My question involves judgment recovery in the State of: Virgina
A Virginia consumer residing in Prince William County defaulted on a credit union loan and the account was subsequently closed and forwarded to its agency for collections. After making payments to the collector for nearly a year, the consumer discontinued doing so because of financial problems resulting from numerous medical illnesses and hospitalizations. Following the diagnoses of cancer, along with ongoing treatment, the consumer returned to full time employment, and immediately approached the credit union with an offer to satisfy the loan balance with direct payments to credit union instead. The credit union agreed to do so. The credit union followed this by reopening the previously closed account, completed all necessary internal steps to allow for ongoing electronic transfer of funds, which has permitted the consumer to make twice-monthly payments for the past 10 months, without interruption to date.
However, 6 months following initiation of this “new” agreement, the collection agency petitioned the court for judgment against the consumer, naming the credit union as the plaintiff. The consumer explained to the collector the details of the new agreement, however, a credit union rep, who replaced the previous person, claimed to have no knowledge of the new arrangement (the representative who reopened the account has since retired). Even though the consumer has verified the active status and payment history to the account, the credit union account representative (according to the collector) has urged the collector to move forward with judgment proceedings anyway. Please advise whether the credit union, by reopening the account, has essentially removed any grounds to seek a judgment, as well as having effectively removed the matter from the collector's domain?
My apologies for the lack of brevity.