Outstanding judgement in Pennsylvania from 1971

[dsalsburg]

What is the name of your state?Pennsylvania

In 1971 at the age of 17 I had, what the court would later decide, an at fault auto accident in Pennsylvania. Auto insurance wasn’t mandatory at that time and I was uninsured. I was found to be liable for damages to the other car (there was no injuries) in the amount of $603. I had no way to pay for it at that time.
I moved to NJ a short time later and had no problems getting my NJ drivers license. I pretty much forgot about the whole issue and never paid the $603 judgement against me. I lived in NJ from that time until a year ago when I moved to Florida.
When I went to the local DMV, to get my Florida license, I was told that the computer showed that there was a hold on my license in Pennsylvania for the original amount of $603. I remembered that number from all those years ago, and so I knew what this was about.
My question is this: Will $603 pay this completely off, or will there be penalty and/or interest? I don’t want to call the state to find out, in case it is the latter. After 47 years, with interest and penalty, the amount could easily be in excess of 10k. If it was, I’d be afraid of opening a can of worms, so to speak. I’m willing to pay the $603, but would probably not be willing to pay the much higher amount in the worst case scenario as it would be a significant hardship.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=42&div=0&chpt=81

According to the above...

§ 8101. Interest on judgments.

Except as otherwise provided by another statute, a judgment for a specific sum of money shall bear interest at the lawful rate from the date of the verdict or award, or from the date of the judgment, if the judgment is not entered upon a verdict or award.

 

[LdiJ]

My concern would be finding the party to whom the judgment is due and getting them to do the necessary paperwork to lift the hold after 47 years.

It almost might be more efficient to hire an attorney to challenge the record itself. I hate to say that but after 47 years its not all that likely that the person who obtained the judgment is even still living.

 

[HRZ]

The are time limits on judgements in PA and a limit on the number of times they can be renewed ...but the Catch 22 may be the clock is suspended when you are out of state and in addition PA prevents wage attachments ...details beyond me ...unless the judgement gets domesticated into a state which allows wage attachments ...the legal interest rate piles up in 47 years !

I'd be wary that if you raise a red flag the creditor may be alerted as to how to find you etc....might be smarter to use an attorney to try to barter a satisfaction.
( recorded on record) wo disclosure of your location or ability to pay .

 

[adjusterjack]

Regardless of the time limits for judgments and collection, a DMV hold is often forever and the DMV won't issue a license unless the hold is removed. I have no idea what the solution is.

 

[ShyCat]

I’m willing to pay the $603, but would probably not be willing to pay the much higher amount in the worst case scenario as it would be a significant hardship.

Considering $603 in 1971 is the equivalent of $3731.51 in 2018 (per CPI calculator), you should probably re-calibrate your expectations.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Considering $603 in 1971 is the equivalent of $3731.51 in 2018 (per CPI calculator), you should probably re-calibrate your expectations.

It isn't inflation that will get him it is the interest cost.

 

[ShyCat]

It isn't inflation that will get him it is the interest cost.

I understand that, but wanted the OP to understand the hoping to pay only the original $603 forty-seven years later is absurd. The interest paid on a debt at least partially compensates the creditor for being repaid with future dollars that will most likely be worth less.

 

[dsalsburg]

I understand that, but wanted the OP to understand the hopings to pay only the original $603 forty-seven years later is absurd. The interest paid on a debt at least partially compensates the creditor for being repaid with future dollars that will most likely be worth less.

 

[dsalsburg]

I understand that, but wanted the OP to understand the hoping to pay only the original $603 forty-seven years later is absurd. The interest paid on a debt at least partially compensates the creditor for being repaid with future dollars that will most likely be worth less.

I simply asked a question. I believe that is the purpose of this forum. Everyone else gave me a civil and useful response except for you. I have no need to be disrespected by being told that I am absurd. Are you always this abusive in your day to day life, or is it only when you feel protected by anonymity?

 

[Just Blue]

I simply asked a question. I believe that is the purpose of this forum. Everyone else gave me a civil and useful response except for you. I have no need to be disrespected by being told that I am absurd. Are you always this abusive in your day to day life, or is it only when you feel protected by anonymity?

One could argue that blowing off the restitution for FORTY SEVEN YEARS is pretty abusive to the person you harmed. And One would be correct.

And, frankly, you would be rather absurd if you think that you will only have to pay 603.00.

 

[LdiJ]

I simply asked a question. I believe that is the purpose of this forum. Everyone else gave me a civil and useful response except for you. I have no need to be disrespected by being told that I am absurd. Are you always this abusive in your day to day life, or is it only when you feel protected by anonymity?

Using the word absurd in that context is not abusive. There was nothing abusive about anything posted on this thread.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

I was told that the computer showed that there was a hold on my license in Pennsylvania for the original amount of $603.

Call Pennsylvania and ask how to clear the hold.