties assume obligations by their conduct.” Williams v Litton Systems, Inc, 433 Mich 755, 758; 449 NW2d 669 (1989). “

https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/supreme-court/1989/81951-5.html
Relevance to Hewald, please.

Remember, this is an existing debt for medical services already performed with a written promise by Hewald to pay in full for these services.

 

[FlyingRon]

There are some states where there are some contract forms (typically rents) where partial payment acceptance can be viewed as acquiescence. This form of contract in the state mentioned is not one of them. I agree with the majority (as I did when I first challenged Justa's assertion).

 

[justalayman]

Who said anything about acquiescence? I stated the ability to argue the implied in fact agreement would be based on the creditors actions among other issues. Such support might be a regular statement acknowledging the payment with a running balance noted with no notice that the debt is due in full immediately. There are other possible actions that would cause a debtor to believe there is a payment agreement as well.

How about a scotus quote

An implied in fact contract exists as, an agreement founded upon a meeting of minds, which, although not embodied in an express contract, is inferred, as a fact, from conduct of the parties showing, in the light of the surrounding circumstances, their tacit understanding.

If that doesn’t fit a situation where the allowance of an action without objection especially if undertaken for an extended period of time, does not create an implied in fact agreement regarding a payment agreement ...well...it does.




Arguing an implied in fact agreement is not enforceable flies in the face of reasonableness. Heck, going to work everyday without specific invite week after week and expecting to be paid is an implied in fact agreement. Nobody said you need to come in next week. You do because you’ve come in every Monday the last 5 years and they have paid you for it. It may have been based on some other agreement originally but since we have surpassed the 1 year statute of limitations issue and you are still showing up for work, there is an implied in fact contract that your job continues until further notice. That doesn’t have to be memorialized in writing nor does it have to be an express agreement yet until terminated it is an agreement supported by action.


Unless you can find law contrary to my claims, there is no reason that when a person makes regular payments for some reasonable amount of time without objection that the debtor cannot stand on claiming an implied in action agreement was created.


So, for a there to be a requirement a contract must be in writing, there must be law supporting it. Y’all have not presented anything supporting your claim the agreement must be in writing. If you can, I’ll sit down. Until then, your claims are not sustainable as it is simply your statement without support. Yes, you all have stated that such an agreement must be in writing.

If true,,then no debtor can make a valid agreement for repayment less than payment in full unless it is in a written agreement. Since that is not true as a verbal agreement is enforceable where it can be proven barring where then the law requires a written agreement, your argument it must be in writing is wrong.

So, it’s time you all prove your claim that any agreement for repayment of a debt less than payment in full must be in writing.

Here is Quincy’s statement

I agree with the others about the bill payment arrangement needing to be in writing but I have a question about the reason for these medical debts.

Why must it be in writing?. Why wouldn’t a verbal agreement be enforceable?

 

[quincy]

Hewald, I recommend you speak to a legal professional in your area of Michigan to discuss your debt and for help with the lawsuit should you receive a summons and complaint.

Any modification to your original agreement to pay for the medical services already provided to you should have been in writing and signed by you and your creditor.

Here is a link to Michigan Legal Help, with information on making an enforceable court-ordered payment arrangement for your medical debts if/when the creditor obtains a judgment against you. It has additional links to finding attorneys in your area:

https://michiganlegalhelp.org/self-help-tools/money-and-debt/getting-installment-payment-plan

Good luck.

 

[justalayman]

So i take it none of you are going to support your claim any payment agreement must be in writing to be enforceable.