|Received:||6/5/2007 2:01:57 PM|
|Organization:||Golden & Golden, P.C.|
|Commenter:||Richard A Golden|
|Agency:||Federal Trade Commission|
|Rule:||Debt Collection Workshop|
Comments: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?