Sit in the courtroom during any lengthy Virginia General District Court civil return docket, in Fairfax or elsewhere in Virginia, and you will likely see the following scenario play out: a pro se (meaning “unrepresented”) defendant will approach the front of the courtroom, whether in response to a lawsuit filed by a credit card company, homeowners association, medical provider, or any other type creditor, and the judge will ask the nature of the Plaintiff’s claim and the amount of damages alleged—sometimes thousands of dollars and sometimes hundreds. The judge will then ask the defendant whether or not he or she agrees with the claim, and the individual either responds affirmatively or acknowledges owing the money but attempts to explain that they have unsuccessfully tried to resolve the matter outside of court, or that the debt constitutes a hardship.
Occasionally a judge will ask or prompt the creditor’s attorney to speak with the defendant in the hallway to see if the matter can be resolved, but most of the time the court will proceed to enter “judgment by consent” and then encourage or instruct the defendant to follow up with the attorney to make arrangements to pay off the judgment. The entry of the judgment alone will almost always end up on a defendant’s credit report, and many judgments are taken when both sides would have benefited from making arrangements to satisfy the debt and thereby avoiding the entry of judgment.
Many creditors might assume that getting the quickest and easiest judgment always leads to the optimal recovery of the debt, but often times the threat of judgment is a more effective tool than the judgment itself in causing a debtor to pay the debt or entering into a satisfactory settlement or payment agreement. Collection and enforcement of a judgment can be frustrating and time consuming, and a voluntarily agreement or resolution is almost always the most effective path towards recovery of the debt. When judgments are obtained quickly either by default or by consent, it frequently signals that the debtor might not have many assets or revenue sources to protect.
Any defendant can answer the judge’s questions at the return date in a manner that will effectively constitute a sufficient denial of the claim that will result in a trial being set. This trial date is usually months down the road, and if nothing else, this provides the defendant with time to make payments or time to try and work out a settlement agreement or payment plan to resolve the debt. For creditors and their counsel, the pending trial date and continuing threat of judgment provides great incentive for the defendant to resolve the debt, if possible.
We at PJI Law can provide advice and assistance to both creditors and debtors, both prior to litigation, during litigation and during the post-judgment collection period. Contact our office today at (703) 865-6100 to schedule an in-person or remote appointment.