I post on this forum very infrequently. I once did more. I’m reminded of why I stopped.
In the thread “Wage garnishment in Florida from credit card debt”, two members expressed differing opinions. GulfBreeze purported to correct Betty, with regard to Florida Head of Household wage garnishment and to advise the OP concerning waiver of rights. Betty’s was the more accurate statement, to the effect that the HoH exemption was 100%. GulfBreeze said “i believe it's a $500 a week limit on HoH exemption...not 100%”. He went on to tell the OP that he “did not waive [his] exemptions if entitled to them by law by signing ANY card application.” (We know the original is available.)
In fact, the HoH exemption is 100% but, above a statutory earnings level, exemption can be waived by written agreement. GulfBreeze’s response had been wrong on two levels. Neither reply gave consideration to a written waiver, as provided by law. I posted a clarification for the OP. I provided a statutory reference that GulfBreeze relied on to cheat.
I did not point out that both of his statements were erroneous as posted. I simply clarified the actual provisions of Florida law and moved on.
I later happened to looked back at this forum and saw that GulfBreeze not only added superfluous filler – a web page copy – to submerge a correction of his error, he actually went back and re-wrote his first and concluding sentence, based on my post, to make it appear that Betty was wrong and he was originally correct.
You have one sick puppy on your hands. To give erroneous information to an OP is one thing. Other members can express contrary views, discussion can follow and the OP can accept all or none. That’s FA. But when a member sneaks back in the morning hours, discovers legal error and revises history solely for his own benefit and to another member’s prejudice, you have a psychological aberration in play.
GulfBreeze, you owe Betty an apology. If it’s not forthcoming, you are a moral and intellectual coward. You owe every member on FA an apology and acknowledgement.
I read your signature line. You don’t like debt collectors or lawyers. You’re 4-0 against them. You want the next one. Well, you’ve posted in Small Claims and you’re 0-4 there. I’m a lawyer and my paralegal could walk through your posts like Sherman through Georgia. I have reasons to be in a really bad mood, and seeing someone like you just makes it worse, if you couldn’t tell.
I’m next, cheat. Bring it. First, apologize.What is the name of your state?
In the thread “Wage garnishment in Florida from credit card debt”, two members expressed differing opinions. GulfBreeze purported to correct Betty, with regard to Florida Head of Household wage garnishment and to advise the OP concerning waiver of rights. Betty’s was the more accurate statement, to the effect that the HoH exemption was 100%. GulfBreeze said “i believe it's a $500 a week limit on HoH exemption...not 100%”. He went on to tell the OP that he “did not waive [his] exemptions if entitled to them by law by signing ANY card application.” (We know the original is available.)
In fact, the HoH exemption is 100% but, above a statutory earnings level, exemption can be waived by written agreement. GulfBreeze’s response had been wrong on two levels. Neither reply gave consideration to a written waiver, as provided by law. I posted a clarification for the OP. I provided a statutory reference that GulfBreeze relied on to cheat.
I did not point out that both of his statements were erroneous as posted. I simply clarified the actual provisions of Florida law and moved on.
I later happened to looked back at this forum and saw that GulfBreeze not only added superfluous filler – a web page copy – to submerge a correction of his error, he actually went back and re-wrote his first and concluding sentence, based on my post, to make it appear that Betty was wrong and he was originally correct.
You have one sick puppy on your hands. To give erroneous information to an OP is one thing. Other members can express contrary views, discussion can follow and the OP can accept all or none. That’s FA. But when a member sneaks back in the morning hours, discovers legal error and revises history solely for his own benefit and to another member’s prejudice, you have a psychological aberration in play.
GulfBreeze, you owe Betty an apology. If it’s not forthcoming, you are a moral and intellectual coward. You owe every member on FA an apology and acknowledgement.
I read your signature line. You don’t like debt collectors or lawyers. You’re 4-0 against them. You want the next one. Well, you’ve posted in Small Claims and you’re 0-4 there. I’m a lawyer and my paralegal could walk through your posts like Sherman through Georgia. I have reasons to be in a really bad mood, and seeing someone like you just makes it worse, if you couldn’t tell.
I’m next, cheat. Bring it. First, apologize.What is the name of your state?
