Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civil Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate moves garnishment-fee bill forward after debate on employer burden
Summary
The Senate placed House Bill 38, which sets uniform garnishment fees at $10 for a single writ and $25 for a continuing garnishment, on the third-reading calendar after senators raised concerns about employer and creditor costs.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah State Senate advanced House Bill 38 on Feb. 7, 1996, after a floor exchange about who bears the administrative costs of wage garnishments and whether statutory fees fairly reflect real-world collection costs.
Senator Watts explained that HB38 moves garnishment fees into statute to create uniformity statewide and cited the bill’s fee schedule: "$10 for a single garnishment or $25 for a continuing garnishment," which is intended as a standardized cost of collection. Watts said the creditor typically pays the fee up front and may later collect that cost as part of the judgment’s recovery process.
Several senators raised concerns about how the fees would affect small employers and judgment collectors who handle frequent garnishments. One senator described the difficulty for small employers that must process repeated garnishments and argued the flat $25 charge for a continuing garnishment might under- or over-compensate employers depending on the business’s payroll practices.
Sponsors and supporters said the change transfers a rule-based fee (set by courts or rules) into statute to create uniformity and predictability across jurisdictions. The floor recorded the bill’s passage onto the third-reading calendar following the question and roll-call procedure.
Next steps: HB38 will appear on the third-reading calendar for final floor action; if passed, the statutory fee schedule will supersede prior rule-based practice and apply statewide.
