Is an Attorney the Best Choice for Money Judgment Enforcement?
Enforcing a money judgment is the practice of collecting what is owed. There are many ways to go about it, including garnishing the judgment debtor’s wages or placing liens on his personal property. Some judgment creditors leave enforcement to their attorneys. But is that the best thing to do?
Here is another way to ask the same question: is an attorney the best choice for money judgment enforcement? Given that judgment creditors often rely on attorneys to represent them in court, it is only natural to ask those same attorneys to follow through with collection after the fact. There are certain advantages in doing so as opposed to collecting in-house. But there are other disadvantages that would dictate bringing in a judgment collection agency instead.
Judgment Collectors is such an agency. Based in Salt Lake City, the agency works exclusively on judgment collection cases in Utah and ten other states. If I had to choose between my attorney and Judgment Collectors to handle the enforcement of a money judgment, I would choose the agency.
Attorneys Have Other Priorities
Attorneys provide valuable services. There is no doubt about that. In civil litigation, a good attorney could mean the difference between winning and losing. But the fact remains that attorneys have lots of other things to do. And quite frankly, those other things might be higher priorities than enforcing a judgment on my behalf.
To further the point, consider a 2021 post published on the American Bar Association website. The post discussed “mastering the art of judgment collection” from the attorney’s perspective. One section of the post outlined how attorneys should go about assessing the collectability of a judgment.
To make a long story short, reading through the analysis portion of the post makes it clear that attorneys need to determine whether pursuing enforcement is worth their while. Will they earn enough for the time and effort they put in? Will he actually be able to collect enough to satisfy the creditor?
All the components that go into a solid analysis point to one thing: money judgment enforcement must be prioritized right along with all the other cases an attorney is working on. The cases that stand to benefit an attorney most will be top priority.
Getting Paid Is a Collection Agency’s Only Priority
Again, I mean no slight to attorneys. Our legal system would be untenable without them. But from a judgment enforcement standpoint, collection agencies like Judgment Collectors have a decided advantage: getting paid is their only priority.
An agency like Judgment Collectors does not work on any other types of cases. Judgment enforcement is all they do. On top of that, they do not have to worry about things that are not directly related to collecting. Their sole focus is on finding a debtor and his assets, making contact, and working out a way to pay.
A simple illustration clearly demonstrates the point being made here: a landscaper who does nothing but cut grass is a better choice to handle your lawn than the neighborhood handyman who does everything from painting to plumbing to weeding gardens. If you want your lawn cut properly and in a timely manner, you give the job to the specialist.
Better Than In-House Collections
Fairness dictates recognizing the fact that both the attorney and collection agency options are better than attempting to collect in-house. In-house collections rarely work out well. So rather than trying to do things as an amateur, a judgment creditor is better off turning enforcement over to his attorney or partnering with a judgment collection agency.
