<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC '-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN'>

<html><head><title>529233-00011.htm</title>

<meta name='vs_defaultClientScript' content='JavaScript'>

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">

<meta name='vs_targetSchema' content='http://schemas.microsoft.com/intellisense/ie3-2nav3-0'>

<meta name='Originator' content='CommentWorks'></head><body><Table>

<tr><td><b>Comment Number: </b></td><td>529233-00011</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Received: </b></td><td>6/5/2007 2:01:57 PM</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Organization: </b></td><td>Golden &amp; Golden, P.C.</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Commenter: </b></td><td>Richard A Golden</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>State: </b></td><td>VA</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Agency: </b></td><td>Federal Trade Commission</td></tr>

<tr><td><b>Rule: </b></td><td>Debt Collection Workshop</td></tr>

<tr><td>No Attachments</td></tr></Table>

<hr><P><b>Comments:</b></p>Existing law impairs creditors' ability to institute collection actions against debtors in a venue that is neither the debtors' residence nor a place where the debtor contracted to pay the obligation.  


In many instances a judgment debtor is employed in some other venue (for example, an Arlington, VA, resident debtor may be employed in Washington, D.C.).  A judgment creditor seeking to collect a debt by a wage garnishment proceeding (literally, a post-judgment collection lawsuit) may be unable to do so consonant's with the FDCPA's now existing venue limitations.


Should the law be changed? If so, how?</body></html>