Arkansas
Arkansas Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 12, 2026). · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

A debt collector cannot garnish wages in Arkansas on its own say-so. For ordinary consumer debt, it must sue you, win a judgment, and get a writ of garnishment from the court before your employer withholds anything. That is the wage rule; Arkansas separately allows a writ of garnishment to issue before judgment against bank funds and other property when the creditor posts a bond in double the amount, covered below. That sequence is where most collection outcomes are decided: the bulk of garnishments flow from default judgments entered because the person sued never answered. Answering the summons, even with a short response disputing the debt, is the single most valuable move you can make.
Arkansas is also unusual in what it does not have: no state percentage cap of its own on ordinary wage garnishment. The federal formula does the work here. Running those numbers through our wage garnishment calculator shows the federal limit for your own paycheck.
Wage Garnishment in Arkansas: The Federal Formula Governs
Arkansas never enacted its own percentage formula for ordinary consumer-judgment garnishment, so the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 1673, supplies the operative limits:
- No more than the lesser of 25 percent of your disposable earnings for the week, or the amount by which your weekly disposable earnings exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage.
- At the current $7.25 federal minimum wage, that floor is $217.50 per week. Disposable earnings at or below that amount cannot be garnished at all; between $217.50 and $290, only the amount above $217.50 can be taken; at $290 or more, the 25 percent cap applies.
Disposable earnings means pay left after legally required withholdings such as taxes and Social Security. Voluntary deductions do not reduce the figure.
Arkansas adds two of its own protections on top, per Legal Aid of Arkansas and the state's exemption statutes:
- The first $25 of weekly net wages of laborers and mechanics is absolutely exempt.
- Under Article 9 of the Arkansas Constitution, a debtor may claim personal property exempt up to $500 if married or head of family, or $200 otherwise. A laborer or mechanic may use this to claim up to 60 days of wages exempt entirely, if the wages plus other claimed personal property fit within the constitutional ceiling.
Claiming the constitutional exemption is not automatic: it requires filing a sworn, notarized affidavit with the court listing your property in detail. Legal Aid of Arkansas describes the process as complicated enough that consulting an attorney is worth it, and the deadlines after a garnishment notice are short.
For firing protection, only the federal rule was confirmed: 15 U.S.C. 1674 bars discharge over garnishment for any one debt. Whether Arkansas extends protection to multiple garnishments was not resolved by our research, so do not assume extra state protection exists.
Bank Account Protections
Arkansas has no self-executing state bank-account exemption of its own beyond the constitutional $500/$200 personal property claim, which can be applied to bank funds through the same sworn-affidavit process. The most important protections for bank accounts here are federal:

- Directly deposited Social Security, VA, and other federal benefits are automatically protected up to the last two months of deposits under 31 CFR Part 212. The bank must apply this itself, and you do not need to file anything to access the protected amount.
- Benefits received by paper check and amounts above the two-month figure are not automatically shielded and must be claimed as exempt through the court.
Legal Aid of Arkansas offers a practical rule worth repeating: keep exempt money, such as federal benefits, in its own account and avoid mixing it with other funds, because commingling makes exemption claims harder to prove.
One point of Arkansas procedure cuts the other way, and it is the reason the judgment-first sequence is not an absolute rule for property other than wages. Ark. Code 16-110-401(a)(1) lets a plaintiff sue out a writ of garnishment where it "may begin an action" as well as where it "may have obtained a judgment," and 16-110-401(b) requires the plaintiff to post a bond in double the amount when the garnishment is issued before the judgment. A defendant served with such a prejudgment garnishment can have it discharged, and the money released by the garnishee, by filing a counter-bond in double the amount under Ark. Code 16-110-408. This route is uncommon in routine consumer collection, and the notice and exemption machinery in Ark. Code 16-110-402 is written around a "qualified judgment creditor," but do not assume a judgment is always a precondition to an account being reached.
Statute of Limitations on Debt in Arkansas
Arkansas runs a two-bucket system:
| Debt type | Limitations period | Statute |
|---|---|---|
| Written obligations | 5 years | Ark. Code 16-56-111 |
| Oral contracts and obligations not in writing | 3 years | Ark. Code 16-56-105 |
| Promissory note | 5 years | Ark. Code 4-3-118 |
| Charges for medical services | 2 years from the service or the most recent partial payment, whichever is later | Ark. Code 16-56-106 |
Where credit card debt falls is less settled than most websites suggest. The 5-year written-obligation statute is broad, and collectors routinely plead card debt under it, but the case most often cited for the proposition that Arkansas treats credit cards as written contracts, Born v. Hosto & Buchan (2010), does not actually decide that question; it is an attorney-immunity case arising from an FDCPA suit. Treat the card characterization as a live issue: a defendant sued more than three years after default has a genuine argument worth raising, and a collector claiming five years should be made to justify it.
Revival: payment or writing both restart the clock
Under Ark. Code 16-56-111(b), either a partial payment or a written acknowledgment of the default restarts the 5-year period on written obligations. That makes Arkansas one of the states where a small payment on an old debt genuinely buys the collector more time. Before paying anything on a debt approaching or past its limitations period, understand what the payment does.
Time-barred is not erased. A collector may still request payment on a time-barred debt, but under federal Regulation F, 12 CFR 1006.26, a debt collector must not sue or threaten suit on it. Credit reporting runs on its own separate clock of roughly seven years.
What Debt Collectors Can and Cannot Do
The federal FDCPA applies fully in Arkansas: third-party collectors cannot use false, deceptive, or misleading representations, including about the amount or legal status of a debt, and cannot threaten action they cannot legally take, 15 U.S.C. 1692e. Regulation F adds concrete limits on call frequency and requires validation information at the outset.
Arkansas also has its own statute covering the same conduct, and it is easy to miss because it sits in the professional-licensing title rather than a consumer-credit one. Ark. Code 17-24-501 et seq. is the Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, a subchapter of Title 17, Chapter 24 on collection agencies. Its section 17-24-506 independently prohibits false, deceptive, or misleading representations in nearly the same language as the federal provision, and spells out the same specifics: false statements about the character, amount, or legal status of a debt; implying that nonpayment will lead to arrest, or to seizure or garnishment that is not lawful or not actually intended; threatening action that cannot legally be taken; falsely implying that a communication is from an attorney or that a document is legal process; and failing to disclose in communications that they come from a debt collector. Those same tells, an arrest threat or a paper dressed up as legal process, are also how people posing as collectors pressure victims into paying debts that do not exist, and our Arkansas scam and fraud guide covers where to report that kind of fraud in the state.
The state Act has teeth of its own. Ark. Code 17-24-512 makes a collector who violates the subchapter liable to the consumer for actual damages, additional damages the court may allow up to $1,000, and the costs of the action plus a reasonable attorney's fee, with a larger recovery framework for class actions. That state claim sits alongside the federal one rather than replacing it, so collector conduct in Arkansas is governed by both, and a collector operating here is also subject to the licensing requirements in the same chapter. Complaints can be filed with the CFPB and with the Arkansas Attorney General's consumer protection division.
Car Repossession Rules
Arkansas adopted the standard UCC self-help rule at Ark. Code 4-9-609: after default, the lender may take the collateral without judicial process if it can do so without a breach of the peace. No advance notice or cure period is required before repossession under Arkansas law; the breach-of-peace limit at the moment of seizure is the main constraint. Continuing a repossession over your in-person objection or breaking into locked premises are the classic ways that line gets crossed, though its exact scope is a matter of case law.

That absence of notice applies only to the seizure itself. Before the lender disposes of the car, Ark. Code 4-9-611(b) and (c) require it to send the debtor, and any co-signer or other secondary obligor, a reasonable authenticated notification of the planned disposition. In a consumer-goods transaction such as an ordinary car loan, Ark. Code 4-9-614 dictates what that notice has to contain, including a description of any liability you would carry for a deficiency and a telephone number you can call to get the exact amount needed to redeem the vehicle. That notice is the mechanism that makes the redemption right usable in practice, and a missing or defective one is a common ground for contesting a deficiency claim.
What Arkansas debtors do have is the UCC redemption right, Ark. Code 4-9-623: before the lender disposes of the vehicle, you may redeem it by paying the full amount owed plus reasonable repossession and storage costs. After a sale, the disposition must have been commercially reasonable, and any deficiency claim is subject to the UCC's calculation rules. Servicemembers whose contracts predate military service are protected by the federal SCRA, 50 U.S.C. 3952, which requires a court order for repossession.
If You Are Being Garnished or Sued in Arkansas
- Answer the lawsuit. Default judgments are how most garnishments happen. An answer forces the collector to prove the debt, the amount, and that the suit is timely.
- Check the garnishment math. Compare the withholding to the federal 25%/$217.50 formula. If your disposable earnings are near the floor, little or nothing should be taken.
- File your exemption affidavit. The constitutional $500/$200 exemption and the wage carve-outs only work when claimed, by sworn affidavit, and quickly.
- Raise the statute of limitations. Oral debts older than 3 years, written debts older than 5, and medical bills more than 2 years past the service or your last partial payment (Ark. Code 16-56-106) are likely time-barred, and the card characterization question can matter; the defense is waived if not raised.
- Be careful with payments on old debt. In Arkansas a partial payment restarts the written-debt clock.
- Document the collector's conduct. False or misleading collection representations violate both 15 U.S.C. 1692e and Ark. Code 17-24-506, and the state Act carries its own damages and attorney's fee provision at Ark. Code 17-24-512.
- Consider bankruptcy for unpayable debt. The automatic stay stops garnishment immediately, and for people facing multiple judgments it is often the only complete answer.
Information last verified on 2026-08-12. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Related Resources
- Debt Collection Laws by State
- How to Stop Wage Garnishment
- Statute of Limitations on Debt
- Can Social Security Be Garnished?
- Arkansas Statute of Limitations
- Arkansas Bankruptcy Laws
Last updated: 2026-08-12.
More Arkansas Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How much of my paycheck can be garnished in Arkansas?
Arkansas has no state percentage cap of its own, so the federal formula governs: the lesser of 25% of disposable earnings or the amount above $217.50 per week. The first $25 of weekly net wages of laborers and mechanics is exempt on top of that.
What is the statute of limitations on credit card debt in Arkansas?
Written obligations get 5 years and oral contracts 3 years. Collectors typically plead card debt under the 5-year written statute, but the characterization is less settled than commonly claimed, and the case usually cited for it, Born v. Hosto & Buchan, is about attorney immunity rather than card debt. The question is worth raising if you are sued more than 3 years after default.
Does making a payment restart the debt clock in Arkansas?
Yes. Under Ark. Code 16-56-111(b), a partial payment or a written acknowledgment restarts the 5-year period on written obligations. A small payment on an old debt can give the collector years of additional time to sue.
Does Arkansas have its own debt collection law?
Yes. The Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Ark. Code 17-24-501 et seq., sits in the collection-agency chapter of Title 17. Section 17-24-506 bans false, deceptive, or misleading collection representations in language close to the federal FDCPA, and Section 17-24-512 lets a consumer recover actual damages, up to $1,000 in additional damages, and costs and a reasonable attorney's fee. It applies alongside the federal law, not instead of it.
How do I claim exemptions from garnishment in Arkansas?
By filing a sworn, notarized affidavit with the court listing your property in detail and asserting the constitutional exemption, $500 if married or head of family, $200 otherwise, plus any wage carve-outs. The process is technical and deadlines are short, so legal aid or an attorney is worth consulting.
Is my bank account protected from garnishment in Arkansas?
There is no automatic state bank exemption. The constitutional $500/$200 exemption can be claimed over bank funds, and the last two months of directly deposited federal benefits are automatically protected under federal rule 31 CFR Part 212. Note also that Ark. Code 16-110-401(b) allows a writ of garnishment to issue before judgment if the creditor posts a bond in double the amount, so a judgment is not always a precondition for reaching an account; a defendant can discharge that garnishment with a counter-bond under Ark. Code 16-110-408. Keeping exempt funds in a separate account makes protection much easier.
Can my car be repossessed without notice in Arkansas?
Yes, as to the seizure. Arkansas's UCC provision allows repossession after default without a court order or advance notice, provided there is no breach of the peace. The lender must still send you a reasonable written notice before it sells the car under Ark. Code 4-9-611, and in a consumer transaction Ark. Code 4-9-614 requires that notice to describe any deficiency you could owe and to give a phone number for the exact redemption payoff figure. Before the car is sold you can redeem it by paying the full balance plus reasonable repossession costs under Ark. Code 4-9-623.
Updates
Updated the statute of limitations and debt-revival details to match a primary-source review of every state (October 2026).
Added Arkansas's own Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (Ark. Code 17-24-501 et seq.) to the collector-conduct section, noted that a writ of garnishment can issue before judgment on a double bond under Ark. Code 16-110-401(b), and added the pre-sale notice a lender must send before selling a repossessed car under Ark. Code 4-9-611 and 4-9-614.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Arkansas Code of 1987 Annotated
§ 16-110-401Grounds.In force
(a)(1) In all cases where any plaintiff may begin an action in any court of record, or before any justice of the peace, or may have obtained a judgment before any of the courts, and the plaintiff shall have reason to believe that any other person is indebted to the defendant or has in his or her…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at arkleg.state.ar.us
§ 16-56-111Notes and instruments in writing and other writings.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) Actions to enforce written obligations, duties, or rights, except those to which § 4-4-111 is applicable, shall be commenced within five (5) years after the cause of action shall accrue. (b) However, partial payment or written acknowledgment of default shall toll this statute of limitations.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 72 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Martin v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2001, 344 Ark. 177)“…b)(6) finding that the five-year statute of limitations in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-111 (Supp. 1999) was applicable. Martin al…”
- Miller Brewing Co. v. Ed Roleson, Jr., Inc. (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2006, 365 Ark. 38)“…in writing and would arguably fit more appropriately within Ark.Code Ann. § 16-56-111(a) (Supp.2005), a five-year statute of…”
- Farris v. Conger (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2017, 512 S.W.3d 631)“…ct, and thus the five-year statute of limitations applied. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-111. The court noted that the complaint ha…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Statute of Limitations on Debt: The 50-State Payment-Revival Table, Arkansas Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
§ 16-56-105Actions with limitation of three years.In forcecited in 9 of our articles
The following actions shall be commenced within three (3) years after the cause of action accrues: (1) All actions founded upon any contract, obligation, or liability not under seal and not in writing, excepting such as are brought upon the judgment or decree of some court of record of the United…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 252 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Arkansas courts apply the three-year period of Ark. Code Ann. 16-56-105(3) to fraud and other claims not on a written contract. Chalmers v. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. (1996) held it runs from injury, not discovery, absent concealment; Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality v. Brighton Corp. (2003) held it does not bar the State.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Davis (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2002, 347 Ark. 566)✓A hog grower sued Tyson for fraud after it ended a bedded-floor program he had borrowed heavily to join. Applying the three-year period of section 16-56-105, the court held the suit timely because damages, an element of fraud, did not arise until Tyson cut off hogs in 1998.
- Chalmers v. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1996, 326 Ark. 895)✓A Toyota dealer sued over pricing that favored dealers across the state line. The court applied the three-year period of section 16-56-105(3) and affirmed summary judgment, holding the dealer's own 1987 and 1989 letters showed he knew or could have discovered the alleged wrong.
- Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality v. Brighton Corp. (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2003, 352 Ark. 396)✓Defendants argued the state agency's suit over PCB-contaminated oil at a defunct industrial site was barred by the three-year period of section 16-56-105(3). The court held limitations do not run against the State when it enforces public rights, so the action was not barred.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Arkansas Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, Arkansas Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim, Arkansas Defamation Laws: Libel, Slander & Suing (2026)
§ 4-3-118Statute of limitations.In force
(a) Except as provided in subsection (e), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay a note payable at a definite time must be commenced within five (5) years after the due date or dates stated in the note or, if a due date is accelerated, within five (5) years after the accelerated due…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- UMLIC 2 Funding Corp. v. Butcher (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1998, 333 Ark. 442)“…y argued that the six-year statute of limitations found in Ark. Code Ann. § 4-3-118 (Repl. 1991) applied. The trial court…”
- Loewer v. National Bank (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1994, 316 Ark. 54)“…ts the six-year limitations after demand for payment under Ark. Code Ann. § 4-3-118 (e) (Repl. 1991) should apply because L…”
- Mobley v. Harmon (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1991, 304 Ark. 500)“…nger than the original period” unless otherwise specified. Ark. Code Ann. § 4-3-118 (f) (1987). That would authorize an ext…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 17-24-506False or misleading representations.In force
(a) A debt collector may not use a false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of a debt. (b) Without limiting the general application of subsection (a) of this section, the following conduct is a violation of this section: (1) The false…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mid-South Adjustment Co., Inc. v. Brittany Smith, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2022, 2022 Ark. 196)“…nscionable means to collect or attempt to collect a debt.” Ark. Code Ann. § 17-24-506(a), 507(a) (Repl. 2018). Later, Smith s…”
- Humes v. LVNV Funding, L.L.C. (In re Humes) (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas 2013, 496 B.R. 557)“…ect a debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.” Ark.Code Ann. § 17-24-506. . The same conduct giving rise t…”
- McMahan v. Sentry ADR Services, LLC (District Court, W.D. Arkansas 2021)“…101 claim is dependent on the success of the FDCPA claim. A.C.A. § 17-24-506(b)(5) provides that a violation occurs…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 4-9-609Secured party's right to take possession after default.In force
(a) After default, a secured party: (1) may take possession of the collateral; and (2) without removal, may render equipment unusable and dispose of collateral on a debtor's premises under § 4-9-610 . (b) A secured party may proceed under subsection (a): (1) pursuant to judicial process;…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Jorja Trading, Inc. v. Willis (Court of Appeals of Arkansas 2018, 566 S.W.3d 510)“…ized for parties with a secured interest in the property. Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-609 (Repl. 2001). In Gorman v. Ratliff…”
- Carter v. First Nat'l Bank of Crossett (Court of Appeals of Arkansas 2018, 552 S.W.3d 40)“…11 S.W.3d 531 (2000). See id. Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-609 (Repl. 2001). In fact, during a…”
- Gibson v. Regions Financial Corp. (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 2009, 557 F.3d 842)“…s property to protect its collateral. See also Ark.Code Ann. § 4-9-609; McIlroy Bank & Trust v. Seven D…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 4-9-623Right to redeem collateral.In force
(a) A debtor, any secondary obligor, or any other secured party or lienholder may redeem collateral. (b) To redeem collateral, a person shall tender: (1) fulfillment of all obligations secured by the collateral;…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
§ 16-110-402Procedure in issuing writs of garnishment.In force
(a)(1) Upon application for a writ of garnishment by any qualified judgment creditor, the clerk of the court shall attach to the writ of garnishment the following “Notice to Defendant”: “NOTICE TO DEFENDANT OF YOUR RIGHT TO KEEP WAGES, MONEY, AND OTHER PROPERTY FROM BEING GARNISHED The Writ of…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 12 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Bob Hankins Distributing Co. v. May (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1991, 305 Ark. 56)“…hat the Rules govern service of a garnishment writ because Ark. Code Ann. § 16-110-402 (2)(A) (Supp. 1989) specifically requir…”
- Duhon v. Gravett (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1990, 302 Ark. 358)“…espect to the property subject to the levy. Id.;see, e.g., Ark. Code Ann. § 16-110-402 (1987). Finally, in anticipatio…”
- McCrory v. Johnson (Supreme Court of Arkansas 1988, 296 Ark. 231)“…given notice of possible state or federal exemptions. See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-110-402 (1)(A) (Supp. 1988). Our prejudgment at…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 16-110-408Discharge of garnishment issued before judgment upon filing of bond by defendant.In force
(a)(1) Whenever a garnishment is issued in any action before judgment, the defendant may have the garnishment discharged and all funds or property of his or hers in the hands of the garnishee released therefrom by filing with the clerk of the court a bond in double the amount for which the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
§ 17-24-501Title.In force
This subchapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act”.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 15 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Humes v. LVNV Funding, L.L.C. (In re Humes) (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas 2013, 496 B.R. 557)“…e Arkansas Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, codified at Ark.Code Ann. §§ 17-24-501, et seq. (“AFDCPA”); (3) violated the A…”
- Scroggin v. Credit Bureau of Jonesboro, Inc. (District Court, E.D. Arkansas 2013, 973 F. Supp. 2d 961)“…d the Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (AFDCPA), Ark.Code Ann. § 17-24-501 et seq., in its attempts to collect a…”
- Humes v. LVNV Funding, L.L.C. (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas 2011, 468 B.R. 346)“…e Arkansas Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, codified at Ark.Code Ann. §§ 17-24-501, et seq. (“AFDCPA”); (3) violated the…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 17-24-512Civil liability.In force
(a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, a debt collector who fails to comply with this subchapter with respect to a person is liable to the person in an amount equal to the sum of: (1) An actual damage sustained by the person as a result of the failure; (2) In the case of: (A) An…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mid-South Adjustment Co., Inc. v. Brittany Smith, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated (Supreme Court of Arkansas 2022, 2022 Ark. 196)“…er of $500,000 or 1 percent of the net worth of Mid-South. Ark. Code Ann. § 17-24-512(a)(2)(A)–(B). According to Mid-South, t…”
- Scroggin v. Credit Bureau of Jonesboro, Inc. (District Court, E.D. Arkansas 2013, 973 F. Supp. 2d 961)“…brought in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment.” Ark. Code Ann. § 17-24-512 (a)(3)(B) (emphasis added). The Court h…”
- McMahan v. Sentry ADR Services, LLC (District Court, W.D. Arkansas 2021)“…ne thousand dollars ($1,000.00) against Sentry pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 17-24-512(a)(2)(A) and one thousand dollars ($1,0…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 4-9-611Notification before disposition of collateral.In force
(a) In this section, “notification date” means the earlier of the date on which: (1) a secured party sends to the debtor and any secondary obligor an authenticated notification of disposition;…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2020-11-06 · Read the full text in our law library
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2008
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Primus Financial Services v. Seitz (Court of Appeals of Arkansas 2008, 102 Ark. App. 146)“…collateral without sending appellee the notice required by Ark. Code Ann. § 4-9-611 (Repl. 2001) beforehand, and was thus…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 15
§ 1673Restriction on garnishmentIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
Except as provided in subsection (b) and in section 1675 of this title, the maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual for any workweek which is subjected to garnishment may not exceed 25 per centum of his disposable earnings for that week, or the amount by which his disposable earnings for that week exceed thirty times the Federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by section 206(a)(1) of title 29 in effect at the time the earnings are payable, whichever is less. In the case of earnings for any pay period other than a week, the Secretary of Labor shall by regulation prescribe a multiple of the Federal minimum hourly wage equivalent in effect to that set forth in paragraph (2). The restrictions of subsection (a) do not apply in the case of any order for the support of any person issued by a court of competent jurisdiction or in accordance with an administrative procedure, which is established by State law, which affords substantial due process, and which is subject to judicial review. any order of any court of the United States having jurisdiction over cases under chapter 13 of title 11. any debt due for any State or Federal tax.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-16 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 450 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts have read the section 1673 garnishment cap narrowly. Kokoszka v. Belford (1974) held that "disposable earnings" reaches periodic compensation and not an income tax refund, so the cap did not keep a refund out of the bankruptcy estate. Jordan v. Chase Manhattan Bank (2015) held section 1673 creates no private right of action.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo (Supreme Court of the United States 1979, 439 U.S. 572)“…and amended § 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U. S. C. § 1673 (b), to pre-empt state law by limiting…”
- Kokoszka v. Belford (Supreme Court of the United States 1974, 417 U.S. 642)✓A bankrupt argued the 25 percent garnishment cap exempted 75 percent of his $250.90 income tax refund from the trustee; the Supreme Court held Section 1673's limit covers periodic compensation, not a tax refund, so the whole refund passed to the estate.
- Jordan v. Chase Manhattan Bank (District Court, S.D. New York 2015, 91 F. Supp. 3d 491)✓After a Florida garnishment froze a disabled borrower's bank account holding disability benefits, she sued under Section 1673; the court held the section creates no private right of action and is enforced by the Secretary of Labor, and dismissed the claim.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in Alabama (2026): Exemptions & Means Test, Bankruptcy in Georgia (2026): Exemptions & Means Test, Bankruptcy in South Dakota (2026): Exemptions & Means Test
§ 1674Restriction on discharge from employment by reason of garnishmentIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
No employer may discharge any employee by reason of the fact that his earnings have been subjected to garnishment for any one indebtedness. Whoever willfully violates subsection (a) of this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 48 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal appeals courts have held that 15 U.S.C. 1674 gives no private right of action to an employee fired over a garnishment. Smith v. Cotton Brothers Baking Co., Inc. (1980) found no implied civil remedy, and Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (1983) agreed, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor under Section 1676.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- James E. Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1983, 701 F.2d 777)✓An employee fired after his wages were garnished sued his employer under 15 U.S.C. 1674(a); the Ninth Circuit declined to follow its own Stewart precedent and held Congress created no private right of action, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor.
- Hodgson v. Cleveland Municipal Court (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1971, 326 F. Supp. 419)✓The Secretary of Labor argued federal garnishment law preempted Ohio's narrower anti-discharge provision; the court found no showing that 15 U.S.C. 1674, a self-enforcing criminal section, was frustrated by the Ohio statute, and no justiciable controversy under it.
- Reginald O. Wallace v. Debron Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 1974, 494 F.2d 674)✓A Black welder was fired under a rule barring two garnishments in a year; reversing summary judgment on his Title VII disparate-impact claim, the Eighth Circuit read 15 U.S.C. 1674 as preventing discharge for one indebtedness, not authorizing it for others.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Alaska Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Arizona Debt Collection Laws: The 10% Garnishment Cap, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
§ 1692eFalse or misleading representationsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof. The false representation of— the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt. The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney. The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 3,533 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts read Section 1692e through the least sophisticated consumer test. Christ Clomon v. Philip D. Jackson (1993) held that mass-mailed letters bearing an attorney signature, sent without file review, violated subsections (3) and (10); Gonzalez v. Kay (2009) held a back-page disclaimer did not defeat the claim on a motion to dismiss.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P. (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2003, 321 F.3d 292)✓Debt letters went out on law firm letterhead after an attorney reviewed only a file showing the debt was outstanding; the Second Circuit held that merely being told by a client that a debt is overdue is not enough attorney involvement, and vacated summary judgment.
- William C. Lewis v. Acb Business Services, Inc., (96-3093/3498), American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. James P. Connors, (96-3498) (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 1998, 135 F.3d 389)✓A collection letter told the debtor to contact 'M. Hall,' a name no employee at the agency actually used; the Sixth Circuit held the alias was not a false or deceptive means under 1692e(10) because the account had been assigned to a real representative and no harm was shown.
- Gonzalez v. Kay (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 2009, 577 F.3d 600)✓A law firm collecting a $448.97 phone debt sent an unsigned letter on its letterhead with the disclaimer of attorney review only on the back; the Fifth Circuit held the least sophisticated consumer might think a lawyer was involved and reversed dismissal of the 1692e claim.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Delaware Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, DC Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Code of Federal Regulations Title 12
§ 1006.26Collection of time-barred debts.In forcecited in 37 of our articles
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Statute of limitations means the period prescribed by applicable law for bringing a legal action against the consumer to collect a debt. (2) Time-barred debt means a debt for which the applicable statute of limitations has expired. (b) Legal actions and threats of legal actions prohibited. A debt collector must not bring or threaten to bring a legal action against a consumer to collect a time-barred debt. This paragraph (b) does not apply to proofs of claim filed in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (2024) dismissed FDCPA claims built on 12 CFR 1006.26(b), reasoning it bars only collection of time-barred debts and the loans at issue were not time barred. Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (2025) dismissed a Regulation F claim because nonjudicial foreclosure is not covered by the FDCPA.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (District Court, S.D. Ohio 2024)✓A borrower claimed a servicer's letter and billing statement lacked language required by 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court granted the servicer summary judgment, since the rule only bars collecting time-barred debts and it had already found her HELOC and mortgage enforceable.
- Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (District Court, E.D. Virginia 2025)✓Pro se homeowners alleged a servicer and foreclosure attorneys pursued a time-barred, discharged second mortgage in violation of 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court dismissed that claim, holding parties carrying out a nonjudicial foreclosure are not FDCPA debt collectors.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Debt Collection Laws by State: Garnishment, SOL, and Repossession Rules, California Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Colorado Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
United States Code Title 50
§ 3952Protection under installment contracts for purchase or leaseIn forcecited in 17 of our articles
After a servicemember enters military service, a contract by the servicemember for— the purchase of real or personal property (including a motor vehicle); or the lease or bailment of such property, may not be rescinded or terminated for a breach of terms of the contract occurring before or during that person’s military service, nor may the property be repossessed for such breach without a court order. This section applies only to a contract for which a deposit or installment has been paid by the servicemember before the servicemember enters military service. A person who knowingly resumes possession of property in violation of subsection (a), or in violation of section 3918 of this title, or who knowingly attempts to do so, shall be fined as provided in title 18, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Ditech Holding Corporation (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York 2025)“…d on, or sold during or within a year after active service. 50 U.S.C. §§ 3952, 3953. Claimant states that he re…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Louisiana Debt Collection Laws: Prescription, Garnishment, and Repossession, Maine Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Maryland Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Code of Federal Regulations Title 31
§ 212.3Definitions.In forcecited in 5 of our articles
For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply. Account means an account, including a master account or sub account, at a financial institution and to which an electronic payment may be directly routed. Account holder means a natural person against whom a garnishment order is issued and whose name appears in a financial institution's records as the direct or beneficial owner of an account. Account review means the process of examining deposits in an account to determine if a benefit agency has deposited a benefit payment into the account during the lookback period. Benefit agency means the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), or the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB). Benefit payment means a Federal benefit payment referred to in § 212.2(b) paid by direct deposit to an account with the character “XX” encoded in positions 54 and 55 of the Company Entry Description field and the number “2” encoded in the Originator Status Code field of the Batch Header Record of the direct deposit entry.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Roger Hawes v. William Stephens (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 2020, 964 F.3d 412)“…Federal or State law to engage in the business of banking.” 31 C.F.R. § 212.3. TDCJ possesses no such charter.…”
- Collect Access LLC v. Hernandez (In Re Hernandez) (United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit 2012, 483 B.R. 713)“…exempt funds. [See 31 CFR 24 § 212.1 et seq.; see also 31 CFR § 212.3 (definitions)].” Hon. 25 Alan M. Ahar…”
- Gates v. MCT Group, Inc. (District Court, S.D. California 2015, 93 F. Supp. 3d 1182)“…eral financial regulations from levy or garnishment. See 31 C.F.R. § 212.3 and § 212.5(b) and (c). Because no pay…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can Social Security Be Garnished? What Section 407 Actually Protects, Small Claims Court by State: Limits, Fees and Appeals (2026)
Sources and References
- Legal Aid of Arkansas, Garnishment: Protected Property (exemption amounts and claiming procedure)(a.arlawhelp.org)
- Legal Aid of Arkansas, Garnishment overview (federal formula applied in Arkansas)(a.arlawhelp.org)
- 15 U.S.C. 1673, Federal restriction on garnishment (25%/30-times test)(govinfo.gov).gov
- 15 U.S.C. 1674, Federal restriction on discharge from employment by reason of garnishment(govinfo.gov).gov
- 12 CFR 1006.26, Regulation F prohibition on suits and threats of suit on time-barred debt(ecfr.gov).gov
- 31 CFR Part 212, Garnishment of accounts containing federal benefit payments(ecfr.gov).gov
- Arkansas Act 932 of 2015 (HB 1268), amending Ark. Code 16-110-402, procedure for issuing writs of garnishment and the Notice to Defendant(arkleg.state.ar.us).gov
- Arkansas Act 229 of 2013, amending Ark. Code 16-110-401(a)(2), grounds and notice for a writ of garnishment(arkleg.state.ar.us).gov
- Arkansas Code Annotated (official online edition): Title 17 ch. 24 subch. 5, Arkansas Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (17-24-501 to 17-24-512); Title 16 ch. 110 subch. 4, garnishment; Title 4 ch. 9, secured transactions(lexisnexis.com)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.