Garnishment Gurus Goat which is a professionally dressed goat

Thousands of cases, millions of results

Asset
Investigations

A professionally dressed goat in a three-piece sui (1).png

A note (rant) about supplemental proceedings

On the surface, supplemental proceedings (or debtor exams) look like a powerful tool. The law lets you summon the debtor into court and force them to answer questions under oath about their assets – where they work, where they bank, what property they own, even details like valuables or insurance policies. In theory, it sounds like a chance to uncover everything. No wonder the internet is full of commentators (often folks who’ve never collected a dollar in their life) hyping debtor exams as the silver bullet of judgment enforcement.

In reality, debtor exams are almost always a bad idea for routine and small dollar cases. Here’s why our experience has made us very skeptical of them:

Hard to Even Get Off the Ground: To schedule a debtor exam, you need a court order and then you must personally serve the debtor with that order. Stop right there: if you can personally serve them, it means you already know where they are. Why not use that knowledge to enforce the judgment directly? For example, if you have an address, you can check property records or send a garnishment. (By the way, Washington property records are public and easy to search – if the debtor owned real estate, we’d likely know before dragging them into court.) Plus, personal service within a tight timeframe is tricky – if the process server doesn’t catch the debtor in time, you have to get a new order and start over. It’s chasing a moving target.
No-Show Debtors & Toothless Warrants: Let’s say you do serve the debtor. What stops them from tossing the papers and not showing up? Honestly, not much. Yes, the court order will say “show up on this date or face a bench warrant”. And technically, the judge can issue a bench warrant for their arrest if they flake out. But good luck getting that enforced. Local law enforcement has higher priorities than rounding up someone who skipped a civil debt hearing. In practice, warrants for debtor exams are rarely acted on (except maybe in extreme cases). We’ve seen dockets where dozens of exams were scheduled and almost nobody showed – and nothing really happened to those debtors. They just carried on not paying, and you lost a few weeks in the process.
“Tell Us Something We Don’t Know”: Now, imagine the rare scenario where the debtor is served and actually appears in court. What do we learn? Often, not much beyond what we already knew or could have found out:
- Question: “Where do you work?” Answer: “I’m unemployed.” (If we couldn’t find a job through our employment searches, this isn’t a surprise.)
- Q: “Do you own any real estate or vehicles?” A: “No, I rent and my car is ten years old.” (We probably already checked county records and saw they own no property; their old car isn’t worth enough to bother with, or is protected.)
- Q: “Do you have any bank accounts or other assets?” A: “No, and whatever I had is within exemptions.” (We may have tried a bank garnishment already; if it hit nothing, this tracks. If they mention a 401(k) or some small stock holding, guess what – retirement accounts are generally off-limits, and small investments are hard to liquidate without expense.)

In short, a debtor who is willing to show up will often claim they have nothing (especially nothing non-exempt). Maybe they’re telling the truth; maybe not. But typically these are people who haven’t paid because they can’t, and a court Q&A isn’t likely to reveal a secret pot of gold. We end up confirming information we either suspected or could have obtained more easily through other means. There’s rarely a Perry Mason moment where the debtor breaks down and says, “Alright, alright, I have a briefcase with $50,000 cash under my bed!” It just doesn’t happen.

Our Take: For most judgments, especially modest-sized ones, supplemental proceedings are more trouble than they’re worth. They look great in statutes and theory, but in practice they usually just delay effective collection. We will rarely recommend a debtor exam as part of our strategy unless there’s a specific, compelling reason. For example, if it’s a large judgment and we’ve exhausted other avenues, or we have intel that the debtor is being willfully evasive despite having assets, we might use the exam as a pressure tactic. But even then, we set low expectations and use it in tandem with other efforts.

If you ever read online about judgment enforcement, you’ll see plenty of mention of debtor exams as a must-do. Take that with a grain of salt. That advice often comes from a theoretical perspective. We speak from real-world experience: we’ve tried them enough to know the difference between what the law lets you do and what actually happens. And what usually happens is nothing of value for the creditor.

So, bottom line: We focus on methods that put money in your pocket. Unless a debtor exam clearly fits into that plan, we’d rather not send you on a wild goose chase. We’re not here to play courtroom games; we’re here to collect what’s collectible. And nine times out of ten, a supplemental proceeding just isn’t the way to do it.

Debtor exams are not always amazing

Employment records from the State

When client intel isn’t available or needs confirmation, our strongest legal tool is obtaining the debtor’s employment info from the Washington State Employment Security Department (ESD). Washington employers report employee wages to ESD for unemployment insurance, so that database knows where people work (as long as they’re on payroll somewhere). To access it, we file a motion with the court for an order authorizing a subpoena to ESD. In that motion, we explain that you have a valid judgment and that “we need the employment info to enforce it, and our need outweighs any privacy concern”. Courts almost always grant these orders for judgment creditors. (After all, a debtor can be made to disclose employment in a debtor exam under oath; this is just a more efficient way to get the same info.) If a debtor were to object (which is rare), a judge might impose a slight limitation – for instance, ordering that the information be given only to us (the attorneys) and not directly to the client, just to alleviate privacy worries. But again, that’s uncommon. Usually, we get the order signed without any fight. This process is primarily governed by RCW 50.13.070.

Client information

Our clients are often the best first source of information. We always ask upfront if you know (even vaguely) where the debtor works or what field they’re in. Any detail – “I think he’s a mechanic at an airplane factory” or “she mentioned working in IT” – gives us a head start. Many times, our clients already have this info, and it’s the quickest win.

In-house investigations

Like private investigators we maintain access to certain databases that allow for us to conduct in-house investigative services. These databases often provide information for employment information, criminal history, bankruptcy filings, and contact information. These databases are not always as accurate as official sources because they rely on obtaining information from many unofficial sources compiled together. Think of them as more likely to have a false positive compared to official sources that are more likely to have no data.

Social media

Basic digital sleuthing remains a valuable tool so long as debtors continue to use social media to advertise their employment. A significant percent of debtor employment information is found from social media posts by the debtor directly.

Your Partner Through the Process

Asset investigation isn’t just about running searches — it’s about knowing what matters, what’s actionable, and what’s a waste of time. We guide our clients through every step, from identifying employment and bank accounts to deciding whether a garnishment or lien makes sense. You’ll know what we’re doing, why we’re doing it, and what to expect next.

We don’t just hand you a list of possibilities. We turn information into strategy. If we find a job, we move toward wage garnishment. If we find a bank, we prep the writ. If we find property, we evaluate lien options. And if we find nothing? We tell you that too — clearly and honestly — and discuss next steps.

Why Choose Garnishment Gurus for Asset Investigation?

Because we live in this space. We know what’s worth chasing and what’s not. We’ve seen the difference between theory and reality — and we don’t waste time on tactics that look good on paper but flop in practice. We don’t just dabble in collections. This is what we do.

If you’re ready to turn your judgment into dollars, we’re ready to help. Let’s find what’s collectible — and go get it.

Sit back, we've got this

Finding employment

Before we can garnish wages, we need to know where the debtor works. That’s often the hardest part — but it’s something we do every day. We use four primary methods to uncover employment details:

Employment Records from the State: Though this requires court time, the accuracy is second to none.
Our Clients: help us help you!
Internal investigations of private databases.
Internet Searches & Social Media: debtors often post where they work online.

Each method has its strengths, and we often use them in combination. The goal is simple: find the job, enforce the judgment.

A professionally dressed goat in a three-piece sui.png