Skip to main content
Hamid Jabbar

Hamid Jabbar’s Answers

229 total


  • Garnishing wages on a lawsuit filed against me?

    There is a lawsuit filed against me for $22,000 on a car repossession four years ago. I have to file a response within 30 days and pay a filing fee. If I don't file, can they garnish my wages?

    Hamid’s Answer

    If you do not respond to the lawsuit and defend, the plaintiffs can request that the Court enter a judgment by default against you. Once the plaintiffs have a judgment, then they can take all the actions of a judgment creditor. As you mentioned, this might include garnishing your wages to obtain payment of the judgment. The plaintiffs can also record a lien against property you own and garnish bank accounts.

    You should seek the advice of an attorney as soon as possible.

    See question 
  • What do i do if i have a judgment against me for my sister's house that i haven't lived in for years and been living on my own

    My wife and I are trying to rent our first home with our baby and now the only thing that stands in our way is this judgement. My sister left her home because she didn't pay the rent in September of 2011. And now because I was part of the lease th...

    Hamid’s Answer

    If a judgment has already been entered it is difficult to dispute the substance of the lawsuit. Because you do not indicate what type of judgment was entered, I am going to assume it was a default judgment for failure on your part to defend the lawsuit. In some circumstances a default judgment can be set aside but you state that it has been "years." Generally, setting aside a default requires a showing of good cause. Good cause is shown by quickly moving to set aside the default judgment once it has been entered and demonstrating that you have a meritorious defense to the substance of the case. Neither of those factors favor you based on the facts you provide. Even if you could show diligence in moving to set it aside years later (not likely), you also indicate that you were "part of the lease." A lease is a contract and if you were a party to that contract and your sister (or you) failed to pay rent when due, the landlord rightly could have obtained a judgment against either or both of you. Thus, you may not have a meritorious defense to the substance of the lawsuit. That leaves you with limited options. You can try to negotiate with the judgment creditor--i.e. pay them the judgment amount or some other agreed-up amount. You could also discharge the judgment in a bankruptcy. Until the judgment is satisfied or discharged, however, it will be an impediment to you renting. A third option is to explain to your new potential landlord the factual circumstances in hopes that they can overlook this part of your credit history.

    See question 
  • Az repossession laws-Does the lienholder have to notify you of date, time, and place of sale?

    I received a letter stating that the car would be sold sometime in the future, without any specific details. About a week later, I received a letter stating the car had been sold at a private sale, If I have paid more than 50% on the car, it was m...

    Hamid’s Answer

    Arizona's UCC requires two notices. The first is a post-repossession notice that sets forth (among other things) the time and place of a public disposition OR the time after which any other disposition is to be made. In my experience, many lenders choose private sales and therefore do not have to provide a time or place--only the time after which the private sale will occur. Most letters that I see state that if the collateral is not redeemed by payment of the full outstanding balance within 10 days, the car will be sold at a private sale. See ARS 47-9613 to 9614. After the sale, the lender must send another notice, which is often called a "deficiency demand" letter. This letter must explain the deficiency calculations among other things. See ARS 47-9616. It sounds to me like your car was sold via private sale. If so, the lender was not required to provide a time or place. I have never heard of the 50% rule you cite nor do I believe it is a part of the UCC.

    See question 
  • Invalid HOA Lien

    On 07/29/2011 I filed for bankrupcy. On 08/5/2011 the HOA filed a lien on my home for the fees prior to my bk. I called the HOA to give them the BK information and they rudely declined to take it. I didn't do much until it was then turned over to ...

    Hamid’s Answer

    Under Arizona law the HOA has a lien from the moment an assessment becomes due. Thus, the lien was likely in existence prior to when you filed BK. Have your BK attorney explain this to you and point him/her to ARS 33-1256 (Condos) or ARS 33-1807 (Houses). The statute has no provisions for any "filing" date so I am not sure what you are referring to. The debt was discharged by the BK but if you filed under Chapter 7 the lien will persist. That means they cannot collect against you personally but still retain a statutory lien right to seek payment from the property and to cloud title.

    See question 
  • Can I sue someone for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress?

    My Wife of 12 years had a 5 month long affair with a close friend of ours. During this time he portrayed himself to be a really good friend to me and called upon me for many favors. I spent thousands of dollars supporting his band and will probabl...

    Hamid’s Answer

    This is a very difficult situation. Arizona does recognize Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress under some circumstances but these types of cases are very difficult to win. So in short, you could bring such a case but most attorneys would advise against it. You should also consider that if you end up filing a bankruptcy, any right to sue you have will become part of your bankruptcy estate and any recovery that is eventually received would be distributed to your creditors. I'm sorry to hear of these events and wish you the best.

    See question 
  • Are only creditors listed on master mailing list? I have a codebt, are they supposed to be included?

    Co-debt mortgage with ex-spouse. He is keeping home and is current on payments and will be accepting full responsibilty for mortgage. Technically I don't believe he is a "creditor" so I do not believe I would need to add him to the master mailing...

    Hamid’s Answer

    You can add anyone you want to the master mailing list including co-debtors.

    See question 
  • Is there a limit on how much an attorney can charge on a chapter 7 bankruptcy case (don't own any home) in California?

    I went to see couple of attorneys and got quotes for filing chapter 7 bankruptcy case (I don't own any home) and the fees are ranging from $1000 + filing fee up to $3500 (including filing fee). I don't know why the range is so wide so I want to k...

    Hamid’s Answer

    That range is typical for Chapter 7 cases. As my colleagues have noted, as long as the fee is considered reasonable there is no real limit. What you get from an attorney may, however, vary widely from attorney-to-attorney. Check out all of the attorneys' bar records and peer ratings and make sure you feel genuinely comfortable with whatever attorney you choose. The attorney-client relationship is one of trust and, all things being equal, you will have a better experience and result with an attorney that you have a good rapport with.

    Best of luck,

    Hamid

    See question 
  • I received a notice of violation (radar trap, picture and video). Car is mine, do I have to ID the driver?

    The notice requests that I identify the driver

    Hamid’s Answer

    It depends. If you only received the notice of violation in the mail, you are not currently under the court's personal jurisdiction. Thus, there is no legal requirement to respond in any way. That being said, if you "received" the notice by process server, you are under the court's jurisdiction and although you may not be required to incriminate the driver now, you could eventually be compelled in court to incriminate the driver. Remember, there is right to remain silent so as not to incriminate yourself, but no such right when it comes to others (generally). There are circumstances where you may not be able to testify against your spousal, however.

    I know that is a convoluted response but I suspect you have just received a notice in the mail. If that is the case, you are most likely under no legal obligation to do anything.

    See question 
  • What are re recording requirements for the State of Oklahoma?

    We have a recorded Warranty Deed that needs to have a second legal description included.

    Hamid’s Answer

    You may want to ask this question again but change your location to Oklahoma so that some Oklahoma attorneys chime in with an answer.

    See question 
  • Az courts convicted me of adult dui and the mvd says I am a juvenille. Both can not be correct.

    I was pulled over at age 17 twice and was made to give urine sample. No alcohol content but over a year later when the test came back positive for drug metabolites I was 18 1/2 and considered an adult in court. I was sentenced as an adult, fine...

    Hamid’s Answer

    The MVD and Court system are different animals and this situation is very frustrating. If I understand you correctly the MVD is treating your conviction as if you were under 18 and suspending your license until you turn 21 years of age pursuant to their rules. However, your court case was prosecuted as if you were an adult. The only comment I have to this situation is that I do not know whether you would have benefited by being charged as a juvenile in the court case. While I have never had this particular situation, it sounds like you are getting the appropriate MVD action regardless of the court action. There are definitely other criminal defense attorneys on this site who may chime in with a different opinion but I don't know that there is much you can do to restore your license at this point. Appealing the MVD decision would involve an argument that you were convicted as an adult but the underlying facts demonstrate that you were a minor at the time of the incident. Thus, the MVD is likely to uphold its own action. On the other end of things, going back to the Judge will be of little benefit because the Court cannot order the MVD to do anything to reverse its action. In Arizona there is no "right" to having a driver's license. It is a "privilege" to drive here and the MVD has brought discretion in suspending or revoking that privilege.

    So my two cents is that they can be both correct in practice but I understand that it sounds illogical.

    Maybe someone else will chime in.

    See question