Bank sued after I paid them, now I have to pay twice?

[LegallyConfused]

What is the name of your state? Massachusetts

A year ago I was charged by a bank a little over one hundred dollars in overdraft fees, then was sued for non-payment of the charges. I contacted the bank in writing requesting that an enclosed money order for the amount shown on the court summons including court fees ($139.44) be accepted for the resolution of my overdrawn account. When I did not receive a reply I contacted the corporation who issued the money order and learned that it had been cashed by the bank. A friend at another bank also informed me that the bank reported the account as paid to the NCPS. I assumed the account was settled, however the bank went to court anyway and they now a hold a judgment against me for the previous amount that was paid, plus what seems to be even more post court late fees. If I make the payment I will have paid double what was listed on the court summons as being owed, plus an additional $20 or so dollars, making the total around $300 for overdrafts that could arguably be the banks fault in the first place! If I don’t make the payment I risk having a local sheriff seize property or personal assets in 10 days, despite the seemingly ridiculous and redundant nature of doing so for such a small amount money (they can have my old DVD player, please take it and be gone!) I realize I’ve missed opportunities and made bad decisions but do I continue to lay down and let them walk all over me, or can I still use the evidence I have to achieve some results in my favor?

 

[Dandy Don]

So can we assume that you did not show up to court to inform them that you had already paid the amount and therefore the judgment was issued against you by default?

 

[LegallyConfused]

Yes, however I'm not questioning the judgement, I intend on paying the banks lawyer, the one who's requesting the payment, and don't think the lawyer himself did anything but his job. However the money order and letter sent to the bank clearly stated that the money should only be accepted as a settlement. And upon learning that the bank cashed the money order I (yes stupidly) assumed the issue settled, and followed the explicit instructions on the court summons stating that I did not need to appear in court if the dispute was settled. I guess the real question is did the bank have a right to deposit the money order in a way other than I stated? For an example, if I sent a check to make a car payment wrote "car payment" on the check and wrote a letter telling them to use the check for a car payment I would assume it would be wrong or even illegal for someone at the car payment place to deposit the check in some other account and not credit me for the car payment! At the very least can I assume the bank is now indebted to me for the amount I sent? Is there more I can do?