Suttell & Hammer, P.S. (S&H) is a law firm based in Washington state that specializes in third-party debt collection. S&H has received consumer complaints alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), including harassment and threatening to take actions that cannot legally be taken.If you have been contacted by this firm, make sure you understand your rights before taking action.
The harassing company pays our fees.
They’re legit. According to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), Suttell & Hammer, P.S. was founded in 1986 and incorporated in 2003. The BBB established a profile page for S&H in 2007. S&H is listed as a collection attorney firm that uses the alternate business name, Suttell, Hammer and White, P.S. Buzzfile estimates S&H’s annual revenue at $9.5 million and the size of its headquarters staff at 62 employees.
According to its website, S&H “strives to be the pre-eminent creditors-rights law firm in the West…by providing the highest quality and efficient legal representation to…clients.” S&H “utilizes cutting edge technologies to rapidly perform while ensuring security and compliance” in an “ever-changing economic environment.”
The S&H website does not provide any additional details about its business practices or client base. The home page includes a link to the online payment portal, contact information, and a disclaimer identifying S&H as a debt collector and advising consumers of their right to request verification of debts.
In addition, the Attorneys tab provides contact information for their staff attorneys, organized by geographical region; a Make a Payment tab; and a Contact Us tab with a web-based contact form. They do not provide links or references to consumer protection resources, laws, or enforcement agencies.
Who are we? We are Lemberg Law, a Consumer Law Firm
Lemberg Law is a consumer law firm helping victims of collection harassment and abuse. We are ranked A+ by the BBB. We’ve helped more than 15,000 consumers stop harassment and recover money from debt collectors. Harassed? Abused? Misled by a collector? Call our Helpline today! There is no charge unless we win.
The BBB has closed 7 complaints against Suttell & Hammer in the preceding 3 years, with 2 complaints closed in the past 12 months. All of those complaints alleged problems with billing and collections. Since November 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has closed 2 complaints against S&H. Justia lists at least 3 cases of civil litigation involving S&H.
Suttell & Hammer, P.S.
10900 NE 8th St., Ste. 605
Bellevue, WA 98004-4454
Telephone: (425) 455-8220
Website: http://www.suttellandhammer.com/
It is illegal for a debt collector to make empty threats to sue you or garnish your wages. It is also unlikely S&H would sue you for a debt you may not owe or they cannot validate. However, debt collection agencies are known to have summoned debtors to court and garnish wages after a default judgement. Contacting an attorney BEFORE this could possibly happen would be a smart move. We’ve helped thousands of consumers fight back against unscrupulous debt collection harassers. Find out if we can help you too today!
Get Free BBB A+ Attorney. Call 475-277-1600 NOW
Unlawful Debt Harassment? Learn the Law & Sue the Collector.
Absolutely. Here are some Sample Cases filed in Federal Court
In November 2013, in United States District Court, Eastern District of Washington, a judge issued an Order in a case alleging Suttell & Hammer had violated the FDCPA, as well as Washington state law. In this case, the plaintiff became delinquent on an American Express credit card bill. American Express sued the plaintiff and “obtained a default judgment and writs of garnishment.” However, the plaintiff challenged the judgement in state court, and it was eventually vacated. The state court “ordered all clouds on the title to the plaintiff’s property removed and the garnished money returned to her.” American Express returned the plaintiff’s money, and the action was dismissed. Subsequently, about a year later, S&H “prepared and filed garnishment papers in the dismissed case, in which they erroneously represented that American
Express had an unpaid judgment against” the plaintiff. Suttell & Hammer also misrepresented the plaintiff’s employer, stating specifically that the employer named in the dismissed judgement was not her employer. S&H did not have any contact with the plaintiff, who learned a month after S&H’s filing that her “paycheck…would be garnished…and that the contents of her deposit accounts…were frozen.” The plaintiff immediately contacted one of the attorneys from the previously dismissed action to discuss the new filing. Two weeks later, her attorney contacted S&H and notified them of the previous dismissal and to terminate the garnishment order. The garnishment order was terminated upon request; the plaintiff’s money was restored; and the state court awarded the plaintiff attorney’s fees in the amount of $9,250.45.
At the November 2013 hearing, the plaintiff sued S&H for violations of the FDCPA; the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WCPA); the Washington Collection Agency Act (WCAA); and wrongful garnishment. The plaintiff sued under the FDCPA for two reasons: to collect statutory damages for the filing of an illegal writ of garnishment; and to collect additional damages for emotional distress caused by the illegal filing. Attorneys for S&H argued that the plaintiff could not prevail in her WCPA claim. That law applies to trade and commerce, but when a law firm files a writ of garnishment—even an erroneous garnishment—such an act does not fall under “trade and commerce” as defined by the WCPA. They also argued that the WCAA claim should fail because that law does not provide for a “private right of action”; in other words, it does not give private individuals the authority to sue for violations. The court upheld S&H arguments that the state laws could not be applied in this case. The court also found that the plaintiff had not provided enough evidence to support a successful claim for emotional distress under the FDCPA. However, they upheld the plaintiff’s claim that Suttell & Hammer was liable for statutory FDCPA violations and awarded her $2,000 in damages. The court also instructed the plaintiff to submit a “petition for reasonable attorney fees and costs.”
Federal laws protect you. The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) regulates the behavior of collection agencies by prohibiting actions such as the use of abusive or threatening language; harassment; or the use of false or misleading information to collect a debt. The FCRA regulates how collection agencies and creditors report delinquent debts to credit reporting agencies. Additional consumer protection laws include the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).
But here’s the rub: If you want to enforce your rights, or recover money for violations — you need to sue. These laws provide individuals like you with a means to seek monetary damages in court. For example, the FDCPA allows consumers who have been violated to recover damages of up to $1,000, plus attorney fees and court costs.
You may have a case, if…
“I can not praise your service enough. I was lost and only really wanted my credit report cleaned up. You’ve gone beyond my expectations. Thanks again!”
“Thanks to the staff at Lemberg Law, I have peace of mind again. They worked quickly to find the harassing calls were super considerate when I talked with them. I love the hard work”
“Thank you so much! With your help the nagging collection calls have ceased! I was thrilled I was also able to get damages from the collection agency. I am unable to adequately express my joy. I am so thankful I made the call.”
”Lemberg Law has saved me from the endless calls, and harassing voicemails. They really do go to bat for you. I didn’t know that debt collection agencies can end up paying your legal bill. What a surprise, to receive free legal help. I’m very grateful for all the hard work they did to finally give me my life back.”
We can absolutely help. Call us today.
Share your story
Have you had a bad experience with this agency’s debt collectors? Sound off and share your experience with other visitors in the comment box below.
Sergei Lemberg is an attorney focusing on consumer law, class actions related to automotive issues, and personal injury litigation. With nearly two decades of experience, his areas of practice include Lemon Law (vehicle defects), Debt Collection Harassment, TCPA (illegal robocalls and texts), Fair Credit Reporting Act, Overtime claims, Personal Injury cases, and Class Actions. He has consistently been recognized as the nation's "most active consumer attorney." In 2020, Mr. Lemberg represented Noah Duguid before the United States Supreme Court in the landmark case Duguid v. Facebook. He is also the author of "Defanging Debt Collectors," a guide that empowers consumers to fight back against debt collectors and prevail, as well as "Lemon Law 101: The Laws That Lemon Dealers Don't Want You to Know."
See more posts from Sergei Lemberg
i was on a dating app .. I thought i was talking to a possible love connection . When i anwsered door on our first date it was suttel hammer serving me subpoena for being sued
Suttell and Hammer sent my present employer a writ of garnishment for a Capital One that that is over 7 years old and never sent me proper notification. What can I do to fight this garnishment?
Cache LLC had a debt collection 2011 (which my husband and I know we paid some years ago). Today I get into work and have a wage garnishment from Hammer & Suttel using a address I lived 2 years ago and my current employer. The judge in Columbia county Oregon allowed an 8 year old debt to be collected using an old address and current employer. The suit names Cache LLC and these are their attorneys. I never received notification that I was being sued because of the address. So now I have a wages garnished and no way to fight it. The amount total is $1084. Wages taken from my pay will be $484 per check. How were they able to get my current employer but not find my current address to a house we had purchased and my current name. I have been married for 8 years and they are using my old name.