current practices in collecting fines...during the research period of 2007 to 2009. the project...

Current Practices in Collecting Finesand Fees in State Courts:

A Handbook of Collection Issues and Solutions,Second Edition

John T. Matthias and Laura KlaversmaNational Center for State Courts

Court Consulting Services

Copyright © 2009 by the National Center for State CourtsISBN 0-89656-274-3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… i

INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1

Chapter 1 COURT COLLECTIONS OVERVIEW………………………………………………………………………………… 3

1.1 Why Should Courts Improve Collections?.............................................................................................. 3

1.2 The Importance of Courts Earning Defendants’ Compliance…………………………………………………………….. 4

1.3 Examples of Statewide Initiatives: The Role of State Judicial Leadership…………………………………………. 6

1.4 Local Judicial Leadership in Improving Collections…………………………………………………………………………… 11

1.5 Attributes of a Successful Collections Environment…………………………………………………………………………. 12

1.6 Core Principles………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 14

1.7 Designing a Court Collection Program……………………………………………………………………………………………... 15

1.8 Programs Combining Internal and External Resources…………………………………………………………………….. 18

Chapter 2 COLLECTION BEST PRACTICES…………………………………..................................................... 20

2.1 Create Payment Expectations through the Fine Collection Atmosphere………………………………………….. 20

2.2 Practice Leadership and Commitment…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21

2.3 Set Collection and Information Goals………………………………………………………………………………………………. 22

2.4 Use a Systematic Communication Plan with Defendants…………………………………………………………………. 23

2.5 Establish Follow-up Processes…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24

2.6 Consider Forming a Specialized Collection Unit……………………………………………………………………………….. 26

2.7 Provide Education and Training………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 27

2.8 Establish Accountability: Control the Collection Inventory………………………………………………………………. 28

2.9 Consider the Cost of Collections………………………………………………………………….………………………………….. 30

2.10 Pursue Interagency/Inter-jurisdictional Cooperation………………………………………………………………………. 32

Chapter 3 METHODS OF PAYMENT AND COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT………………………………… 35

3.1 Prepayment of Fines/Payment by Mail…………………………………………………………………………………………… 35

3.2 In-Person Payments………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 36

3.3 Acceptance of Personal Checks……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37

3.4 Payment by Credit Card………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 38

3.5 Acceptance of Payments Remotely…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 39

3.6 Partial-Payment, Installment, and Deferred-Payment Plans……………………………………………………………. 41

Chapter 4 PAYMENT ALTERNATIVES AND CAPACITY TO PAY ……………………………………………... 42

4.1 Community Service in Lieu of Fine Payment…………………………………………………………………………………… 42

4.2 Time Served in Lieu of Fine Payment……………………………………………………………………………………………... 43

4.3 Traffic School………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44

4.4 Assistance in Finding Jobs……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 44

4.5 Financial Counseling……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44

Table of Contents

Chapter 6 IN-HOUSE COLLECTION UNIT……………………………………………………………………………………….. 49

6.1 Organizational Considerations of In-house Collection Unit……………………………………………………………….. 49

6.2 Organization of the Collection Unit’s Work………………………………………………………………………………………. 50

6.3 Screening Eligibility for Payment Plan: Collection Investigation………………………………………………………... 60

6.4 Staffing Considerations: Using Existing or Additional Staff………………………………………………………………... 61

6.5 A Collector’s Professional Demeanor………………………………………………………………………………………………… 62

Chapter 7 CONTRACTING COLLECTION SERVICES………………………………………………………………………….. 64

7.1 Role of Outsourcing Collection Services in Court Collections…………………………………………………………… 64

7.2 Collection Services Considerations……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 66

7.3 Requests for Proposals for Collection Services………………………………………………………………………………….. 66

7.4 Communications with External Collection Agencies………………………………………………………………………….. 68

Chapter 8 MORE-COERCIVE ENFORCEMENT MEASURES……………………………………………………………... 70

8.1 Collection of Fines as a Civil Judgment – Garnishment and Liens………………………………………………………. 70

8.2 Income Tax Refund Intercepts (“Tax Setoff Program”)……………………………………………………………………… 71

8.3 Arrest Warrants and Incarceration……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 71

Chapter 9 PROBATION/PAROLE DEPARTMENT COLLECTION ACTIVITIES……………………………………….. 73

9.1 Pre-sentence Investigations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 73

9.2 Fine Payment as a Condition of Probation or Parole…………………………………………………………………………. 74

9.3 Payment from Inmate Commissary Accounts……………………………………………………………………………………. 74

Chapter 10 USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN COLLECTIONS…………………………………………………………………………. 76

10.1 Building Business Capabilities Using Technology……………………………………………………………………………... 76

10.2 Software………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 77

10.3 Software System Interfaces……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 79

10.4 Data Warehouse………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 81

10.5 Autodialers and Predictive Dialers…………………………………………………………………………………………………... 82

10.6 Skip-Tracing Services……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 84

Chapter 11 OPERATIONAL INFORMATION AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES…………………………………. 86

11.1 Obtaining Defendant Information for Collection Purposes……………………………………………………………….. 86

11.2 Policy Issues Related to Caseflow Management Information……………………………………………………………. 87

11.3 CourTools Performance Measure 7…………………………………………………………………………………………………... 87

Chapter 5 ROUTINE ENFORCEMENT TECHNIQUES……………………………………………………………………….. 45

5.1 Notice Before Initial Appearance…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 45

5.2 Actions Upon Nonpayment…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 46

5.3 Late Fees on Fines and Costs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 47

5.4 Use of Credit Information Services………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 47

List of Tables

List of Figures

Table 1: Texas Collection Improvement Program Key Elements……………………...…………………………………. 7

Table 2: Arizona Fines/Fees and Restitution Enhancement Program Services….………………………………….. 8

Table 3: Michigan’s Tools for Collecting Fines and Fees……………...………………………………………………………. 9

Table 4: California Comprehensive Collection Program Criteria…………………………………………………………… 10

Table 5: Three Court Collections Models…………………………….................................................................... 15

Table 6: Activities by Collections Phase………………………………………….…………………………………………………... 17

Table 7: Best Practices and Local Practices Checklist………………………….……………………………………………….. 33

Table 8: Components of Texas Collection Improvement Program……………………………………………………….. 50

Table 9: Business Capabilities and Technology Tools………………………………………………………………………….. 76

Table 10: Defendant/Account Information for Management of Collections……….………………………………... 77

Table 11: Collection-Related Software Functions………………………………………………………………………………….. 78

Table 12: Case Management System Interfaces for Court Collections…………….……………………………………. 80

Table 13: Performance Measure Definitions………………………………………………………………………………………... 89

Figure 1: Proportions of Resources Needed to Collect and Willingness to Comply……………………………….. 18

Figure 2: CourTools Measure 7 Reporting Period Example…………………………………………………………………….. 88

Chapter 13 SAMPLE COLLECTION STRATEGIES……………………………………………………………………………….. 96

13.1 Sample Program 1: Payment-on-Day-of-Sentencing Program…………………………………………………………. 96

13.2 Sample Program 2: Reducing a Backlog of Accounts Receivable..…………………………………………………… 97

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................... 99

Chapter 12 OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO COURT COLLECTIONS………………………………………………………… 93

12.1 Legislative Issues…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 93

12.2 Cost Recovery of Indigent Defense………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 94

12.3 Centralized Traffic and Government Collection Units……………………………………………………………………... 95

12.4 Fine Amnesty………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 95

Court collections programs should be designed with several goals in mind:

To hold defendants accountable for their actions

To improve the enforcement of court judgments

To reduce judicial and clerical efforts required to collect court-ordered financial obligations

To ensure prompt disbursement of court collections to receiving agencies and individuals

To achieve timely case processing

Michigan Trial Court Collections Standards & Guidelines, July 2007

Current Practices in Collecting Fines and Fees in State Courts: A Handbook of Collection Issues and Solutions, Second Edition

National Center for State Courts - i -

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The first edition of Current Practices in Collecting Fines and Fees in State Courts: A Handbookof Collection Issues and Solutions emerged after the Court Consulting Services of the NationalCenter for State Courts offered technical assistance to the state court administrators of all 50states regarding collection of fines and fees in 1993 and 1994. The response from courts wasoverwhelming. Project staff visited 40 courts in 22 states to review collection procedures andmake suggestions for improvement. Practically every type of limited and general jurisdictiontrial court was represented, including three statewide systems. The issues presented and theprocedures used covered the spectrum of collections problems and practices in America’scourts.

The 1995 publication, Current Practices in Collecting Fines and Fees in State Courts: AHandbook of Issues and Solutions, has been used by many state judiciaries and state courts forthe past fourteen years. With the passing of time, and particularly with the increasing use oftechnology, the National Center for State Courts determined that it was important to reviewand update the publication.

Court Consulting Services researched states and courts to assess collection efforts, programs,and techniques. Project staff attended state and national conferences held by theGovernmental Collectors Association of Texas, Inc.1 A national work group convened inOctober 2008 to gather additional information and discuss various aspects of collectionprograms.

This report could not have been prepared without the open and forthright assistance of everycourt visited in 1993 and 1994 as well as the input of the many states, courts, and individualsduring the research period of 2007 to 2009. The project staff wishes to express particularappreciation for those involved in the 2008 national work group and other writers whocontributed to this edition, who include the following:

Beth Barber, Trial Court Collections Project ManagerState Court Administrative Office, Michigan Supreme Court

Michael A. DiMarco, Consolidated Collections ManagerArizona Supreme Court

1 The Governmental Collectors Associations of Texas is a nonprofit association that recognizes, supports, andserves governmental collection programs in the state of Texas (www.govcat.net). Its founders were instrumentalin establishing the National Governmental Collectors Association in 2008, which promotes and supports theinterests of governmental professionals nationwide (www.ngcagov.org).

http://www.govcat.net

http://www.ngcagov.org


- ii - National Center for State Courts

John Dew, Executive DirectorFlorida Clerk of Court Operations Corporation, State of Florida

Michael A. Gatiglio, Finance Administrator, Revenue EnhancementLos Angeles Superior Court, California

Gordy Griller, Principal Court Management ConsultantNational Center for State Courts, Court Consulting Services, Denver, Colorado

Alphonso Jefferson, Jr., Support Services Department AdministratorOffice of Lydia Gardner, Clerk of Courts, Orange County, Florida

Nadine Jenkins, President/CEO, National Governmental Collectors AssociationDirector of Collections, Montgomery County, Texas

Amy Johnson, FARE/DSO Business Analyst (Fines/Fees and Restitution Enforcement)Arizona Supreme Court

Jim Lehman, Collection Program ManagerTexas Office of Court Administration

Jane Macoubrie, Court Research AssociateNational Center for State Courts, Court Consulting Services, Denver, Colorado

For editing, Charles F. Campbell, Publication Specialist, External Affairs, Williamsburg, VirginiaFor layout design and production, David O. Sayles and Erika D. Friess, Program Specialists,Court Consulting Services, Denver Colorado

An effort such as this cannot be conducted without the assistance of a great number ofpeople. On behalf of the National Center for State Courts, the authors wish to expressappreciation to all those who have shared their time, knowledge, experience, and insights.


National Center for State Courts - 1 -

INTRODUCTION

Why should courts be involved in fine collections?There are a number of reasons courts should seek toimprove collections. Improving collections:

1. Provides a means of ensuring compliancewith court judgments, thereby increasingpublic trust and confidence in the judicialsystem. The enforcement of a fine is asimportant to the integrity of the court as theenforcement of any other sentence orjudgment;

2. In terms of criminal sanctions, provides amechanism for rehabilitating offenders,teaching responsibility, and discouragingfurther illegal or unsanctioned activity;

3. Allows measurement of court performance;and

4. Increases revenue generated in many localcourts and statewide court systems.

At the same time, courts need to pay attention todefendants’ perceptions of procedural fairnessthough attention to the language and consistency ofsentencing and enforcement activities. People aremore likely to comply with court judgments if theyperceive the process as fair.

There are many reasons a court might pursue acollections program. This publication combinesinformation and resources collected over twoperiods of time. The original publication, CurrentPractices in Collecting Fines and Fees in State Courts:A Handbook of Collection Issues and Solutions, wasbased on observations, discussions, anddocumentation of current fine collection practices inthe sampled courts and the reports of Institute forCourt Management (ICM) workshop participantsduring 1993-1994. This updated, second editionincludes information from the original publication aswell as additional resources gathered during 2007-2009.

During both of these time frames, a number ofoverlapping areas emerged:

• What applies in traffic cases can often be appliedto criminal cases.

• What applies to collection of fines can often beapplied to collection of civil costs, restitution,recovery of the cost of indigent defense,probation fees, juror sanctions, red light phototickets, and other governmental debts.

• Management techniques can be applied bywhichever agency is responsible in a particularjurisdiction for collection of fines, fees, and othermonies.

The principles and techniques are useful in collectinggovernment obligations of any kind, e.g., adult civil,adult criminal, adult probation, juvenile criminal,juvenile probation, child support, hot-checkreimbursement, EMS/Fire reimbursement, propertytax, and public utilities such as sewer and water. Thediscussion and examples are aimed toward enforcingcourt orders.

This publication is intended to be a practical guide topolicies and practices for operating and managing afine collection system.

TerminologyUse of the words “collections” versus “compliancewith court orders.” “Collection of fines and fees” isshorthand for enforcing compliance with courtorders, which is the purpose of collections by itself,or in connection with other sanctions issued by acourt. Some jurisdictions have changed the name ofthe collections office to the court compliance office.Obtaining revenue to operate the courts throughuser-based fees is one of the realities of courtfunding, but this mercenary approach should notovershadow the purpose of maintaining respect forthe rule of law and all that it entails.


- 2 - National Center for State Courts

Use of the word “court.” State and local judicialorganizations vary in structure nationwide, andsociety continues using the word “court” asshorthand to cover all operations involved in settingpolicy for enforcing court orders, regardless ofjurisdictional and organization details. A jurisdictionmay have an elected clerk responsible for setting andimplementing policies for collections. The sheriffmay be responsible for collections of the county orparish. A municipal finance division may beresponsible for actual collection of funds, and workwith the municipal court in setting and implementingpolicies for collection of fines and fees. A countyboard or city council may set up a collection unit thatcollects a variety of financial obligations at thecounty or city level.

Use of the words “defendant,” “debtor,” and“account.” These words are used interchangeably.An amount of money a court orders to be paid is afinancial obligation, and the obligor is a defendant ina court case, whether it is a civil infraction or acriminal offense. An amount of money becomes an“account” when the person agrees to a payment planor the obligation is referred to an internal or externalcollection unit. The term “account” is used in thecollection industry.

Use of the word “collections” and “collection.”“Collections” is used only as a noun, as in “improvingcollections.” “Collection” is used as an adjective, asin “collection agency” and “collection strategy.”



Chapter 1COURT COLLECTIONS

OVERVIEW

A tension has existed between courts and otherbranches of government over the level ofresponsibility and involvement courts should have incollecting the fines and fees they assess. This tensionhas increased over the past several years asgovernments have faced more and more financialconstraints and public scrutiny. With the financialsqueeze, the other branches of government havemore closely reviewed courts’ expenditures, as wellas potential sources of revenue (fines and fees),which come from court assessments.

Public trust and confidence in all government entitieshas also influenced changing attitudes regarding theappropriate role for courts in collections. We live inan age when trust in government institutions,including courts, is not automatic. When defendantsperceive a court process or proceeding to beprocedurally fair, there is every reason to expectgreater compliance with court orders. The integrity,efficiency, and use of public funds by governmentinstitutions are widely and openly questioned. Thereis an increased expectation from the public that allgovernment operations, including those of thecourts, should be efficient, accountable, and cost-effective. It is difficult to promote public trust andconfidence in the judiciary without the courtssupporting and encouraging programs and processesthat improve the collection of fines and fees.

The attitudes of other branches of governments andthe general public are changing in regard to courtoperations and the court’s role in collections, and theattitudes within the judicial branch are changing as

well. Whether or not the change within courtstoward an increased role in improving collections isfrom government pressure, increasing lack of publictrust and confidence, or financial desperation, manycourts have made changes in their processes andprocedures to improve the collection of fines andfees. These attitude changes and the resulting newprograms are not just scattered local phenomena.On a state and national level, the perspective thatcourts should be aware and involved in the processof collection, and not just in assessing monetarypenalties, is changing as well. There is increasingpressure and support for courts to be knowledgeableabout their own collection practices and collectionbest practices, and to also modify their ownpractices, processes, and procedures as needed toimprove collections.

Under the policy direction of the Conferences ofChief Justices and State Court Administrators, theNational Center for State Courts providesinformation, resources, and tools to assist courts inimproving fine and fee collection. The NationalCenter for State Courts’ Web site states, “Consistentwith the basic premises of fine administration,individual offenders must be made to pay their finesin order for society to have achieved its policy goalsof punishment and deterrence and for the courts tomaintain their own credibility.”1

Indicative of the Conference of Chief Justices’ andthe Conference of State Court Administrators’support for collection improvement, bothconferences approved court performancemeasurement including the CourTools. For example,CourTools Measure 7, “Collection of MonetaryPenalties,” states: “Integrity and public trust in thedispute resolution process depend in part on howwell court orders are observed and enforced in casesof noncompliance… The focus of this measure is onthe extent to which a court takes responsibility forthe enforcement of orders requiring payment ofmonetary penalties.” 2 Section 11.3 discusses“CourTools Performance Measure 7.”

1 www.ncsc.org2 See www.ncsc.org/D_Research/CourTools/tcmp_courttools.htm.

1.1 Why Should Courts Improve Collections?

http://www.ncsc.org

http://www.ncsc.org/D_Research/CourTools/tcmp_courttools.htm.



Changes in court involvement in the collectionprocess are reflected by various state and local courtinitiatives and actions to improve collections.Though there are generally accepted core principleson what can be done to improve collections, there isno generally accepted standard for implementingthose principles in individual courts, regionaljurisdictions, or state processes and programs.States and courts are directed and limited in theircollection policy decisions and program changes formany reasons. These include court organizationalstructure, statutes related to collections, availableresources to improve collections, and current policiesand procedures, as well as the laws, resources,policies, and procedures of other agencies involvedin the collection process.3

This section was written by Gordon M. Griller, Principal CourtManagement Consultant, National Center for State Courts

Compliance has a broader meaning than collections.It is multidimensional. The objective of compliance isto facilitate cooperation or obedience. The court’sultimate goal is to encourage more voluntaryconformity. Collections are only one part of acompliance program. A collections program can bedeveloped a as part of a compliance strategy, butconversely a collections program cannot easily growinto a compliance plan.

What is involved in for court-ordered monetarydirectives other than collections?

First, a compliance strategy relates to the basicpurposes of courts. A parallel example: Think whatwould happen if everyone decided not to pay theirtaxes. The Internal Revenue Service depends onvoluntary compliance. That is reinforced by thecertainty of pursuit and consequences. This mindsethas been ingrained in the public’s mind.

A similar scheme applies with higher order concernsof society. If taxes aren’t paid, the governmentcannot do the things citizens expect that only thegovernment can do: provide national defense, publicworks, and justice; safeguard property; and imprisoncriminals.

Compliance with the law has two dimensions:1. To do justice in individual cases. Justice is

about applying the law to the facts of a case.This purpose of courts has to do withindividual liberty. Here, some can win againstthe government. It’s about fairness whetherthe penalty is loss of freedom or loss ofmoney or property.

3 The National Center for State Courts maintains information on court collections on its Web site. (See “Fines, Costs, and FeesResource Guide” at www.ncsc.org/WC/CourTopics/ResourceGuide.asp?topic=ColFin [2003; updated 2009].)

1.2 The Importance of Courts EarningDefendants’ Compliance

http://www.ncsc.org/WC/CourTopics/ResourceGuide.asp?topic=ColFin



2. To appear to do justice. This purpose is aboutall the other cases. About the consistent,predictable application of the law to similarcontroversies. It has to do with social order insociety (balanced against individual liberty).If the courts are seen to be fair and persistentin the application of the law, more people willvoluntarily comply with court orders anddirectives.

Voluntary compliance is what society depends on.That is only possible if people conclude the courtsare impartial and fair.

Courts provide an arena for peaceful, fair, andimpartial conflict resolution. When the dispute isbetween the government and an individual, a courtof law is the only avenue toward a remedy.

The Framers of the Constitution viewed anindependent judiciary as a protector of individualrights guaranteed by the Constitution. Court is theonly place where a person can triumph overgovernment when government was arbitrary orwrong. (Arbitrary in this context means based onpreference, bias, prejudice, or convenience, not onlaw or substantiated fact.)

Without a conscientious, timely debt collectionsprogram, the legal status of a sentenced or convicteddefendant may be in jeopardy without their evenknowing it (i.e., a debt can move to warrant status,jeopardizing a defendant with possible arrest andloss of liberty when the court has not beenconscientious about mailing notices of default, ortimely quashing of a warrant when the debt hasbeen satisfied by the defendant). Most court activity(50% of the time and money spent by courts) doesnot involve trials or adjudication processes, butmaking records of legal status.

Swift, responsible action by courts, plus the certaintyof consequences, has a strong deterrent effect onthe general public. What happens when it is knownthat the court routinely will pursue failures to appearor to pay?

As a public enterprise, the courts have an obligationto operate efficiently. High-performing courts areseen to be proficient and timely in their work.

Judges – for good or ill – are tied to their orders. Forthe general public, the judge’s name on routinecourt orders, orders to show cause, or warrantscarries significance. If issued in error or withouttimely, understandable remedies or ways to comply,it reflects personally on the capability and expertiseof the judge.

Poor or haphazard enforcement reflects negativelyon the courts and justice in general.



Whether state judicial leadership comes from adesire to increase public trust or confidence orsimply a reaction to the financial stress of the times,several state judiciaries have led the way to improvecollections within their states by creating andimplementing statewide initiatives. Externallyimposed legislation has, at times, been the impetusfor initiating programs. At other times, statejudiciaries have created and sponsored legislationthat could provide a better framework by whichcourts could change processes or develop programsto improve collections.

Here are examples of the efforts taken by four statejudiciaries to improve collections.

Texas

With a decentralized court structure in Texas, muchof the funding for the courts comes from counties.To improve funding in the counties and, therefore,the courts, the Texas Office of Court Administration(OCA) initiated a voluntary model CollectionImprovement Program in 1998. This programprovides information and technical assistance basedon key elements to counties and courts on how toimprove their collections.

Even though the OCA has little direct budget orfunding responsibility for the courts, the programwas designed to assist cities and counties inimproving the collection of fines and fees assessedby the courts. Since most of the funds collected areretained locally and used to fund local programs, itwas a way to help improve funding for the courts.

Benefits of the Collection Improvement Program arethat it encourages personal responsibility by thoseassessed and it increases revenue. By May 2005, theOCA had assisted with the development of 69collection programs serving 237 courts. Thesevoluntary programs had an overall increase incollection revenues in 2005 of 86 percent, or $42million. The increase in collections was the catalystfor legislation in 2006 that created a mandatorycollections improvement program targeting thelargest cities and counties in Texas.

1.3 Examples of Statewide Initiatives: The Role of State Judicial Leadership



1. Staff or staff time dedicated to collection activities. This may include localstaff or contractor employees.

2. Expectation that all court costs, fees, and fines are generally due at thetime of sentencing or pleading.

3. Defendants are required to complete an application for extension of timeto pay if payment in full is not made immediately.

4. Application information is verified and evaluated to establish anappropriate payment plan for the defendant.

5. Payment terms are usually strict (e.g., 50% of the total amount due mustbe paid within 48 hours; 80% within 30 days; and 100% within 60 days).

6. Alternative enforcement options (e.g., community service) are availablefor defendants that can demonstrate their inability to pay.

7. Defendants are closely monitored for compliance, and action is takenpromptly for noncompliance. Actions include telephone contact, letternotification, and possible issuance of warrant.

8. Local staff may contract with private collection agencies or firms for theprovision of collection services on seriously delinquent cases (61+ days),after in-house collection efforts are exhausted.

9. Application of statutorily permitted collection remedies, such as programsfor nonrenewal of driver’s license or vehicle registration.

10. Issuance and service of warrants, as appropriate.

Table 1Texas Collection Improvement Program Key Elements 4,5

4 Texas Office of Court Administration (updated 2008). “Collection Improvement Program.”5 Texas Courts Online (www.courts.state.tx.us/oca/collections/collections.asp).

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/oca/collections/collections.asp).



Arizona

The interest by the Arizona Administrative Office ofthe Courts (AOC) in improving court collectionsbegan with a fiscal crisis during 2000-2003. The AOCinitiated the statewide Arizona Fines/Fees andRestitution Enhancement (Arizona FARE) program asan alternative to anticipated large budget reductionsand forced court layoffs. The program is a voluntarystatewide collection unit for courts that uses variousinitiatives and processes to maximize collectionpotential. The program has two parts: onecomponent deals with backlog processing and theother component takes responsibility for allcollection tasks from the time of charge filing.

The Arizona FARE program, a public/privatepartnership of the state courts, which includes thestate Motor Vehicle Division, the state Departmentof Revenue, and a private vendor, began in July2003. The program is designed to enforcecompliance with court orders and law and increaserevenues. The Arizona FARE program is in 115courts in 13 counties. Approximately 1.8 millioncases have been submitted.

Table 2Arizona Fines/Fees and Restitution Enhancement

Program Services6

1. Reminder notices 5. State-tax-intercept program

2. Delinquency notices 6. Vehicle-registration holds

3. Web-based and IVR credit-cardpayment (English and Spanish)

7. Credit-bureau reporting

4. Electronic skip tracing 8. Outbound phone calls

6 Arizona Courts-Collections. “Fines/Fees and Restitution Enforcement (FARE) Program.” PowerPoint presentation(www.search.org/files/ppt/MN-Day2-Byers.ppt).

http://www.search.org/files/ppt/MN-Day2-Byers.ppt).



Michigan

The Michigan Supreme Court started with theassumption that one of the guiding principles of asuccessful collection program is having judicialsupport. The Supreme Court appointed a collectionsadvisory committee, consisting of judges and a courtadministrator, and approved the committee’srecommended collection strategy. This strategyincluded appointing regional subcommittees topromote the Supreme Court’s approved collectionstrategy. The subcommittees, which include judgesand court staff experienced in various collectiontechniques, also provide training on practical andtested collection techniques throughout the state.

Another aspect of the Michigan program,accomplished in conjunction with legislation,focused on the court’s authority to sentence and

collect fines, costs, and assessments and codified theprocess to collect funds from prisoner accounts.Effective January 1, 2006, the Michigan CollectionLegislation authorized that fines and fees could becollected at any time regardless of whether adefendant is on probation, has had probationrevoked, or has been discharged from probation.The legislation also allows that courts may require awage assignment to pay the assessed costs. Thislegislation was then amended effective January 9,2007 to allow courts to order defendants to pay anyadditional costs incurred in compelling thedefendant’s appearance. This allowed courts to putthe financial burden for nonpayment back on thedefendant and not on the court. Table 3 belowshows some of the tools that courts have used sincethis legislation was enacted and the reported results.

Tools Examples of Various Courts’ Results

1. Orders to remit prisoner funds:Court orders to collect fines andfees from prisoner accounts

51% of court orders on prisoner fundscollected statewide, resulting in$3,525,375 during a three-year period.

2. Delinquency-notification software:Software developed internally by aMichigan court that was purchasedby the SCAO so it could be providedto other courts at no cost

10th District Court sent 32,453 noticesand collected $1,352,546 at a cost of$24,893 during a 20-month period.

3. Show-Cause process47th District Court collected$1,492,279 during the three years theshow-cause docket was in place.

4. Court-ordered wage assignments47th District Court has issued 102wage assignments in a 14-monthperiod and collected $47,121.

Table 3Michigan’s Tools for Collecting Fines and Fees 7

7 Schaefer, P. D., and E. A. Barber (2007). “Court Collection Advisory Committee Interim Report.” Michigan Supreme Court, StateCourt Administrative Office, Lansing (courts.michigan.gov/scao/services/collections/01-07InterimReport.pdf).



California

Chief Justice Ronald M. George called the collectionof court debt a top priority in his 2003 State of theJudiciary Address. Following that address, theCalifornia Judicial Council established theCollaborative Court-County Working Group onEnhanced Collections. By August 2004, the JudicialCouncil had adopted several policies to improvestatewide collections based on therecommendations that came from the workinggroup. These included policies for:

• Definitions of delinquent accounts orpayments;

• Standards for discharging court-ordereddebt;

• Establishment of trial court and countycommittees to increase collections andcompliance;

• Courts and counties to submit midyear andyear-end collection reports on JudicialCouncil-approved templates;

• Development and support of legislation thatwould allow courts and counties to chargeinstallment fees; and

• Process to develop standards and guidelinesfor courts in approving or denying feewaivers.

California is also using a legislated cost-recoveryprogram. This program allows a court or county thatmaintains a collection program for delinquent fines,penalties, assessments, and fees to deduct certainexpenses for that program before making anydistribution to the state. To qualify for the cost-recovery program, the collection program mustmeet at least 10 of 17 collection criteria, see Table 4.

1. Issue monthly billing statements10. File liens on real property and

proceeds of sale

2. Make telephone contact with debtor 11. File claims of objection in bankruptcy

3. Issue warning letters12. Coordinate with probation

department to locate debtors

4. Request credit reports to assist inlocating debtors

13. Suspend driver’s licenses

5. Access employment development dept.(EDD)

14. Accept credit-card payments

6. Generate monthly delinquent reports15. Participate in FTB court-ordered debt

program

7. Participate in FTB tax-intercept program 16. Contract with private debt collectors

8. Use department of motor vehiclesinformation to locate debtors

17. Use local and national skip-tracinglocator resources

9. Use wage and bank-accountgarnishments

Table 4California Comprehensive Collection Program Criteria 8

8 California Judicial Branch (2008). “Statewide Administration: Enhanced Collections Project.” Programs: Innovations in theCalifornia Courts. Web site (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/innovations/stateadmin-2.htm).

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/innovations/stateadmin-2.htm).



These four examples demonstrate that despitedifferences in organization and legislative approach,states are making successful efforts to improvecollections. Even when programs are voluntary,leadership and encouragement coupled withpractical assistance from the state-level judiciary cansignificantly improve the collection process byproviding tools to guide courts and help themimprove collection processes. Michigan’s judiciaryfound that by promoting best practices, training, andsuccessful pilot programs, there has beencompetition among individual courts to improvecollections. When court leaders show interest anddo their part to improve collections by usingwhatever principles, programs, or processes workwithin their own justice system, they can gainincreased trust from the public, other branches ofgovernment, and funding bodies.

It is difficult, if not impossible, for any court todevelop a process for improving collections withoutthe support and leadership of local judges. Oftenjudges feel that collections or enforcement of theirorders is not their responsibility. Yet as Michiganpointed out through their development of a processfor collection improvement, a successful approachhas to be led by the judges. In Michigan this effortbegan with the philosophy and direction of formerChief Justice Maura Corrigan. Justice Corrigan’sphilosophy is that enforcing court-ordered financialsanctions should be a top priority for two reasons:the judiciary’s credibility is at stake and the judiciaryhas the responsibility as the third branch ofgovernment. She felt that courts must send thepublic a firm and consistent message that offenderswill be held accountable. The Michigan SupremeCourt then organized task forces, which includedjudges, to develop tools and training to assist statecourts.

In a training video for judges to improve collections,9

Judge Phil Schaefer, former 9th Circuit Court Judgein Kalamazoo County, Michigan said, “In the finalanalysis, the success of any collections effort isdirectly proportional to the level of the commitmentof the judiciary. A court may have the most capableand devoted employees in the world, but unless thejudge leads, they cannot follow.”

1.4 Local Judicial Leadership in ImprovingCollections

9 See “Collection Video and Audio Library” at www.ngcagov.org/videolibrary.htm.

http://www.ngcagov.org/videolibrary.htm.



Some of the ways to encourage and train judgesinclude:

1. Use chief justices and presiding judges to leadother judges by setting the tone duringpresentations.

2. Involve judges in the development of strategiesand processes for improving collections.

3. Establish court collection advisory committeesat state and/or local level that are led by andinclude judges.

4. Develop training materials for judges that helpthem improve their performance in collectingcourt-ordered financial obligations.

5. Educate judges on how the judiciary’sresponsibility to enforce court-orderedsanctions enhances the integrity of the court.

6. Encourage judges to present best practices toother judges (judges training judges).

7. Provide and educate judges on performancemeasures such as collection rates (promotescompetition).

8. Document ways that judges can simultaneouslymanage fine enforcement without sacrificingindividuals’ feelings of procedural fairness.

9. Advocate the inclusion of collection educationas part of the standard agendas or curriculumsfor local, state, and national judicial trainingworkshops, seminars, and conferences.

Lack of compliance in paying fines and fees denies ajurisdiction revenue and, more important, calls intoquestion the authority and efficacy of the court andthe justice system. Tight operating budgets, thesearch for additional funding for courts, and acontinuing desire that court orders command therespect of defendants have combined in recentyears to increase interest nationwide in collection offines and fees. Each court must examine a numberof fundamental issues when seeking to improve itscollection of fines and fees.

Three issues – court philosophy, communityperception, and resource commitment – arerecurrent themes in courts. Courts that have beenthe most successful in collecting have (1) adopted aphilosophy that active, if not aggressive, collection isthe right approach to take; (2) decided to improvecommunity perceptions; and (3) dedicated somestaff and other resources to the collection effort.Courts that have not made progress in fine collectionhave probably not yet grappled with these issues.

Court PhilosophyThe perception among judges and court managers inmany jurisdictions is that if their own locality iseconomically depressed, then many traffic andcriminal defendants are unable to pay fines and fees,particularly in cases involving a mandatory fine or jailsentence. However, experienced collectorsconsistently assert that all but a very few defendantshave greater resources for meeting their obligationsthan may be immediately apparent. A court needsto agree internally on its collection philosophy.Courts can respect individuals’ ability to pay by usingpayment plans and other tools, so that fines arecollected and individuals still feel they haveexperienced procedural fairness.

1.5 Attributes of a Successful Collections Environment



Community Perception“Word on the street” in every jurisdiction makes thepublic aware of the local level of fine enforcement.It may be common knowledge, for example, thatthere is no room in the jail for defendants arrestedon warrants or that nonpayment of fines and feeswill not trigger a violation-of-probation proceeding.A court needs to decide whether it will seek tochange or influence the “word on the street.”

Resource CommitmentEvery locality has a relatively small percentage ofhard-core defendants who either will not pay theirobligations, whatever sanction is applied, or willeventually be impossible to locate. However, amuch larger percentage of defendants will pay all orpart of the amount owed if 1) payment can be madewithout too much inconvenience, and 2) increasinglycoercive measures are applied by the collector. Acourt needs to determine how much effort toexpend on a particular class of offenses in relation tothe benefit received.

A problem encountered in some courts is a lack ofuseful management-reporting information for finecollection programs, or failure to use informationavailable. Courts with standard or ad hoc reportingcapability through a case management systemtypically have data on collection rates or averagetimes to complete payments already in a usableformat or that can be exported and further analyzedin a spreadsheet. Please see Chapter 11,“Operational Information and PerformanceMeasures,” for more information.

In many instances, even courts that keep current datafail to track baseline collection rates beforeimplementing new procedures and can measure theeffect of new procedures. Because of this generallack of information, there is little more thananecdotal evidence supporting the effectiveness ofmany of the strategies presented in this Handbook.

NCSC is often asked if there is any national standardcollection rate. There is no national standard, giventhe many differences in jurisdiction, socioeconomicconditions, and demographics. With court

performance and particularly CourTools, courts areencouraged to determine their baseline and then setstandards and measures that best fit their individualjurisdiction and resources. Performancemeasurement is an important aspect of all courtprocesses. Measuring the success of fine and feecollection should be a vital aspect of any court’smeasurement. Some successful courts that trackstatistical information report that they collect morethan 90 percent of the fines and fees assessed, andthis is obviously a good result. Given the depressedeconomic conditions in certain areas, the transientand unemployed (or underemployed) character in anarea’s population, or merely the relative size of ajurisdiction, comparison of collection results of anytwo jurisdictions is problematic. One can be certain,however, that collections in any given jurisdictioncan be improved by applying additional collectiontechniques.



No court can do everything. Successful programsshould focus on changes that provide the mostimprovement at the least cost. In selecting thoseprocesses, courts need to base all decisions in the coreprinciples of improving court collection.

By developing guidelines, principles, or characteristicsfor successful collection programs, state court systemsand individual jurisdictions can influence andencourage collections improvement. Though thewording, format, and even level of detail may differ inthe way the information is presented, the elements,components, standards, or guidelines can mostly betraced to what may be considered the core principlesfor successful collection programs.

Several states have developed standards, bestpractices, or principles to implement successfulcollection programs. Texas encourages thedevelopment of successful collection programs withtheir key elements. California uses a comprehensiveset of collections components to guide courts indetermining successful collection programs. Michiganprovides a publication called “Trial Court Standardsand Guidelines” to assist courts in implementingsuccessful processes.

Whatever the fine collection strategy adopted, anycourt’s program could be improved by implementingtwo general guidelines:

No DelayOne important rule of fines and fees collection is thatthe longer the delay between sentencing andpayment, the less likely it is that the defendant willpay. Procrastination is a common humancharacteristic. Given the chance, many people willavoid unpleasant tasks like paying a fine; therefore, acourt must not give them the chance. If enough timeelapses, other more immediate debt obligations may

intervene, and even defendants who initially leave thecourthouse with the best intentions may fail tocomplete their scheduled payments.

ConsistencyOne principle of justice is to treat similarly situateddefendants alike. Inconsistent practices among themembers of the bench encourage judge shoppingand cynicism. The court needs to develop consistentsentence enforcement and related policies andsolicit the commitment of all judges to those policies.

In 1994, when the NCSC project staff visited 40courts in 22 states to review collection proceduresand during the 2006-2008 review of collectionpractices and programs for the update of thispublication, the more successful collection programsfollowed some or all of the following core principles.These are not all inclusive or limited by the languageused. The core principles presented could beconsidered as an evaluative tool for a collectionprogram or a starting place to determine aspectsthat may be added to a current program.10

• Showing judicial and administrativecommitment to collecting fines and fees

• Clearly defining responsibility for collectingfines

• Setting short time periods for payment• Communicating to a defendant what is

expected• Establishing and adhering to collection

procedures• Setting collection goals and monitoring

performance• Responding immediately to nonpayment or

nonappearance• Having a range of effective sanctions for

noncompliance and using them similarly in allcases

• Maintaining strong financial controls• Ensuring that procedures are understood by

everyone, including judges, the prosecutor’soffice, court staff, defendants, and the bar

1.6 Core Principles

10 See www.ncsc.org/WC/CourTopics/FAQs.asp?topic=ColFin#FAQ265.

http://www.ncsc.org/WC/CourTopics/FAQs.asp?topic=ColFin#FAQ265.



Just as no one court or even any state court system isthe same, court collection programs need to beuniquely developed to fit a court or court system,considering the court’s available resources, bothinternal and external. Starting with its coreprinciples, a court can build the collection vehiclethat works best in its environment. In Texas, thatmay be a Mack truck; in California, it may be a hybridgas/electric car. Each is different, yet similar becauseof those core principles, which comprise the engine,steering, wheels, and brakes. The biggest differencefrom 1994 to 2009 is that readers don’t have to workwith concepts; they can consider many new andimproved models in operation and decide how theywant to build their own.

Choice of Collection ModelsOperationally, there are three collection models thatcourts can consider, or use in combination. Thesecan be called: 1) mostly notification, 2) non-compliant sanctions, and 3) the internal collectionsmodel. These different approaches to collections inTable 5 are either an implicit or conscious choice,and have an impact on results.

1.7 Designing a Court Collection Program

Table 5Three Court Collections Models

Mostly Notification Noncompliance Sanctions Internal Collection Unit

• Bench conveysexpectation of payment infull or minimum paymenton adjudication

• Fine reduction asappropriate incircumstances

• Alternatives such as trafficschool or communityservice

• Installment plan writtenand given

• Reminder notices

• Multiple ways to payconveniently

• Few or ineffectivesanctions

• Credit-bureau-reportingthreat

• Show-cause hearings

• Immediate licensesuspension

• Immediate bench warrantthreat

• Bench warrant served

• Vehicle registrationsuspended until payment

• Voluntary assignment ofwages

• Wage or bank-accountgarnishment

• Setoffs against tax refunds,etc.

• Phone calls to past-dueaccounts (after X days)

• Staff interviews withindividuals needing specialattention due tocircumstances

• Scheduled paymenthearings with judge

• Skip-tracing practices andresources similar to anexternal collection unit

• Referral to externalcollection service after Xdays and X effort



Issues to Guide Policymaking• Is your court more comfortable with

developing an internal collections staff tohandle recalcitrant defendants, or with morecoercive sanctions?

• If you choose more coercive sanctions, whatsteps will you use to ensure that defendantsfeel procedural fairness?

• Which sanctions will be effective in yourlocation?

• While the internal collections staff may beintuitively appealing, can you make thisactivity effective enough to justify the cost?

Role of In-House Collection UnitInternal resources should include judicial support forcollections, staff, and technology. The currentresources should be assessed as well as the potentialfor future resources. Please see Chapter 6, “In-House Collection Unit,” for more information.

Court collection programs range from the in-houseprograms that are responsible for all aspects of courtcollection, to programs that turn all collectionactivities over to an external entity soon afterjudgment, with most somewhere in-between, usingsome criteria for referring accounts to the externalentity. Programs that are in-house may be internalto the court and report to the court or be a supportdivision set up to provide all collection services to thecourt. These programs are responsible for all aspectsof a collection program: from the time the defendantis sentenced until the fine and fee is completely paid.There are also programs that focus on only oneaspect of collections.

Role of Contracted Collection ServicesExternal resources could include public and privateentities that may provide services, such as hostedcollection tools like address verification and skip-tracing services, and collection agencies. It wouldalso be important to assess the potential forpartnering with other courts, divisions, or branchesof government that could share resources andservices. Please see Chapter 7, “ContractingCollection Services,” for more information.

Role of TechnologyThe courts visited during the technical assistanceproject in 1993-1994 and those studied and reviewedduring the 2006-2008 time frame ranged from small,rural courts to some of the largest urban courts inthe country. Most have automated casemanagement systems of varying degrees ofcapability, although a surprising number maintainedessentially manual recordkeeping systems, orautomated systems with significant manualprocesses to support automation. In Arizona, forexample, the (mostly) statewide case managementsystem allows the user to keep records of payments,court proceedings, disposition changes, etc., withinthe system. While the system does record payments,it is limited in the capability of breaking outpayments applied to cases with more than onedefendant and where joint and several paymentstoward restitution is ordered. Because of this, manycourts use a manual recordkeeping system for thesetypes of cases in the form of a “pay card” that isplaced in the individual files of the defendants. Thisleaves room for error. The new case managementsystem that is currently being rolled out to Arizonacourts is designed to better accommodate joint andmultiple payments and eliminate the manualprocedure. Please see Chapter 10, “Use ofTechnology in Collections,” for more information.

Collection PhasesIn addition to choosing a collections model, courtsshould structure collection activities in relation totime periods such as 30-60-90-180 days. Earlieractivities increase payments. By understandingwhich activities affect the different phases ofcollections, you can work out a plan to focus certainefforts during a collections phase, then measureresults by phase, and then gauge how effective (andcost-effective) different activities are.

A court’s first focus should be to encourageimmediate payment, beginning at adjudication.These first activities involve mostly judge and staffcommunication, so these collections activities canoccur at no or minimal additional cost. Opportunitylost at this point means more activity is needed later,and adding later activities incurs greater costs.



Table 6 sets forth collection phases and activitiesassociated with events, beginning with adjudication,and extending by monthly or other intervals asevents occur. After the first 60 days, a defendant’slevel of responsiveness to communications willusually become clear and will determine what themost effective approach will be. The court should

“work the account” by communicating with thedefendant as long as payments are received, andrefer the account to external collection serviceswhen the defendant stops communicating or stopspaying. Please see Chapter 11, “OperationalInformation and Performance Measures,” for moreinformation on determining performance measures.

Table 6Activities by Collections Phase

Activities with Direct Impacton Amounts Collected

Actions with Supporting Considerations

At AdjudicationDefendants advised that payment in full

is expected, unless there are specialcircumstances

Minimum payment (20-50%) requested atadjudication if not paid in full

Payment plans may be used, but not forsmall amounts (unless exceptionalcircumstances)

Payment plans given to defendantsinclude amounts and due dates

Process and documents to communicateexpectations, rights, penalties, andprocedures are easily available todefendants and are in accessiblelanguage (including translation asneeded)

Process to set up payment plansProcess to track alternative sanctions

First 30 Days after AdjudicationReminder notices sent that clearly spell

out penalties, give payment optionsagain

Does the system provide capability toefficiently send mass notices?

Second Month (by 60 days)Escalate language in reminder noticesShow-cause hearings for noncomplianceBench warrants for failures to appear or

pay or those failing to show causeLicense-suspension notices sent to DMV

(after notice, as required by law)

Calculate the age of financial obligationsand percent received, to track theeffectiveness of activities by time phase

Process to implement sanctions

Third Month (by 90 days)Escalate language in reminder noticesShow-cause hearings for noncomplianceBench warrants for failures to appear or

pay or those failing to show cause

Process to implement sanctions

From 90 to 180 DaysContinue previous efforts

Consider referral to external agency



Cost of Collections in Relation to ReturnIn designing a court collection program, cost forincreasing internal resources or accessing externalresources needs to be weighed against the potentialreturn. Figure 1 illustrates the relative number ofpeople who always pay, might pay, and never pay.Represented by the bulk of the triangle, most peoplerespect the law and fulfill their obligations and paypromptly or with some prodding. At the other end, arelatively small number of people try to avoid theirobligations, and an inordinate amount of effort maybe required to obtain compliance.

A collection program should focus its effortsprimarily on the category of those who might pay,since many people need some encouragement orjust a reminder. Certainly a court’s processes andprocedures should encourage and ease the processfor those who will pay. But the focus of “what else isneeded in our collection program” should be on thecategory of those who might pay.

External resources for court collections can includepublic or private collection agencies. These agenciescan do all or part of the collection process. Thedecision of when to use external resources isgenerally dependent on when the court chooses torefer the debt to someone else when it is not cost-effective to handle the debt in house.

Many courts and states use this approach but invarious ways. The primary reasons for courts to usecollection agencies is that often there are notresources to do anything more internally, and courtsdon’t often think improving collections is theirprimary business.

Too often courts turn collection tasks over to otherentities rather quickly and do little other than collectwhat people are willing to pay. Statistics show thatthe largest percentage of money is collected duringthe period of time closest to the assessment. Duringthis early period, there is often much that can bedone internally with a modest investment, eitherusing technology or people, that can improvecollections for the court.

Some courts have access to county or stategovernmental collection agencies that may be partof another branch of government. For example,Utah has an Office of State Debt Collections, as do anumber of other states. When a party is given timeto pay they are put on a payment schedule. Thosepayments are made directly to the clerk’s office. If aparty is delinquent in payment for more than 90days, the clerk’s office forwards the debt to theOffice of State Debt Collections, an executive-branchagency. The office is statutorily charged withcollecting all bad debts owed to the state. Thispublic collection agency uses all the collection toolsthat a private agency may access.

The advantage of an already establishedgovernmental program is that the court does nothave to solicit proposals, select vendors, or manage

Figure 1Proportions Resources Needed to Collect and

Willingness to Comply

1.8 Programs CombiningInternal and External Resources



delinquent collection processes. Although it requiresa commitment, It takes few additional resourcessince the only current collection efforts areconsidered within the clerks’ and cashiers’ normalworkload. The disadvantage is that the courts havelittle control over improving collections that aredelinquent more than 90 days. The courts also haveno selection options for the collection vendor. If thestate collection agency has good practices and usesall available collection tools, court collections as wellas other state collections will improve. If the statecollection agency is not doing everything possible,the court cannot do as much to improve the process.

When a private vendor is used for delinquentpayments, potential competition can improve thechoices for the court. The Superior Court of LosAngeles uses the RFP process to its advantage byinsisting on certain tools in the vendor’s toolkit,such as additional warning letters, tracking reports,and management reports. The reports allow thecourt to watch for activities in the process andanticipate improvement.

Another important aspect of using a private vendoris that a collection vendor should have tools andstrategies already in place to collect. A court wouldneed to acquire the skills or tools to collect. Thenegative side to using a private vendor is that theprocess needs to be managed. There are usuallyRFPs to develop and then vendors to select andmanage. This takes additional resources. It alsocosts to use a vendor; these costs may be absorbedby the court or the vendor as a cost of doingbusiness, negotiated between the two, or passed onto the debtor. In selecting a vendor, it is importantto talk with other courts or jurisdictions who usevendors for similar services and compare costs ofservice. Costs for the same vendor and sameservices may still not be the same for two courts orjurisdictions due to the size of the potentialcollection caseload and potential return. It is alsoimportant to compare the cost to use a privatevendor with the cost of collecting internally.

The range of activities and tools vendors can use incollections varies greatly. It is important tounderstand and compare the differences and thevalue of using each of them. Not every court needsto or will benefit from every tool on the market orstrategy known.

A unique hybrid of using a public and privatecollection agency is the Fines/Fees and RestitutionEnforcement (FARE) Program in Arizona. Thisprogram, under the Arizona Administrative Officeof the Courts, is a public and private partnership.The Arizona State Courts, Department of Revenue,and Motor Vehicle Division partner with thevendor. This collaborative effort allows for manyuseful tools to improve court collection efforts.The courts in Arizona can choose to participate inan array of compliance and enforcement services.The courts can opt in at any point in a case, as soonas assessed or when it becomes delinquent. Theother unique feature is that a court can use theservices of FARE as well as those of anothercollection agency. The approach encourages bothFARE and private vendors to compete. By doing so,the logic is that the courts will have many choicesand not have to fit into the same size box as othercourts. The difficult aspect of this approach issimply that not every state or local jurisdiction willhave the resources to initiate its own court-focusedpublic entity.



Chapter 2

COLLECTION BESTPRACTICES

This chapter discusses best practices in courtcollections, and the following chapters elaborate oncertain specific areas. This chapter presents anoverview of best practices, and necessarily simplifiessome of the ideas presented.

Each section header is a best practice. Table 7 atthe end of the chapter summarizes the bestpractices and provides a checklist, so that readerscan summarize the practices already in use in theirlocations, practices that might be considered, orpractices that cannot be considered locally forvarious reasons. Throughout this chapter, we willalso point the reader to other chapters where atechnique is discussed in greater detail.

Courts with the best collection programs convey anexpectation from the beginning that fines will bepaid in full and as quickly as possible. Theseexpectations are expressed by notices from the courtand statements by the sentencing judge emphasizingpayment on day of sentencing and by immediateaction in cases of overdue payment ornonappearance. Courts with the best programsconsider the timely payment of fines as important asthe enforcement of any other court sanction. Whilerevenue enhancement is not ignored, the greateremphasis is on ensuring appropriate respect for thecourt and its orders.

Practice Tips

A few judges and administrators take the positionthat “courts should not be in the business ofcollecting money” and dismiss the need for courtconcern with fine collection. As noted earlier, thisthinking in the courts seems to be changing. It wasalso stated earlier that successful collectionprograms require leadership, direction, and follow-through by the judges.

Some judges are concerned that many defendants intheir locality are poor and have no ability to paycourt obligations. Community service is the primarymethod for this segment of the population to meettheir obligations. While care should be taken toavoid depriving defendants’ families of life’snecessities, pressure can conscionably be applied inmany cases to force defendants to accept and payfor their mistakes in a manner appropriate to theirmeans. This goes to the heart of maintaining thecredibility of the justice system and ensuring thatjustice is fairly and evenly administered.

2.1 Create Payment Expectations throughthe Fine Collection Atmosphere



Court leaders (the chief or presiding judge and thecourt administrator or clerk of court) set an examplefor other judges and court staff in collecting finesand fees. They do this from the time a defendant issentenced through the time a fine is paid in full ordeclared uncollectible. Leaders need to create theexpectation that the fine will be paid each time adefendant has contact with the court, whether withstaff, by personal appearance in court, by service ofprocess, or by telephone or mail. This requires acommitment of resources: court staff dedicated tocollection, court time dedicated to sending theproper message to defendants, and technologydedicated to providing information to managecollections.

Practice Tips

Leadership from the top is necessary to the successof any organizational effort, and commitment meansinvolving other participants in the justice system –clerks, court administrators, prosecutors, probationofficers, law enforcement officers who servewarrants, and jail managers. In some jurisdictions,justice agencies do not regularly talk to each otherabout fine collection or any other topic.

In jurisdictions with successful fine collectionsystems, justice system participants discussenforcement and other issues; clerks and lawenforcement officers verify that warrants have beenserved or canceled; jail managers reserve jail slotsfor executed warrants; probation and parole officersnotify the prosecutor or the court when a defendantis released from prison with an unpaid fine; andprosecutors use civil collection techniques (propertyliens, wage and bank account garnishments, orsheriffs’ sales, as state law permits).

Judicial commitment to fine collection may be thesingle most critical factor. Without exception, themost successful programs enjoyed the backing of a

majority of the court’s judges. Collection programsthat are struggling, despite strong administrativebacking, generally have judicial personnel who aredisinterested or hostile to fine collection initiatives.Upon observing collection programs at samplecourts nationwide, it appears that a collectionprogram cannot be successful without strong,consistent support from the bench.

2.2 Practice Leadership and Commitment



Court leaders should set attainable and measurablegoals to improve fine and fee collections. Even ifsophisticated management information is notavailable, court leaders can set goals for the otherelements of successful programs. Many courts haveno collection procedures, no plan to reduce thebacklog of unpaid fines, not even a part-time staffperson tackling the collection problem. Even modestgoals can make a significant difference.

The type of goal most commonly associated withcaseflow management systems is a time standard forcase disposition. Likewise, time standards foraverage time to successful completion of finepayments also should be established. Interim eventtime goals can be set. For example, by establishingthe times for issuing notices or warrants, or forsetting a hearing following default, leaders can helpreduce delay in collection procedures. The mostsuccessful collection programs also have goals foraverage amounts collected, measured in thenumbers of defendants completing payments andpercentage of amounts ordered that are collected.

Monitoring procedures should be developed to allowthe court to measure program outcomes againstgoals regularly. Regular performance monitoringprovides the court with an “early warning system.”If collection rates drop or times to completion beginto lengthen, the court can review and adjust itsprocedures before a more serious problem develops.

At a minimum, monitoring and managing of finecollection requires regular exception reports ofdefendants who have not appeared or paid fines orinstallments as promised. These individuals can thenbecome targets of prompt collection activity: past-due notices, suspension of driver’s license, phonecalls, contempt hearings, motions for violation ofprobation, or issuance and service of arrestwarrants. In a manual environment, the timelinessof payments can be tracked through a procedure as

simple as a weekly or daily “tickler” filing system.For example, a chronological register can be set upand defendants’ documents filed by appearance ordue date. As payments are made, the documentsare moved to the next due date or the closed-casefile. Any documents remaining after a date haspassed should indicate defendants who have failedto appear or pay as ordered, and immediate actioncan be taken.

Practice Tips

Court leaders may convene a fine collection taskforce of justice agency personnel to set goals andmeet periodically to review progress. The task forceshould include technology staff or a representativeof the court’s software vendor to ensure thatinformation will be available to measure progresstoward goals.

In earlier years, good management reports appearedto be the exception for fine collection programs. Astechnology has become more prevalent andimproved in courts, there is an expectation that goodmanagement reports will be available.

2.3 Set Collection and Information Goals



Communication with defendants from the verybeginning of the collection process is far moreeffective than later attempts to make contact. Manydefendants do not have stable addresses and can“disappear” very quickly. A good practice isproviding written notice, whenever a defendantappears, of the defendant’s next due date orhearing. By doing so, they have proof that noticewas given and avoid the costs of written or personalservice.

In the best programs, judges have developed regularconcordant procedures and communication steps tohelp ensure enforcement consistency. Staffmembers are made aware of the court’sexpectations and receive training in the finecollection process. Successful collections oftenrequire the cooperation of other justice agencies. Acourt initiative that requires the service of warrantsor jailing of delinquent defendants is not likely tosucceed if local law enforcement is not closelyinvolved in its planning and execution.Communications need to clearly spell out what isexpected, when it should occur, and theconsequences of noncompliance.

Practice Tips

Communicating the importance of paying a finebegins before adjudication and with the sentencingjudge. Communicating both the estimated amount,as well as the fact that payment is expected on theday of sentencing, is an effective way to maximizecollections. Courts should:

• Inform defendants from the bench at theinitial hearing or pretrial that payment is dueupon assessment and provide an estimatedamount due.

• Advise defendants at the probation screeningof the date payment is expected and theamount of the expected payment.

• Ensure that court personnel notify litigants atall court appearances of the date thatpayment is expected.

• Educate the local legal community thatpayment is required at the time ofassessment.

Many traffic dockets are so crowded that tailoringpayment terms is barely thinkable .Successful courtsall have a judge who tell defendants:

• That payment must be made that day orwithin 24 hours.

• That an arrest warrant will be issued forfailure to comply.

• That failure to pay violates a condition ofprobation.

On the contrary, consider the message sent by ajudge who gives every defendant 30 days to pay,with or without discussion with the defendant.

Some judges communicate their attitude towardcollection by giving a harsh sentence at thebeginning of their docket, by ordering defendants toempty their pockets, by arranging a “good guy/badguy” routine with the bailiff, or by taking athumbprint or photo. Past-due notices can threatento report the fine to a credit-reporting company,publish it in the newspaper, or post it at the library.Although some criticize these practices asintimidating, judges should examine their verbal andnonverbal messages and decide what is effective andwhat meets their personal standards.

Through the Michigan Supreme Court’s State CourtAdministrative Office, training videos have beendeveloped that provide actual examples for judges inhow to and how not to communicate the paymentexpectation to defendants. 1

2.4 Use a Systematic Communication Planwith Defendants

1 The Michigan Web site is password protected, but many of the videos can be viewed at the “Collection Video and Audio Library”at www.ngcagov.org/videolibrary.htm.

http://www.ngcagov.org/videolibrary.htm



Some courts post signs in the courtroom, hallways,and at the clerk’s counter that fines are expected onthe day of sentencing. Others require defendantswho want to delay payment to report to the judicialenforcement unit (often a single staff memberworking full- or part-time on collection) for approvalof installment payments. In the majority of thesecourts judges refuse to discuss payment terms in theopen courtroom. Setting a payment plan from thebench not only wastes judicial time, but also tends tolead to “mass” poverty. When the remainingdefendants hear that delayed payments areavailable, everyone may then assert a claim foradditional time. These courts have found that thebetter practice is to send defendants to a judicialenforcement officer or the clerk’s office to completean application for a delayed payment arrangement.

In Montgomery County, Texas, all defendants, eventhose planning to pay in full that day, are required toreport to the collection unit immediately followingthe court hearing. This enables the judge to onlydeal with the next step of going to the collection unitand not having to deal in the courtroom with anydiscussion of the fine, fees, or payment.

A few courts notify counsel in advance thatsentencing will not proceed without payment of astated amount. Others will not permit a timepayment arrangement or extension without at leasta minimal “down payment.”

Collecting fines begins in the courtroom, as indicatedearlier. But if defendants choose not to or cannotpay in full, courts will need to decide on the follow-up process that best suits the local philosophy andneeds. While the general strategies discussedappear consistently in successful collectionsprograms, specific procedures can, and must, betailored to meet an individual court’s philosophy,local legal restraints, and goals established withother justice agencies.

Examples of how court philosophy, laws, and goalscan affect the shape of a collection program, includethe following (among many possible examples):

• Judicial commitment to collection programsrequires a certain level of buy-in and consistencyin the courtroom among judges who levy andenforce payment of fines.

• The court must decide what regimen of phonecalls, past-due notices, contempt citations, benchwarrants, or other techniques is effective andcan be managed, given staff resources available.

• In traffic citation cases, a court may desire or berequired by law to notify offenders of animpending license suspension and issuance ofwarrant.

• Whether courts can recover fees for costs ofcollections is a matter of the law or ordinance inyour jurisdiction.

• Individual court circumstances and technologicaland staff resources will determine whether it iseconomical to use the “lock box” services of abank, a Web-based payment system, an address-updating service, or an external agency forcollections.

• Taking into account the court’s political climateand accounting procedures, the court mustdecide if or when an account can be declareduncollectible and “written off” or made inactive,and at what point, if ever, an arrest warrant orcapias can be recalled or canceled.

2.5 Establish Follow-up Processes



• So as not to overwhelm them, the court mustseek accommodations with law enforcement,jails, and other justice agencies on suchmatters as warrant sweeps, publicly runcommunity-service programs, and local jailcapacity for willfully noncompliant defendants.

If courts intend to pursue collections, they need toidentify procedures by which to handle collectionfrom individuals. An example is the means by whichdefendants are allowed to pay fines. Successfulcollection systems make payments as convenient aspossible by accepting checks and credit cards.Although some court leaders believe that theinconvenience of paying in cash or money order onlyis appropriate additional punishment, many courtsaccept personal checks and only infrequentlyencounter bad checks, and keep a list of who passedthe bad checks. Many courts now accept credit cards.In some states, credit card acceptance is statewide.In others, it is on a county-by-county basis.

With a society that functions on credit card use forpractically all purchases, an increased use of creditcards at the counter, over the phone, or on a Website, can improve collections. The policy regardingwho pays the credit card fees varies. Manyjurisdictions absorb these costs because they find thatthe savings in receiving, accounting, and collectioncosts far outweigh the amount of the fees. Otherspass these banking costs on to the payor as aconvenience fee.

Practice Tips

Some courts accept personal checks only undercertain conditions: when a defendant makes paymentby mail, when a defendant has not “bounced” checksbefore, or when the clerk calls the bank to verify theavailability of funds and put a hold on the funds.

If a court wants to increase the number of paymentsby mail, court leaders may want to persuade lawenforcement officers to give traffic offenders anenvelope addressed to the clerk along with thecitation. Some courts use a distinctively colored, self-addressed envelope to facilitate handling in the court,

others have designed a traffic citation incorporatedinto an envelope.

Almost all courts allow installment payments for finesbased on a local threshold. However, unless theclerk’s software accommodates such payments,installments can be a significant burden for staff.Successful courts collect the following informationbefore allowing installment payments: Social Securitynumber, work address and phone, payday, addressand phone of parents and other relatives in the area,and personal references to verify.

Unless the fine is large, collection is most likely within60 days of adjudication, after which the defendant’ssense of urgency diminishes rapidly. Prompt follow-up is essential. Some defendants also changeaddresses frequently and require more effort tolocate if the court does not move quickly.

Most courts reported that the threat of jail via abench warrant is an important incentive for manydelinquent defendants. The capacity to raise moneyseems to increase substantially when a defendant isin custody. A few courts also report that the threat ofcredit reporting is effective, whether or not it actuallyis carried out. In some jurisdictions, the threat of adriver’s license suspension is an effective way toencourage fine payment; in other jurisdictions, thethreat and even the suspension does little to affectfine payments. As we have said previously, courtsmust look at what is effective and suits the court’sphilosophy, personnel, and staff limits.

One or two collection programs we are aware of requiredefendants seeking an extension of time to pay toprovide proof that they have made efforts to secure aloan and have been actively seeking employment. Onecollector even suggests holding a garage sale oreliminating cable television service to raise money.Good collectors are aware of “flush-money” times of theyear, such as the month preceding Christmas andincome-tax-refund season, and time collectionincentives to coincide with these periods.



Once the court and other justice agencies haveagreed on goals and procedures, staff must carry outthe daily work. In some jurisdictions clerk’s officestaff may feel they are too busy to take on collectionefforts or feel uncomfortable in the role of“collection agent.”

For these reasons, formation of a judicialenforcement or collection unit is an increasinglypopular alternative. Having a specialized staffensures that adequate time will be devoted tocollections and that collection staff have theinclination and experience to handle a stressfulcaseload. The few systems that have done cost/benefit analysis of their collection programs reportimpressive returns. Colorado’s collectioninvestigator program, for example, reportedcollecting eight to ten dollars for every dollar spent.

Experience and training can acclimate most courtstaff to their collection tasks (see “Education andTraining” section). Even if there is a specializedcollections unit, all staff members need to conveythe expectation that payment is expected, and bewilling to encourage payment while acknowledgingthat some will need to pay as circumstances allow.As in any area, these tasks will be seen as morevaluable if they are recognized as important by courtleaders and competent performance isacknowledged. The court must identify, train, andencourage those staff members who truly enjoy thechallenge of collections, but also encourage all staffto create the expectation of payment.

Practice Tips

If a court decides to pursue an in-house collectionunit, court leaders can advertise internally andexternally for collection-oriented staff willing toaccept the challenge. These positions can be full- orpart-time (whatever the court can budget). Somesuccessful collection officers have worked in private-

sector collections, while others without previousexperience found they were able to motivate peopleand enjoyed doing so. Some judges delegateauthority to collection officers, including theauthority to revise payment schedules without courtapproval and the authority to initiate wage-garnishment and contempt proceedings. Please SeeChapter 6, “In-House Collection Unit,” for furtherinformation.

If hiring a collection officer is not an option, assigningcollection activities to a single member of the clericalstaff has several advantages. By having one staffmember in charge of the collections activities, ithelps ensure that there is consistency in processingextension requests and delinquent accounts. It isimportant that the individual handling collectionshas the temperament to work well with an oftendifficult group of individuals.

In some jurisdictions the probation department,rather than the courts, manages collections. Giventheir authority to punish a defendant who fails tocomply with probation terms, probation staff can behighly successful in this area. Some probationdepartments, as a matter of policy, place equalemphasis on financial and behavioral compliance.However, some probation departments emphasizebehavioral changes and compliance withnonfinancial conditions of probation overcompliance with financial conditions. In such anenvironment, dedicating one individual to enforcingfinancial obligations only can relieve probationofficers of an unpleasant task seeminglyincompatible with “more important” compliance.

2.6 Consider Forming a SpecializedCollection Unit



Once court and justice agency leaders make thedecision to pursue collections more aggressively,they must provide education and training for staff. Ifthe court atmosphere is to signal expectations ofpayment, then all staff will need to convey thatexpectation. Additionally, the court will needpolicies in place that provide procedural fairness toall defendants and ensure that practices areunderstood and consistently followed.

Practice Tips

Developing practices, policy guidelines, and trainingcan be easier if courts draw on some excellentresources that are available. The NationalAssociation for Court Management’s Trial CourtFinancial Management Guide contains a section on“Administering Collection of Fines, Fees and Costs.”2

In addition to raising numerous policy issues andproviding many forms, procedures, and statutoryexamples, it contains a bibliography of the literatureon collection of fines and fees. The National Centerfor State Courts’ Institute for Court Managementalso offers online and in-person courses on revenueenhancement and managing court financialresources. The National Center for State CourtsKnowledge and Information Service also can providebibliographic materials.3 Workshops and trainingmaterials may be available from private industry.

One collection unit conducts regular meetings withcounter staff to continually involve them in theprocess, a concept that all collection operations mayconsider. Counter staff have been trained to ask forand verify addresses every time a defendant makes apayment. They are encouraged to develop friendlyrelations with account holders and to attempt to

elicit other information from defendants at times ofcontact, especially information pertaining toemployment or financial changes that may haveoccurred since the defendant last visited the court.Most counter staff have enthusiastically agreed tothese duties and enjoy being part of the collectionteam. In addition to counter staff, the head ofcollections has recognized the importance of makingcollection of fines and fees a full-court effort. Staffin many areas including the civil department, havebeen trained to watch for defendants withoutstanding fines and to relay potentially usefulinformation to collections.

2.7 Provide Education and Training

2 Section 30.70. The Trial Court Financial Management Guide is available in loose-leaf form by subscription from the NationalCenter for State Courts.3 NCSC’s Knowledge and Information Services www.ncsc.org

http://www.ncsc.org



Large amounts of unpaid fines and fees can create apolitical and public-relations problem for a court.The professionalization of court management andthe continuing demand that public institutionsoperate in a more “businesslike” manner have alsospurred interest in accountability for unpaid finesand fees owed to courts. Funding agencies andlegislatures may look to courts to contribute towardfinancing their own operations, although it is widelyaccepted that courts are not, and can hardly be, self-supporting. City councils, more so than county-governing boards or legislatures, tend to view finesand fees as a revenue stream they can tap to financegovernment operations.

The most visible means of demonstratingaccountability is developing collection procedureswith mechanisms for measuring success. Goodprograms also have an established “write-offprocedure”; however, to eliminate uncollectibleaccounts, ensuring that the amounts shown asoutstanding include only funds that realistically maybe collected. Reporting on and managing theoutstanding collections inventory helps courtsestablish their accountability, and develop realisticexpectations.

Some outstanding fines are uncollectible in anycourt, although the amount is affected by the court’scollection practices. But there is always a group thatcannot or will not pay, whatever sanction is applied.Unless steps are taken to identify a reasonable levelof uncollectible accounts suitable for write off afterappropriate time and effort has been expended, acourt will have superficially large amounts ofuncollected fines and fees. Dealing directly with theproblem and not trying to hide it, is the best way toenhance accountability and public confidence.

Some courts have become the target of publiccriticism after media “exposure” of large amounts ofoutstanding fines, fees, and restitution. Other courts

reported difficulties with funding authorities, whoperceived a pool of unpaid fines as indication of acourt system that isn’t “doing its job.” Regardless ofwhether these attacks are motivated by the public’sright to know or political aims, courts areaccountable for the efficiency of their operations.

There can be a number of reasons why outstandingfines and fees may have been on the books for a longperiod of time:

• Many courts do not have a write-off procedurefor uncollectible fines and fees.

• In some courts, the transition from a manual tocomputerized system created a gap inenforcement when accounts receivable were notmigrated to the computer system.

• Some courts have had periods when staff sizewas too limited to carry out collections or whencollection was not given high priority.

• Fine payment obligations may have expired upontermination of probation, an individualsentenced to pay a fine may be serving a lengthyperiod of incarceration, or most commonly, thecourt simply may not be able to locate adefendant.

As a practical matter, many of these fines areuncollectible, despite the court’s best efforts. Nouseful purpose is served by keeping uncollectibleaccounts receivable on the books.

Practice Tips

Section 13.2 in this handbook, “Sample Program 2:Reducing a Backlog of Accounts Receivables,”provides some suggestions for reducing caseinventories.

Writing Off Uncollectible Accounts for ReceivablesInventory ControlThe amount of outstanding accounts receivable canbe a politically sensitive issue, and the court shoulddevelop a process for separating active and inactivecases for reporting purposes.

2.8 Establish Accountability: Control theCollection Inventory



Inactive cases are those that have undergone the fullcollection process without success, including serviceof a warrant or license-suspension notice. They arenot written off because the warrant or suspensionmay eventually generate a payment.

Formal write-off procedures for uncollectibleaccounts should be established. Possible criteria forwriting off some uncollectible accounts include thefollowing from Michigan’s collection policies:

A. Michigan’s policy for debts to be eligible fordischarge, which is a judicial action to forgivea debt, uses the following criteria, where acourt administrator identifies such debts andan assigned judge discharges them:4

• The debt is discharged by order of abankruptcy court.

• The debtor is deceased and the estate isclosed.

• The debt is uncollectible by operation oflaw.

This policy also establishes criteria forinactivating uncollectible debts, which is anadministrative procedure to remove a debtfrom the list of amounts the court can expectto collect, but does not constitute forgivenessof the debt; inactive debts are still payable bythe debtor. The court must be able to acceptpayment for all inactive debts, and return adebt to active status to resume appropriatecollection efforts.

A court should be ready to consider the effectof bankruptcy proceedings on an allegeddischarge of court costs, fees, and fines:

• Court-ordered fines, fees, and costs havenever been considered a debtdischargeable in a Chapter 7 bankruptcyproceeding.5

• If a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case iscommenced on or after October 22, 1994,then court-ordered fines, fees, and costsare considered debts that cannot bedischarged in a bankruptcy proceeding,and a court can fully enforce its ordersagainst a defendant.6

• Even if a defendant first files bankruptcyand is subsequently found guilty of anoffense, a court can still order him to payrestitution for the same loss that hadbeen discharged as a “debt.”7

B. A court may use the state’s record retentionschedule to write off uncollectible accounts.Although an account most likely is, from apractical point of view, uncollectible longbefore the purge date for the court record,using the state’s record retention schedule isa practical fall-back procedure to handle oldaccounts.

4 See Michigan Trial Court Collections Model Debt Inactivation Policy, http://courts.michigan.gov/scao/services/collections/Policies/SCAOModelPolicies/ModelDebtInactivationPolicy.pdf.5 See Kelly v. Robinson, 107 S. Ct. 353 (1986).6 See 11 U.S.C. Section 1328 (a).7 See Cabla v. State, 974 S. W. 2d 927 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.], 1998).

http://courts.michigan.gov/scao/services/collections/Policies/



Time limits on warrants can also be useful inmanaging the collections inventory. For warrantsissued on an initial failure to appear, some courts seta limit of two years, for example, for a warrant to beoutstanding, on the theory that an officer would beunable to remember the facts adequately to testifyat trial beyond that time. The court may find ituseful to issue time-limited warrants for minoroffenses. Doing so will ensure that a next eventdate, a hearing on dismissal or renewal of thewarrant, is entered in the court’s information systemwhich will automatically trigger a review and anaction on the case.

Documenting the reasons or the procedure forconverting accounts to an inactive status may not bea sensitive issue for a court but, if ever questioned,the court should be able to articulate its rationale.Demonstrating accountability means both (1) havingprocesses for collecting fines and fees owed, and (2)clarifying through reporting and policy what isactually owed to the court.

As with other public entities, many courts and otherjustice system agencies may not have had to paystrict attention to the bottom line in theiroperations. For the majority of courts, this haschanged in recent years as governmental dollarshave grown tighter, and taxpayers and fundingauthorities have demanded more-efficient and less-expensive public programs. Courts, therefore, mustconsider not only how much is being collected, butalso how much it costs to generate that revenue.

Practice Tips

A court needs to consider a number of issues indeveloping a collection strategy, and one is costversus return. For example, what is the total andper-dollar cost of collecting fines and fees by variousmethods (staff, postage, service, and collectionagency fees, etc.) and the likely return for investinggreater resources? Will a less-resource-intensiveprocess generate similar returns? Can technologyenhancements eliminate labor-intensive and less-efficient manual processes? At what point does thecost of collecting a group of delinquent fines surpassthe likely return? Please see Section 3.5 “Acceptanceof Payments Remotely” for examples of technologyand services to reduce the cost of collections.

Cost versus Benefits in PracticeA few courts rely almost entirely on personal serviceof delinquency notices on defendants who fail tomake timely payment. They assert that theirmethod is the best available because it generates agood return (they claim about a 70 percentcollection rate overall). However, the costs of theprocess are substantial. Some law enforcementofficers may need to be dedicated exclusively toserving notices or warrants. Multiple notices orattempts to locate may be required in many casesbefore payment is made, and the cost of this activitymust be weighed against the benefits derived.

2.9 Consider the Cost of Collections



The best programs use a mixture of strategies. Tokeep costs down, the best programs start withrelatively inexpensive, computer-generateddelinquency notices. Defendants on a formalpayment plan may receive a telephone call from thecollection unit. Initial written notices or telephonecalls clearly describe the subsequent steps the courtwill take if payment is not made. If the defendantfails to make payment, the court then undertakesmore-coercive, and more-expensive, efforts to forcecompliance. These usually include licensesuspension (for traffic offenses), issuance of awarrant, credit reporting, or civil enforcement, suchas wage garnishment or property liens.

Service of warrants is particularly problematic inmost jurisdictions. While the possibility of going tojail can be an effective threat, it is expensive toserve warrants and incarcerate defendants. Mostcourts rely on traffic stops or subsequent arrestsbecause they do not have enough staff to locate andserve defendants who have unpaid fines. In manylocalities, jail space is limited or unavailableimmediately so the defendant often is immediatelyreleased on recognizance or on limited bond andgiven a new date to appear. It’s a last resort. Thedefendant often fails once again to appear or pay,and the process starts over, unless the bond amountequaled the obligation due. State law often permitsthe defendant to voluntarily assign the bondamount to the fine obligation or forfeit the bondupon subsequent failure to appear.

After careful consideration, some courts havedetermined that serving warrants can be animportant and cost-justified function, despite therelated costs. One large urban court employs sixbailiffs who serve warrants and provide courtroomsecurity. They are uniformed and drive official-looking cars when they serve process and warrants.The bailiffs do not actually arrest defendants; it istoo expensive, and there is no room at the jail.However, the court has found that simply beingnotified of a warrant or capias in person is enoughto prompt most people to pay an outstanding fine.

Technique versus Cost:Coordinated Warrant SweepsPlanned warrant “sweeps” were reported to be asuccessful strategy by several courts. Each courtcoordinated with local law enforcement andcorrections officials to plan a mass effort to arrestdefendants with outstanding fines. Local mediawere notified to publicize the sweep. Word of thesweep reached the street quickly. The result waslong lines at the courthouse of defendants waitingto pay fines before they could be arrested.

In 2008, the Lehigh County, Pennsylvania AdultProbation Department and the Lehigh CountyBureau of Criminal Collections reported that theyconduct quarterly what is known locally as theDelinquent Accounts Re-Negotiation (DARN)Roundup. Supervisory staff in each office meetsapproximately six weeks in advance of thescheduled date and identify offenders on activesupervision who are more than 30 days delinquenton restitution and court costs.

Delinquent offenders are instructed by mail serviceto report to the Adult Probation Department’s largeconference room on the scheduled date by theirprobation officer. The letter also indicates that fullpayment will result in “consideration” for earlytermination from supervision. Ten offenders perhour are scheduled for joint meetings with an adultprobation officer and collections hearing officer,who strictly enforce payment agreements on theroundup date. Payment of arrearages is expectedand full payment to a zero balance is desirable;however, any amount is accepted.



Although every court’s collection system hasstatutory and local rules governing its operation, theroles of clerk, judge, prosecutor, law enforcement,and probation may not be explicitly delineated inpractice. Where responsibility for fine collections isnot clearly assigned to a single entity, generallycollections operations are less efficient. Leadershipand common understanding and expectations areneeded among the justice system operationsresponsible for collecting fines and fees so that thefine collection process does not flounder.

Other governmental agencies often play a criticalrole in contributing to the success or failure of a finecollection program, and collection administrators inthe better programs have carefully cultivated theircooperation. Major changes in the process proposedby the court are discussed first with other affectedagencies. Court representatives meet regularly withthe prosecutor, law enforcement, corrections, themotor vehicle registry and, sometimes, the publicdefender and private bar to discuss mechanisms forsystem-wide improvement.

Other government agencies may also be valuableinformation sources. Depending on state law andgovernment structure, courts have found that stateemployment offices, state- and local-administeredutilities, other courts, and law enforcement can bevery helpful in providing information needed tolocate delinquent defendants.

Practice Tips

One court sponsors a monthly interagency “breakfastclub,” a policy board composed of police,prosecutors, the court, and information services, todiscuss issues of mutual interest, (including collectionof fines and fees), problems, and opportunities.Another court has designed its collection strategywith the ongoing assistance of a task force ofinvolved agencies. However, in a surprising numberof courts, justice system participants involved incourt collection do not regularly meet.

As court and justice agency information systemsevolve to similar hardware and software platformsand communication and data exchanges betweenagencies becomes more feasible, ongoinginteragency dialogue has become even morenecessary. Through thoughtful system and interfacedesign, information interchanges can be enhancedand duplicative data-entry activities often can bereduced or eliminated, saving on time and resourcesfor all involved.

ConclusionWhile many ideas discussed in this chapter areexpanded upon in later chapters, Table 7 provides asummary of the best practice areas and specific keypractices we recommend be considered. Table 7 alsoindicates the later chapters that take up a topic inmore detail. The checklist at the far right provides aneasy way for a reader to monitor practices already inplace, those that should receive further scrutiny, andthose that might not be applicable in their situation.

2.10 Pursue Interagency/Inter-jurisdictionalCooperation



Table 7Best Practices and Local Practices Checklist

Best Practice Area Specific Practices toConsider

Checklist

AlreadyDo This

ConsiderThis inActionPlan

NotApplicable

2.1 Create Expectations through the FineCollection Atmosphere

Judge communicates expectationsfrom the benchSigns in court or hallways, etc.reinforce expectationsDocument practices to ensureprocedural fairnessCommunicate follow-up intent

2.2 Practice Leadership and Commitment Involve other participants, i.e.,clerks, law enforcement officers,warrant servers, prosecutorsSeek the backing of the majorityof judicial officersCommunicate expectations fromthe bench to all systemparticipants

2.3 Set Collection and Information Goals Set time-related goals (30 dayscollections, 90 days, etc.)Set amount goals

See Performance Measures in Chapter 11 Plan ways to monitor progress

2.4 Use a Systematic Communication Planwith Defendants

Provide written notice ofdefendants’ next due date, andamounts due (see Chapter 5)Communicate consistently, atevery step, and executecommunication wellBe sure that non-English speakersor poor readers know what isexpected

2.5 Establish Follow-Up ProcessesFor more detail, see Chapter 3 andChapter 5

Decide how to follow up withunpaid amounts:

Payment plans

Progressive escalation of writtennotices of amounts dueSuspend driver’s license

Providing alternative waysdefendants can pay, including:

Internet, either court or externalentity siteMail (direct to court or via banklock box)In-person (personal checks,credit cards, prepaid cards,electronic checks)



Best Practice Area Specific Practices toConsider

ChecklistAlreadyDo This

ConsiderThis inActionPlan

NotApplicable

Telephone voice responsesystem

In-house or external collectionpersonnelAccept payments at check-cashing locations, with fee paidby defendant

More coercive enforcement measures arediscussed in full in Chapter 8

Show-cause docket

Contempt citations

Bench warrant or threat of awarrantThreat to notify credit agencies

Time backlogged payment sweepsto coincide with “flush” moneyperiods

See Payment Alternatives in Chapter 4 Consider alternative “payments”

2.6 Consider Forming a SpecializedCollections Unit

Handle the “too busy” and “notcomfortable” staff

See In-House Collection Unit in Chapter 6 Develop specialized collectionsstaff if needed and possible

2.7 Provide Education and TrainingSee Routine Enforcement Techniques inChapter 5

Develop policies and proceduresthat support consistent and faircollections practices

See In-House Collection Unit in Chapter 6 Engage counter staff in learning tointeract at collectionsopportunities

2.8 Establish Accountability: Control theCollections InventorySee Sample Program in Chapter 13

Develop write-off proceduresensuring that truly uncollectibleaccounts do not remain in thecollections inventory

2.9 Manage the Cost of CollectionsSee Calculating Cost of Collections inChapter 11

Determine which collectionspractices provide the most returnfor the least outlay

See Legislative Issues in Chapter 12 Decide which collections practicesare not practical in the localsituation

2.10 Pursue Interagency/ Inter-jurisdictionalCooperationSee the role of probation/paroledepartments in Chapter 9

Cultivate cooperation with otheragencies whose responsibilitiesaffect collections success

Table 7 (Continued)Best Practices and Local Practices Checklist



Chapter 3METHODS OF PAYMENT AND

COMPLIANCEENFORCEMENT

In many courts, some percentage of guilty pleas andfine payments are mailed in by defendants.Accepting mailed payments shows that the courtwants to make it as easy as possible to comply.1

Issues to Guide Policymaking• How, if at all, is prepayment of fines and fees

encouraged?• How is the method of prepayment

communicated? Is it simple and clear?• What is the prepayment deadline, and is it

enforced to reduce the rush of last-minutepayments?

• Are partial prepayments accepted by mail? Ifso, what communication should there be toobtain further payments?

Practice Tips

To increase the number of payments by mail, severalcourts have persuaded law enforcement officers togive traffic offenders an envelope addressed to theclerk along with the citation or a schedule of fineamounts by offense. A distinctive preaddressedenvelope facilitates the handling of payments andprovides traffic defendants with written paymentinformation at the time of the stop, thussubstantially reducing the number of inquiry calls tothe court. Law enforcement also can hand outinformation on how to apply for “traffic school,” ifappropriate.

One urban court speeds up receipt of paymentssubstantially by using a post office box; paymentsare often received the day after they are mailed. Acourt should enter citation data as soon as possible,or allow counter clerks to initiate a “shell” case toaccept payments when the citation is not yetentered, to accept payment when it is offered andnot force a defendant to try again later. Most courtsaccept payment in person up to and including theappearance date. Many courts also accept mailedpayments after the appearance date if timelypostmarked, or allow a grace period before issuanceof a license suspension or warrant, to maximizepayment opportunities before proceeding withsanctions.

One court refuses and returns all mailed paymentsthat do not exactly match the fine due. Most courts,however, have decided that the better policy is toretain the funds and respond with either a demandletter for the balance due or a refund of the overage.For administrative convenience, some courts haveestablished a minimal level (a few dollars) ofoverpayment or underpayment that will be acceptedwithout adjustment. Staff members are instructedto deposit the funds and show the account satisfiedwithout further action if the payment falls within therange established by court leaders. Foroverpayments, a refund is sent only if the defendantrequests one.

3.1 Prepayment of Fines/Payment by Mail

1 Most courts accept payment by personal check, and some that do not accept checks at the courthouse will accept a mailed checkrather than turn away money.



As an aspect of growing interest in enhancedcustomer service, many courts have reviewed theprocess for fine payments and made efforts toimprove public access. In many urban centers, inparticular, the court is no longer close to majorpopulation centers. Courthouses are overcrowdedand parking is difficult. Limited hours may make atrip to the court inconvenient for workingindividuals. For these and other reasons, a numberof courts have begun to experiment with alternativepayment methods and locations.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• How can the court modify its courthouse

operations to enhance public access for in-person fine payments through extendedhours, kiosks, or drop boxes?

• Should the policy be to discourage paymentsat the court to reduce traffic at thecourthouse, through remote paymentalternatives via Internet, telephone voice-response system, or commercial money-transfer agents?

Practice Tips

Some large urban courts offer very good service tothe public by keeping a window open to acceptpayments 24 hours each day. Night staff alsoprepare dockets for the next day and perform othertasks during the evening hours.

A few courts have installed voice-response systemsconnected to their computer systems which permitpeople, using a touch-tone telephone, to enter acitation number, find out the amount of the fine andthe court date, and even postpone a court dateonce. This kind of system is available 24 hours a dayand saves considerable staff time.

A few courts offer a drop box for payments.Although this has the drawback of not giving a payera receipt, payments by check or money order areself-receipting. One court has a drive-up window. Afew courts offer payment through an automaticteller machine (ATM) or a kiosk; this solutioninvolves significant development and equipmentcosts, although the expense will decrease as thehardware and software are more widely used.

Another court has an arrangement with a grocerychain to accept and forward payments at storelocations (similar to more-common utility-bill-payment outlets). Some courts accept paymentsthrough Western Union. They feel that thearrangement is used primarily by defendants whoare uncomfortable entering the courthouse, eitherbecause they don’t understand the legal process orare concerned that other legal problems may bediscovered if they appear in person.

3.2 In-Person Payments



A majority of courts accept personal checks undersome circumstances. The philosophy of these courtsis to make payment as easy as possible fordefendants. Most reported that bad checks are nota significant problem. Defendants are ordered toresubmit payment by cash or money order, alongwith a processing fee (usually about $20). If thedefendant fails to pay as ordered, the case isprocessed as any other delinquent payment.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Should the court accept personal checks and,

if not, is that consistent with a policy to makepayment as convenient as possible for adefendant?

• Should availability of funds be verified beforeaccepting personal checks?

• Should the court accept electronic checks,either with bank account number and routingnumber, or conversion of information from apaper check into an electronic payment fromthe person’s bank account to be processedthrough the ACH Electronic PaymentsAssociation?

• What administrative procedures exist forbounced checks? Can the court maintain a listof defendants who have “bounced” checksand refuse to accept future payments bycheck?

• Can the court legally impose a fee or servicecharge for a nonsufficient funds (NSF) check(either a flat amount or a percentage)? If a feeis imposed, is it adequate to cover the costs ofprocessing a bad check?

Practice Tips

In one jurisdiction, courts do not accept personalchecks because an archaic state law imposespersonal liability on the clerk for the full amount ofany bad check accepted by the court. This isprobably a highly unusual provision, but any courtpreparing to change its policy regarding checkacceptance should confirm that the court will notincur any penalty and that the costs of processingbad checks can be passed on to the defendant.

Paper and electronic checks take several days for thefunds to clear a person’s bank account, and checksmay “bounce” for insufficient funds or the accounthas been closed either inadvertently or fraudulently.A court should post notice of a fee charged forreturned checks.

3.3 Acceptance of Personal Checks



A growing number of courts accept credit cards forface-to-face payments. Many states have lawsgoverning the acceptance of credit cards by publicagencies. The primary issue raised by credit-cardpayments is who is to cover the transaction feerelated to card use. Different strategies have beendeveloped in the courts. State law and merchantagreements generally govern whether the feecharged by a financial institution for handling credittransactions (a) can be passed on to the customer(defendant) or (b) must be absorbed by the court asa cost of doing business.2 A third option available tosome of the larger systems is to have the bankabsorb the costs as part of the court’s bankingpackage.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Can the court accept credit-cards under state

law?• Who bears the expense of processing credit

card payments?• Is there legal authority for charging

defendants with the cost of credit-cardpayment processing, or will the court or thevendor absorb the cost? Is it statutory or canthe chief judge issue an administrative order?Can the court’s banking institution beconvinced to absorb all or part of thetransaction costs?

• Should the court accept payments withprepaid cards (i.e., a stored value card withmonetary value on the card, not in anexternally recorded account)?

Practice Tips

This section was written by Amy Johnson, FARE/DSOBusiness Analyst (Fines/Fees and RestitutionEnforcement), Arizona Supreme Court.

In Arizona the practice of accepting credit-cardpayments has increased greatly to accommodatedefendants by offering a convenient way to payamounts due. There are several courts that set upand maintain their own credit-card machines toaccept payments. This has proven very beneficial forthose courts that are rural. One of the complaintsheard is that the merchant account fees assessed tothe case for this convenience charges up to 6% ofeach payment received, which defendants and somecourt staff alike feel is much too high.

Notices are mailed to defendant describing theArizona Fines/Fees and Restitution Enhancement(FARE) program and providing Web/IVR paymentoptions. These notices are mailed for pre- and post-disposition cases as well, which may help encouragethe defendant to make a payment even before thecase becomes delinquent.

Credit card fees are absorbed by our vendor on back-end delinquency collections. For other transactionsthrough FARE, the cost is borne by the FAREprogram. The Web/IVR payment option has helpedto increase collections in all areas, but especially inrural areas where citations are issued to drivers whoare just “passing through.”

Some courts use a third-party vendor to processcredit-card payments, which can be made online orby phone 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Thereare no merchant account fees paid by the court;instead, the payer pays a transaction fee directly tothe vendor. The vendor provides flyers that list thephone number, Web site, and transaction fees.These flyers can be posted at payment windows,provided by law enforcement when traffic citationsare issued, and mailed with notices to thedefendant.

3.4 Payment by Credit Card

2 Merchant agreements typically prohibit passing the fee on to the customer, although business policies are changing.



Allowing defendants to pay their financial obligationswithout going to the courthouse is beneficial forseveral reasons. As with software system interfacesdescribed in Section 10.3, an automated interfacewith a payment gateway avoids data entry frompaper and the issues associated with it: resourceexpense of handling paper and performing dataentry, delay in processing, and errors in data entry.

The cost per financial transaction for remotepayments decreases significantly compared to takingpayments across the counter.3

Interactive Voice Response (IVR)IVR is a technology that allows a computer to detecttelephone voice and keypad inputs. The personcalling can enter citation number, credit-cardnumber, and answers to “Yes/No” questions usingthe telephone keypad or verbally. IVR systems canrespond with prerecorded or dynamically generatedaudio responses to direct users on how to proceed,including verifying a citation number and entering acredit-card number for payment. Defendants canmake payments by telephone 24/7, and the public isaccustomed to this kind of convenience. Anautomated interface matching payments andaccounts is highly desirable.

A side benefit is that IVR systems allow callers to getneeded information 24 hours a day and obtain datarelatively anonymously. They can also be used as afront end to individual staff or call centers to answermany calls without requiring the assistance ofcustomer service personnel. In such cases, IVR keepsthem from constantly having to answer the samesimple questions. A properly designed IVRapplication can respond to a caller’s needs promptly

and with a minimum of complexity. Badly designedIVRs (like many help-desk call-center systems) haveresulted in knee-jerk criticism for the technology asbeing unhelpful, difficult to use, frustrating, andannoying. Some callers object to responding to anyautomated system and prefer speaking with ahuman respondent.

Internet PaymentMost courts contract with a credit-card processor(payment gateway) to provide Internet paymentprocessing. A county or state may already contractwith a credit-card processor, so a court may be ableto piggyback onto an existing contract.

An Internet payment usually follows the followingsequence of events:1. The defendant enters identifying information on

a secure court Web page with personalinformation, including a credit-card number,encrypted so it cannot be intercepted and readby a third party.

2. The credit-card processor checks the informationit received about the payment to ensure it has allthe information it needs to continue processingthe transaction. It then determines whichcompany manages the defendant’s credit cardand transmits a request for the card to becharged.

3. The defendant’s credit-card company validatesthe card and the account. If everything checksout correctly and the credit card is clear forpurchases, the credit-card company sends anacknowledgement back to the card processorthat the amount requested can be transferred. Ifthe credit-card company denies the charge itsends a code back to the credit card processorindicating what the problem was.

4. The credit-card processor now tells the casemanagement system whether or not thetransaction was successful, and the Web sitethen tells the defendant whether or not the

3.5 Acceptance of Payments Remotely

3 In 2008 the Orange County (Florida) Clerk of Court reported that the cost of an in-person financial transaction was $1.88. Bycontrast, the cost of an IVR payment was $0.43; the cost of an internet payment was $0.13; payment through Western Union was$0; payment through a local commercial payment agent (AMSCOT) was $0.43; and payment through a lockbox was $0.43.



payment transaction was complete, with aconfirmation number. The credit-card processorinitiates a funds transfer to the court’s bankaccount for deposit.

5. A payment report is mailed daily to the courtlisting payments made (for the court to use toreceipt payments into the case managementsystem if there is no automated interface),broken down by amount received for each case,type of card used, case number the payment wasmade on, and total amount received.

The court accounting staff then reconciles paymentsin the bank account with the list of payments fromthe credit card processor. Defendants can makeInternet payments 24/7, and the public isaccustomed to this kind of convenience. Anautomated interface matching payments andaccounts is highly desirable.

A side benefit is that Internet payment systems allowcallers to get needed information 24 hours a day andobtain data relatively anonymously.

Commercial Money-Transfer AgentsThe court may contract with money-transfer agentsthat operate nationally (like Western Union orMoneyGram) or locally (like check-cashingbusinesses). Defendants pay a transaction fee basedon total dollar amount, or the court may absorb thefee. Locally based money-transfer agents may offera variety of services to the consumer, includingcheck cashing, utility payments, payday advance, andmoney orders. The benefit of this approach isproviding a larger number of off-site paymentlocations for defendants to pay their courtobligations. An automated interface matchingpayments and accounts is highly desirable.

LockboxA lockbox is an arrangement in which defendants aregiven a post office box to mail payments, and a localfinancial institution receives, receipts, andimmediately deposits a court’s mailed-in payments.No fee is assessed to the defendant. Followingreceipt of the funds, the bank forwards thepaperwork sent with the payment (typically a copy

of the ticket or summons) and deposit informationto the court for further processing. An automatedinterface matching payments and accounts is highlydesirable.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Assuming the cost of conducting face-to-face

transactions is known, is it cost-effective toreceive and process remote payments?

• Is an automated interface feasible, and atwhat up-front cost?



Most courts accept partial, installment, and deferredpayments, either through formal payment plans, orwhen the judge in the courtroom makes a verbalorder (i.e.“Pay by 5:00 PM on Friday”).

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Is there an established practice or written

guidelines for granting a payment plan todefendants?

• Is there a minimum amount for fines and feesthat does not qualify for a payment plan, andare defendants expected to be able to pay?

• If the judge agrees to a payment plan, ordelegates authority for this decision to staff, isthere a procedure if the defendant fails tofollow through?

• Are forms designed for this purpose? Is thedefendant required to provide financial andpersonal information and sign a paymentagreement before leaving the courthouse?

• Are payment dates and enforcementprocedures clearly specified in the paymentagreement?

• What is the potential effect on clerical andadministrative personnel in managing paymentplans?

• If a defendant requests a payment plan for anadditional case, should it be added to anexisting plan or should it become anotherpayment plan to take effect after the first oneis completed?

• What happens when a payment is missed? Dostaff members take prompt action in responseto missed payments?

• What grace period, if any, is allowed before aninstallment becomes delinquent? Should anybe allowed? Does the payment agreementprovide that notice be sent before the courttakes action on the delinquency?

• Are there additional penalties for failure tomake installment payments (for example,

show-cause hearing, additional fine, or driver’slicense suspension), and should notice be sentbefore additional penalties are imposed?

• Are terms realistic and not overly lenient?

Practice Tips

Processing partial and installment payments can be asignificant burden upon clerk’s office staff,particularly in courts with manual accounting andcase-tracking systems or cumbersome automatedsystems. The processing of partial paymentsbecomes particularly complicated when fines andcosts must be collected and disbursed to variousagencies, as is the case in most states. Thealternative is to permit only full payments, a practiceadopted by a number of limited jurisdiction courtsfor fines in the $100 to $200 range. These courtsreport that payment rates have not suffered as aresult of refusing partial or deferred payments ofrelatively small fines. The administrative savings innot carrying payment plans for such cases furtherjustifies the decision.

Despite the administrative burden imposed bypartial payments, the majority of courts acceptthem, primarily through terms of a payment plan.This conforms to a policy that it is always better tohave some payment on an account than none. Evencourts with relatively unsophisticated informationsystems have devised methods for accounting forpartial payments. Some accept the installments, butwait to disburse funds until the account is fully paid.4

Many courts have established a priority fordisbursements, i.e., the first funds received areapplied to restitution, a victim/witness fund, or courtcosts. When the first priority disbursement issatisfied, funds are applied to the next disbursementin the hierarchy. When a clerk’s office compiles itslist of desired improvements to a computer system,the ability to handle partial payments automaticallythrough a payment plan deserves relatively highpriority to conserve labor resources and ensureaccurate accounting.

3.6 Partial-Payment, Installment, and DeferredPayment Plans

4 This practice produces questionable results if no further payment is ever made. The court’s financial module should be able to tracksuch amounts and disburse them periodically or at such time as it appears that no additional payments are forthcoming.



Chapter 4PAYMENT ALTERNATIVES

AND CAPACITY TO PAY

Every court has alternatives to payment toaccommodate indigent defendants or others aspermitted by statute.

Every court permits indigent defendants tosubstitute community service for payment of a fine.Typically, community-service programs areadministered through the jurisdiction’s probationdepartment, while the work itself is overseen by anoutside governmental or nonprofit agency. Somesmaller courts do not have a formal community-service program. Instead, defendants make theirown arrangements for service and provide the courtwith proof that the required hours were completed.A standard hourly rate, usually minimum wage, iscredited for the service. The fine is “paid” when thevalue of the number of hours worked equals theamount of the fine.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Is community service a realistic alternative to a

fine?• How is eligibility verified?• Is the time of actual service verified? How is it

verified?• What happens if service is not successfully

completed?• How are dollars of a fine and costs translated

into hours of service (at what rate is servicecredited)?

• Which assessments can community service beperformed in lieu of and which assessmentsmust be paid?

Practice Tips

Challenges to offering community service include theproclivity of offenders not reporting to work whenneeded, and their need for constant supervision.The jurisdiction can operate its own communityservice program, or outsource labor to non-profitagencies and organizations. A court should considerwhether and how to offer community service tooffenders convicted of serious offenses, includingsex-related assault, burglary, habitual drug use, andviolent crimes.

Common complaints regarding community-serviceadministration arise in many courts:

• problems of insufficient staff to assign andsupervise workers.

• difficulty in finding agencies willing to acceptcommunity-service workers.

• lack of reporting of (and slow response to)noncompliance with community-serviceorders.

Exposure to liability for community service workersalso is an issue for many collection programs.Potential liability for the courts or supervising agencydepends on state law. A few states have specificstatutes granting immunity to the court and theentity providing the community service assignment.Other jurisdictions charge program participants afee, which pays a liability insurance premiumcovering the participating entities. Still in otherjurisdictions, community service workers are coveredunder the workers’ compensation insurance policy,prompting some judges to order into communityservice only healthy defendants who are unlikely tofile claims under the insurance policy.

If a jurisdiction operates its own community serviceprogram, they should provide a short orientationabout what’s expected, when the defendant shouldreport to work, and the work rules. Defendants gettwo chances to do a job correctly, and then he or sheis sent back to the judge.

4.1 Community Service in Lieu of Fine Payment



Community-service programs provide locations,dates, and times that defendants can performcommunity-service hours, and rules of conduct.Courts have the option to set a rule to disqualifydefendants from working that day, if they show uplate.

The defendant needs to feel like he or she isreporting to a paying employer, because it sets alevel of expectation.

Multiple times, shifts, and locations provide moreoptions. Some weekends are available.

Proper recordkeeping is critical. A sign-in sheetshould include dates, times, and referring agency.Software is needed to keep track of hours.

Staff must supervise community-services workers atall times, list areas that are allowed to work in, andduties they are allowed to perform.

One of the realities of fine collection is that after adefendant seeks and is given a chance to makepayments, the defendant may willfully default andfail to appear or comply. The usual result is issuanceof a warrant and eventual arrest, sometimes forunrelated reasons like new charges. The judge has achoice to continue to seek payment or subordinatethe collection effort to new and sometimes moreserious charges. For reasons of judicial economy,that the limited resources of the legal system or agiven court should be conserved, the judge may viewthe entire circumstances of the defendant and offerthe defendant cancellation or reduction of theamount due based on time served in jail.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• What is the daily cost of housing an inmate in

the jail?• Is there consensus among judges in the

jurisdiction of the amount that should becredited for time served?

• Which assessments can jail time be served inlieu of payment and which assessments mustbe paid?

4.2 Time Served in Lieu of Fine Payment



Traffic school has been adopted by a number ofjurisdictions. The claimed benefits of traffic schoolsinclude a reduced burden on the justice systembecause cases are delivered out of the formal courtprocess, and the prevention of future violations byproviding instruction in safe driving habits. Driverselecting traffic school rarely save any money; often,administrative fees and traffic school costs exceedthe amount of the potential fine. However, theyusually avoid the reporting of a violation to theirinsurance company and a related rise in premium, orthe imposition of points.

In addition to traffic schools, a few jurisdictions havestarted to experiment with similar remedialprograms for defendants arrested on minormisdemeanor offenses.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Does state law allow diversion of traffic

defendants through traffic school?• Can a local sponsor (community college or

nonprofit organization) be found?• How are traffic schools evaluated for the

quality and effectiveness of their programs?

Practice Tips

The National Safety Council accredits traffic schoolsnationwide. A local community college or anonprofit organization such as Mothers AgainstDrunk Driving (MADD) may be enlisted to sponsor atraffic school.

In a few courts, the collection officer helpsdefendants find work to ensure that they can paytheir fines. It is usually limited, informal assistance,but it can be effective in getting fines and fees paid.

Practice Tips

Although judges and collection staff are usually toobusy to devote much time to helping defendants finda job, providing the telephone number of the localoffice of the state employment department or a daylabor business may help a defendant obtainemployment.

In the spirit of problem-solving courts, a probationdepartment or collection unit can seek to promoteoutcomes that will benefit not only the defendant,but the victim and society as well. Some defendantsdo not have the skills to budget and handle theirmoney, so an agency can offer financialmanagement counseling, with voluntaryparticipation, operated like a consumer-credit-counseling service. Some agencies offer a monthlyclass with a financial adviser.

4.3 Traffic School 4.4 Assistance in Finding Jobs

4.5 Financial Counseling



Chapter 5ROUTINE ENFORCEMENT

TECHNIQUES

To provide offenders with the proper informationbefore the initial court appearance and to increasethe number of defendants who come to courtprepared to pay in full any fine and fee assessed, aprehearing notice may be distributed by thearresting officer or mailed to the defendant or thedefendant’s attorney of record. The notice shouldclearly and plainly tell the defendant when andwhere to appear; the amount or the range of thefine to be assessed on a finding of guilt; methods ofpayment accepted by the court; sanctions that willbe imposed if the defendant fails to appear asordered; and, if it is the court’s policy, that paymentin full is required at the time of sentencing.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Will a prehearing notice sufficiently increase

payment of fines to justify the expense of theeffort?

• Is a computer system available to print thenotices in a timely manner?

• How can a notice distribution program becoordinated with local law enforcement andthe citing officer?

Practice Tips

A number of courts found that their area lawenforcement officers were against distributingnotices at the time of arrest. They were concernedthat including the amount of the fine, in particular,may cause some individuals to become violent.However, no problems of the sort were reported injurisdictions using this practice. One court reporteda substantial drop in pre-appearance telephoneinformation requests after officers began distributinghearing and payment information with the citation.

While notices often must include a lot ofinformation, the court should ensure that the noticesare in easy-to-read, non-legal language. Withoutattention to reading level and form design, formsmay be difficult to comprehend for defendants whoare unfamiliar with the legal system, have lowliteracy levels or limited ability to read English, orsuffer from vision impairments. Notices can bedifficult to read and can be intimidating, especially ifall of the text is in capital letters, the printing is small,and/or if statutes are quoted in their stiltedlanguage.

5.1 Notice Before Initial Appearance



A series of standardized actions should be specifiedfor staff to follow when defendants fail to complywith payment plans or other court orders. The courtshould carry out the threatened steps promptlyupon noncompliance.

Examples of the actions taken upon default includethe following:

• A telephone call to the defendant at work orat home by court staff

• A mailed demand notice warning of thesanctions to be applied if payment is not made(e.g., suspension of driver’s license, additionalpenalties, threat to report the obligation tocredit-reporting agencies, issuance of warrant)

• Suspension or nonrenewal of driver’s licenseor vehicle registration, as permitted by statelaw

• Imposition of a late fee on outstanding finesand fees

• Releasing the account to a private collectionagency

• Institution of contempt/show-causeproceedings

• Issuance of warrant, with setting of cash bondrequired for release

• Accrual of interest on delinquent fines andfees or restitution judgment

• Assignment or garnishment of wages• Setoffs of state income tax refunds or

gambling or lottery winnings• Filing of a property lien, seizure of bank

accounts, or impoundment of vehicle• Electronically monitored home confinement

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Are sanctions available under state law

identified for all situations?• How can court management ensure that

sanctions will be consistently applied followingnoncompliance?

Practice Tips

The key to successful enforcement for nonpaymentis quick and authoritative action in accordance withcourt guidelines.

For traffic offenses, driver’s license suspensionshould routinely be used if permitted by statute.Most drivers will pay fines to keep their license ingood standing. Notifying the defendant beforesuspending the driver’s license is an obvious step.Even if it is not required by statute, advancenotification of the suspension probably encouragessome defendants to pay before it occurs and offersthe court another opportunity to warn of the fullrange of sanctions available.

For defendants arrested on a warrant, “shockincarceration” (for perhaps 24 hours), in conjunctionwith efforts to get the defendant to raise the fundsneeded to pay the fine and fees may be effective.For many, jail is an unpleasant enough experience toobtain compliance. Most courts reported that themere threat of jail following arrest on a warrant wasenough to inspire many defendants to either paytheir fines or post bond.

After the notice of suspension is sent, the warrant isissued, or civil enforcement attempted (i.e., wagegarnishment), some courts then release the accountto a collection agency (discussed in the next section).Others continue collection efforts in-house, turningaccounts over to a private agency only at a pointwhen no payments have been made for a certainperiod or the court is unable to locate thedefendant.

5.2 Actions Upon Nonpayment



State law may allow the imposition of a flat penaltyamount for failure to appear or for late payments,accrual of interest on fines or on costs, or both.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Under state law or court rule, can a late fee be

imposed? Can interest on fines, costs, orrestitution accrue?

• Is the late fee appropriate? Is it high enough toencourage compliance? Is it so high thatjudges tend to waive the fee because they feelit is too great a penalty?

• How does interest accrue (flat percentage,sliding scale)?

• Are there times (such as when a fine, costs, orboth are being paid in installment payments)when interest cannot accrue?

• Can the computer system calculate interest?

Practice Tips

One court demonstrated the effectiveness ofthreatening to charge a late fee. The court’s policyhad been to send a demand letter immediately aftera defendant failed to appear or pay as ordered,stating that a late fee would be imposed if theaccount was not satisfied within 10 days. Courtleadership decided to reduce staff time and costs byeliminating the warning letter, although theycontinued to impose the late fee. The result was animmediate increase in unpaid fines. The courtquickly reinstated the warning, and compliancelevels rose again to prior levels.

Credit bureaus can provide information aboutdefendants. Please see Section 11.1, “ObtainingDefendant Information for Collection Purposes”.Credit reporting also is a possible sanction fornonpayment, and the threat alone of reporting theobligation may increase the likelihood of payment.Many individuals purchase consumer goods oncredit, and a threat to their credit ratings can be astrong incentive.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• How much will credit reporting cost; will the

returns justify the expense?• How difficult is credit reporting to manage

administratively?

Practice Tips

A court should explore costs related to creditreporting of delinquent accounts. Credit reportingcan be limited to cases in which a defendant isdelinquent, although the court may considerreporting the outstanding obligation in all cases inwhich a defendant is paying a substantial fine overtime. Doing so would be similar to commercialcreditors reporting the amount of outstanding debts,even for current accounts, to warn others thatgranting further credit may be risky. If creditreporting is pursued by a court, a warning thatnegative credit reporting may result should be addedto delinquency notices.

A court can become a member of a credit bureau ata nominal annual cost. A few courts that include astatement in a demand letter that credit reporting isa “potential sanction” for nonpayment havediscovered that the threat alone, even if not carriedout, is highly effective. The warning seemed to workespecially well with out-of-state defendants who hadignored prior threats of a warrant (presumablybelieving that as they had no plans to return to thejurisdiction, they were beyond the reach of awarrant).

5.3 Late Fees on Fines and Costs 5.4 Use of Credit Information Services



Credit reporting must be very carefully managed toensure absolute accuracy in reporting. The courtmust ensure that initial reports are correct and thatpayment information is provided promptly to thereporting service to update the record. Whenaccounts are outsourced to a commercial collectionagency, the agency may perform credit reporting.

This section was written by Nadine Jenkins, Director ofCollections, Montgomery County, Texas.

In 2008, the Montgomery County Collections Unitconsidered adding reporting court debts to creditbureau reporting as a component to the collectionsprocess. During the same period of time, the threemajor credit bureaus, Experian, TransUnion, andEquifax, were contemplating whether to accept thereporting of delinquent payments of fines and fees incriminal offenses and traffic offenses. Theinvestigation revealed the following information:

• The cost of reporting delinquencies was fairlysubstantial. One piece of software wasnecessary to submit a delinquency, andanother for the recalling of the case reported.

• The return on investment was not positiveonce the costs of: labor for submitting andrecalling a debt, notification to advise thedefendant of the process, and postage, wereincluded.

• Recalling traffic-violation submissionsrequired additional labor, and the cost ofrecalling and submitting was great due tovolume and would require staff dedicatedstrictly to that process.

• In-house collections and flagging of thedefendant’s driver’s license had a much moresignificant return on investment of labor andother resources, and generated a much fasterturnaround response time in generatingrevenue.

• Most people with misdemeanors and felonieshave bad credit already.

Ultimately the three credit bureaus decided not tosupport the reporting of delinquent fines and fees,and such debts would not be considered whenscoring a person’s ability to extend credit terms.Based on all of these factors above, the county chosenot to implement.



Chapter 6IN-HOUSE COLLECTION

UNIT


The court or an assigned unit may take responsibilityfor all aspects of collection, sometimes with theorganizational support of the local government.Responsibility may include the initial collection forthose who pay immediately, setting up paymentplans, and following up on delinquent accounts.Courts that take this approach typically are thosethat have enough resources to conduct the entireprocess.

Another approach is for a group of courts to bandtogether to form the collection unit. Considerationsfor courts’ banding together should includegeographical location, jurisdictional differences, andemployment differences.

This model works well in part because the staff isorganized as an independent unit, not simply clerksassigned to collection tasks. Processes and tasks areclearly collection or enforcement oriented. Statecourts that are in a non-unified, locally fundedsystem may consider this approach. State-funded orunified court systems may be more likely to havestatewide resources for courts to draw on at somepoint in the collection process.

The advantage of an in-house approach is that thecourt has responsibility and, consequently, controlover the entire process. Improving collections canoccur at any point, and changes can be made to theprocess for improvements. Staff can be hired basedon skills related to collection tasks. These skills arenot necessarily the same skills that may be used in aclerk’s office or courtroom.

Montgomery County, Texas, is an example of thismodel. This county developed its own collection unitspecifically to address all misdemeanor and felonyoffenses. The collection unit was initiated by onejudge and one county commissioner who decidedthat they did not have the time or expertise toreview and develop payment plans for the manydefendants. The collection department grew fromone court (judge) and one employee to collecting for11 courts (judges) with 14 employees. It is a self-supporting unit.

6.1 Organizational Considerations of In-HouseCollection Unit



As described in Section 1.3 “Role of State JudicialLeadership,” the Texas Office of CourtAdministration (OCA) established a CollectionImprovement Program to assist cities and countieswith collecting fines, court costs, and fees assessedwhen defendants are not prepared to pay allamounts at the time of assessment, and when timeto pay is requested. Program requirementsexempted collection of victim-restitution orcommunity-supervision fees.

Setting up a program in a city or county meanssetting up a collection unit. The OCA expected eachlocality to determine under which office or branch of

government the collection program would mostappropriately operate and agreed to be satisfied aslong as the operation complied with the CollectionImprovement Program requirements and allapplicable statutes for the collection of fines, courtcosts, and fees.

The OCA acknowledged that staffing requirementsvary greatly depending on court type, volume, andtraffic. Generally, one person should be able tosupport court volumes ranging from 10,000 to15,000 convictions (including deferred adjudicationsin that term) annually.

The rules under which these Collection ImprovementPrograms operate are set forth in Table 8 below. 1

These activities are not intended for defendantswho have been determined to be indigent.

6.2 Organization of the Collection Unit’s Work

Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component1. Written CollectionsProcedures

Importance• A written procedure ensures consistency and provides a blueprint that can be

used regardless of changes in personnel.

Flexibility• Some programs have created detailed procedure manuals.• Some programs rely on internal memos and other written directives.

Table 8Components of Texas Collection Improvement Program

1 www.courts.state.tx.us/pubs/courtex/collections-edition-2007.pdf

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/pubs/courtex/collections-edition-2007.pdf



Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component

2. Dedicated Staff Importance• Without dedicated staff, collection activities tend to be neglected or ignored;

cases are not continuously monitored to ensure payments are made, phonecalls and notices to delinquent defendants are not timely, and a large backlogof uncollected cases develops.

• Staff should have a basic understanding of collections (in this context,collections is not defined as receipting money or cashiering). The collectionsfunction is designed to facilitate payment/compliance by applying collectionsindustry techniques to encourage the offender to pay (comply).

• Historically, staff turnover rates in the collections industry lead all otherprofessional categories. This reflects the difficulty of the job and why it canrarely be effective if attempted on a casual basis.

Flexibility• Each local program must have a minimum of one staff person whose priority

job function is collection activities. The priority collection job function may beconcentrated in one individual employee or distributed among two or moreemployees and need not require 40 hours per week of FTE time.

• Designed to ensure that the collection of court costs, fees, and fines is apriority.

3. Immediate PaymentExpectation

Importance• Immediate compliance reduces the court’s costs associated with managing

compliance, and it reduces the increased risk of arrest for the defendant.• If defendants have the opportunity to postpone compliance with the court’s

order, most of them will.• Decreases staff workload - instead of processing many payments from each

defendant, you only have to deal with one.• Sends a clear message of compliance.

Flexibility• Generally, the judge announces from the bench before court begins that court

costs, fees, and fines will be due upon assessment.• Some programs post notices in key areas around the courthouse and

sometimes in the courtroom itself.• Some programs advise criminal justice system stakeholders of this

requirement through meetings and memos.

Table 8 (continued)Components of Texas Collection Improvement Program




4. Application andContact Information

Importance• Designed to capture contact information and determine financial ability to

pay.• Defendants who need time to pay usually do not object to completing the

application, while others who actually can pay in full will do so and leavebecause they do not want to spend unnecessary time and effort to completethe form.

• Prevents setting a defendant up for failure. By having and reviewing adefendant’s financial status, collections staff can place the defendant on anappropriate payment plan.

• Without this process the defendant is placed on the “honor system.” Privatecompanies and financial institutions do not extend credit without firstobtaining contact and financial status information from the borrower, whyshould the courts? One need only look at the FIRST step taken by the privatesector (skip tracing), when an account is referred to collections, to understandthe importance of this component.

• Personal identifiers, such as Social Security numbers and bank accountnumbers, are not required or recommended on the application form.

Flexibility• Ideally, the application is taken immediately following court by the

collections/compliance office or officer.• One municipal court takes the application during court before the defendant

sees the judge.• One county takes the application during pre-sentence hearings for their

criminal misdemeanor defendants.• Several counties take applications for justice court cases over the phone.• One municipal court distributes applications at sentencing and defendants are

given 10 days to return it or pay in full.• Programs may use a single form for both the application and contact

information. The required information must be obtained within 30 days of theassessment date.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component5. Verification ofContact Information

Importance• Simple verification of two key pieces of information (home/contact phone and

employment/source of income) is essential. Experience shows that if thesetwo pieces of information are correct, then the remaining information on anapplication is most likely correct.

• In the (different, but not unrelated) context of indigent defense, the TaskForce on Indigent Defense recently released a study, which concluded that “acomprehensive screening and verification program would generate financialbenefits for those counties with a sufficient number of criminal arraignments.”

Flexibility• Ideally, verification by a collections/compliance office or officer is completed

while the defendant is at court.• In one municipal court, the bailiffs verify the information on the application

during court and before the defendant sees the judge.• In one county, the application is forwarded to the collections/compliance

office within 24 hours of appearance for verification.• Several counties use an automated system to verify information on the

application while the defendant is still in the courthouse.

6. Defendant Interview Importance• According to the American Collectors Association the number-one reason for

payment default is confusion; this problem can be magnified in the justicesystem. This component is designed to ensure the defendant knows his/herresponsibility and the consequences of failure.

• If this component is applied effectively, the defendant should always knowwhat to do and who to contact if there is a problem.

Flexibility• Ideally, the interview is conducted by the collections/compliance office or

officer before the defendant leaves the courthouse.• In one city, interviews are conducted by the judge after the application has

been completed and verified.• In one city, interviews are conducted by designated staff at the cashier’s

window following court.• In several counties, interviews for justice courts are conducted by the

collections staff over the phone within 48 to 72 hours following courtappearance.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component7. Payment Terms Importance

• Designed to expedite the payment process wherever and whenever possible.For example, a 48-month payment term for a $250 assessment (or theequivalent of a $5.20 payment per month) simply is impractical in most cases.Collections are reduced when a community-supervision case is revoked andthe full payment has not been received.

• The longer a defendant is in the system, the greater opportunity there is fordefault.

• The longer a defendant is in the system, the greater the expense burden toboth the defendant and the system.

• The program is not designed to create court orders. It is designed to create aspecific framework for the enforcement of court orders.

Flexibility• The application of this component must never conflict with judicial authority

or discretion.• One example is: For misdemeanors – 50% of the total amount due must be

paid within 48 hours, 80% within 30 days, and 100% within 60 days. Forfelonies – the payment terms are generally shorter than the term ofcommunity supervision/deferred adjudication or parole. Payment terms forstate jail felonies should be similar to other felonies except payment termsshould generally begin after release. Please note these are examples only. Anypayment terms established or ordered by the court acting within its statutoryauthority or discretion is acceptable.

• Ideally, payment terms are uniform and relatively short. They are establishedby the collections/compliance office or officer in individual cases, using theguidelines promulgated by the judge(s).

• One county requires non-probation misdemeanor defendants to pay in fullwithin 30 days or face jail. Defendants on probation must pay within the termof probation.

• Several counties assign both probation and non-probation misdemeanors tothe collections/compliance office, with payment terms established by theoffice – those terms do not generally exceed 90 to 120 days.

• One county court at law requires defendants to pay in full within 90 days ofsentencing, but allows extended-term payment plans if the defendant cannotpay in full within 90 days.

• One county requires payment in full within six months.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component8. Account/PaymentPlan ComplianceMonitor

Importance• Designed to ensure effective case compliance management and timely follow-

up of cases in which the offender defaults.• Timely follow-up is crucial to the collections process. Poor follow-up is usually

at the root of any troubled collections program.

Flexibility• Ideally, cases are assigned to the collections/compliance staff to monitor for

compliance.• One county employs a single coordinator that monitors each court to ensure

the court staff is monitoring compliance with payment agreements.• Several cities and counties have court collection software programs that

monitor cases for compliance automatically.

9. Phone Contact Importance• This is generally the first step (along with sending a notice) in any standard

collection process. It is standard operating practice to initiate phone contactas soon as possible following default.

• Timely follow-up is crucial to the collections process. Poor follow-up is usuallyat the root of any troubled collections program.

Flexibility• Ideally, delinquent defendants are called immediately by the collections/

compliance staff assigned to monitor their cases for compliance. Within 30days of a missed payment, a phone call must be made to a defendant who hasnot contacted the program staff. The phone call must be documented.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component10. Mail Contact Importance

• This is generally the first step (along with a phone call) in any standardcollections process. It is standard operating practice to send out notification ofdelinquency as soon as possible following default.

• Timely follow-up is crucial to the collections process. Poor follow-up is usuallyat the root of any troubled collections program.

Flexibility• Ideally, defendants are sent a delinquency notice immediately by the

collections/compliance staff assigned to monitor their cases for compliance.• Within 30 days of a missed payment, a written delinquency notice must be

sent to a defendant who has not contacted the program staff. The writtennotice must be documented.

• One county utilizes a collection vendor to send delinquency notices todelinquent defendants.

• Several cities and counties use automated computer systems to senddelinquency notices to delinquent defendants.

11. Pre-Warrant Notice Importance• Notification that collection/compliance efforts are about to be escalated is

generally a standard procedure in any collections process.• This notice also serves as a final courtesy attempting to give a defendant every

opportunity to comply with the order of the court.

Flexibility• Ideally, defendants are called or sent a pre-warrant notice when a defendant

has not responded to previous attempts to be contacted by collections/compliance staff assigned to monitor their cases for compliance.

• One county uses a collection vendor to send pre-warrant notices to non-responsive delinquent offenders.

• Several cities and counties use automated dialers or systems to call or sendpre-warrant notices to nonresponsive delinquent offenders.

• One county uses a warrant specialist (actually a collections supervisor) tomake final-attempt pre-warrant calls to nonresponsive delinquent defendants.

• Several cities and counties use warrant officers to make final-attempt pre-warrant calls to nonresponsive delinquent defendants.

• If a capias pro fine (“warrant”) will be sought for a defendant, a phone callmust be made or written notice must be sent to the defendant who has notcontacted program staff within 30 days of the written delinquency noticedescribed in number 8 above. The phone call or written notice must bedocumented.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component12. Warrants Importance

• The warrant is the ultimate consequence for failing to comply with an order ofthe court. It is designed to encourage personal accountability and respect forcourt orders.

• In situations where a defendant continues to fail to comply with a court orderand has been notified that a warrant will be issued for noncompliance, awarrant should be issued so that defendants do not come to believe that thethreat of a warrant is just that, a threat, and they do not have to comply.

• The threat of a warrant and the possibility of incarceration often producecompliance.

Flexibility• Generally, programs work to identify hardcore cases – such as known repeat

offenders – that require the court’s attention without the use of the warrant.But when all efforts fail, they will recommend issuing a warrant as a necessarynext step in the enforcement process.

• Some courts have elected not to issue warrants for failure to pay court costs,fees, and fines.

13. Use of LawEnforcement

Importance• Once a warrant is issued it can become an extremely effective tool in

encouraging compliance. Service of the warrant sends a strong and clearmessage to lawbreakers and the entire community that compliance is notoptional.

• One of the most cost-effective and successful uses of law enforcement officersin the collections process has been establishing contact with the defendant toarrange for resolution before field service.

Flexibility• Some programs have warrant officers assigned to and working directly with

the collections/compliance office on warrant cases.• Some programs use warrant officers, marshals, and in some instances

constables assigned to law enforcement agencies to contact defendants orserve warrants.




Program Component Importance and Flexibility of Component14. Post-WarrantNotices and Calls

Importance• The collections process does not end with the issuance of a warrant, and

notification sends this message.• Notifying the defendant that an arrest warrant has been issued should be

considered mandatory if previous notifications have advised of this intent; itwould be mandatory if the Fair Debt Practices Act applied.

• A phone call or notice advising that a warrant has been issued may be the onecontact that finally gets the attention of the defendant and results incompliance.

Flexibility• Some programs use in-house staff to make these follow-up calls and send

notices.• Some programs use law enforcement officers to make these calls and send

notices.• Some programs rely on third-party collection agencies or firms to make these

calls and send notices.15. AlternativeCompliance Options

Importance• Individuals who are unable to pay are not exempt from compliance with court

orders. The Collections Improvement Program is designed to give thosedefendants a reasonable compliance option. This can be accomplished with anassignment to a community-service or public-works program in lieu ofpayment of court costs, fees, and fines.

Flexibility• Some programs work with community-service or public-works programs

managed and operated by the county or city.• Some programs work with their community supervision and corrections

departments who manage community-service or public-works programs.• Some programs have created their own community service or public-works

programs.

16. Use of StatutorilyPermitted CollectionRemedies

Importance• Using statutes designed to assist with enforcing compliance with court orders

for the payment of court costs, fees, and fines is strongly encouraged becauseit increases the opportunity for success.

Flexibility• Ideally, programs use both the Texas Department of Public Safety’s (DPS)

Failure to Appear program for nonrenewal of driver’s licenses and the TexasDepartment of Transportation’s (TxDot) Scoff program for nonrenewal ofvehicle registration for defendants who fail to pay court costs, fees, and fines.





19. Reporting Importance• This component is required by statute.• By analyzing the information provided in the reports, OCA staff are in a better

position to provide assistance to the collections/compliance office.• Collections/compliance offices can see how they are doing in relation to other

counties or cities. Also, there is contact information should they want tocontact another office on a casual basis.

Flexibility• Though the Office of Court Administration (OCA) recommends monthly

reporting, each program shall report its collection activity data online to theOCA at least annually in a format approved by the OCA.

18. ContractedBack-endCollections

Importance• It is important the collections process continues until there is resolution. In

some instances, it is more cost-effective to use contract vendors to workseriously delinquent cases after all internal efforts have been exhausted.

Flexibility• There are statutory provisions for counties and cities to contract with private

collection agencies and firms for the purpose of collecting court costs, fees,and fines.

17. In-House Back-endCollections

Importance• It is important the collections process continues until there is resolution.

There must be a plan in place to continue efforts to bring defendants intocompliance and reduce the number of outstanding cases due to thenonpayment of court costs, fees, and fines.

Flexibility• Some programs have specific internal procedures to continue working

delinquent cases until resolved. They use all available tools, including the DPSand TxDot programs. They also continue to search and make contact withdefendants no matter where they are to try to reach resolution.




Before a defendant is given additional time to pay anobligation, a best practice is to determine whetherthe defendant’s financial means justify a paymentplan. Rather than the judge conducting colloquywith a defendant about ability to pay, the judgeshould refer the defendant to the collection unit tomake this determination. If the defendant does notappear at the collection unit within a specifiedperiod, failure to appear will result in a warrant.

The following is an example of a step-by-stepprocess a collection team may use to determine adefendant’s ability to pay:

1. Every defendant who requests time to pay mustcomplete a financial affidavit. One purpose is toprovide information on which to base a decisionregarding the defendant’s ability to pay. Havingto complete an affidavit may encourage fullpayment from those actually able to pay andwho either do not want to be bothered with alengthy form or do not wish to reveal financialand personal information.

2. Upon completion of the affidavit, the collectioninvestigator interviews the applicant. Theaffidavit is reviewed question by question toconfirm the accuracy of the answers. Affidavitsusually include a request for personal references.The investigator should call the references whilethe defendant is present or waiting in thehallway. Questions should be addressed to thesereferences without providing the answers. Forexample: “Where does John Doe live?” ratherthan “Does John Doe live at 123 Main Street?”Calling references while the defendant is stillpresent in the courthouse emphasizes theseriousness of the process and encourages thedefendant to be truthful. It also prevents thedefendant from coaching references before a callfrom the court.

3. If references are not provided or cannot bereached, the defendant should not be granted apayment plan, and full payment should be

required within 24 or 48 hours, depending oncircumstances.

4. If it is determined that the defendant has theability to pay, the collection investigator shouldinitially require immediate full payment. Often, acompromise is permitted allowing payment onthe defendant’s next payday. Most units insistupon payment in full in 30 or 60 days. Public-benefits recipients are usually given more time topay.

5. If it is determined that the defendant does nothave the ability to pay immediately, thecollection investigator completes a deferredpayment plan order or agreement and give acopy to the defendant before the defendantleaves the courthouse. The court may impose afee to cover in part the expense of conductingthe screening, if a payment plan is established.

6. If a defendant fails to make a scheduledpayment, the court should be ready to respondimmediately with a telephone call or letterdemanding payment and advising the defendantof the consequences of noncompliance. “ActionsUpon Nonpayment” in the immediately previoussection details how to respond.

6.3 Screening Eligibility for Payment Plan:Collection Investigation



Some units use trained staff at the counter in theclerk’s office, staff in a separate location to interviewstaff and verify information by telephone, or somecombination of the two. The staff position, referredto as a collection investigator or collection specialist,may be part-time or full-time.3

Collection units in a number of courts play a key rolein the overall collection process. Collectioninvestigators must be given authority to determineor recommend for judicial approval the defendants’ability to pay and eligibility for a payment planoutside of the courtroom setting, using astandardized set of questions and a verificationprocess.

Most courts can begin an in-house collection unit bydedicating a portion of an existing staff position tothe collection effort. If the manager has establisheda baseline of previous collection results,improvement of collections should become evidentand justify the dedication of staff resources to theeffort.

Managers can apply management techniques suchas refresher training, mentoring, and performancemonitoring to make the collection unit a meaningfuland interesting work experience.

At the individual-collector level, managers can useseveral approaches for monitoring and publicizingperformance measures for purposes of teambuilding and recognition of excellent performance.Assuming a “level playing field,” setting up a monthlyor quarterly competition among collectors canmotivate them to improve their skills andperformance. Based on competition periods,managers can give recognition to good performersand award prizes.

Not every staff person may be interested incollection work, and some will take to it more easilythan others. Training is more important, however,than aptitude, though aptitude and interest arefactors.

This section was written by Jim Lehman, Collection ProgramManager Office of Court Administration, Collection Program,“Born to Be a Collector.”

Is it true that good collectors are born, not made?No. There are principles and guidelines thatconsistently produce positive results if they areconsistently applied. Practice, not genetics, makesperfect. But practice does reveal certain keycharacteristics that are generally associated withsuccessful collectors. We’ll call them the six P’s ofsuccessful collectors.

1. Package. What is the appearance of thecollector? Does he or she present a positiveprofessional look? What facial expressions andbody language are present when the collectorinteracts with a defendant in-person? The oldadage “you only have one shot to make a goodfirst impression” applies here. Successfulcollectors will present a professional, calm, andassertive demeanor and will remain in this moderegardless of the circumstances. Effectivecollectors usually look the part. High-leveltraining exercises for professional collectors nowinclude videotaping collectors at work andallowing them to see themselves as the customersees them. This has proven to be a very effectivetraining tool.

2. Presentation. How does the collector soundwhen addressing the defendant? Is his/her tonecrisp, businesslike, intelligent, confident? Thedelivery determines whether the defendanttakes the collector seriously. Successfulcollectors practice delivery, everything fromgreeting to closing. Many high-level trainingcourses for collectors now also require thecollector to listen to audiotapes of himself orherself for self-evaluation.

6.4 Staffing Considerations: Using Existing orAdditional Staff

3 For a full description of an in-house collection unit program, see Paul Litschewski, “Getting a Grip on Collections: An Overview ofthe Colorado Investigator Program,” Court Manager 6, no. 3 (Summer 1991).



3. Predisposition. Is the collector comfortablecollecting? Successful collectors have noproblem asking for payment in full and therequest sounds perfectly natural. Effectivecollectors can be firm without being insensitive.This cannot happen if the collector lacksconfidence or interest.

4. Persuasion. Is the collector convincing?Successful collectors are usually masters ofpassive persuasion. They can usually use theirpowers of reason and suggestion to overcomeobjections or defuse hostility. Effective collectorscan convince a defendant that it is in his or herbest interest to comply.

5. Persistent. How quickly does the collector giveup or give in? Successful collectors are tenaciousand rarely give up easily. That’s not saying theydon’t know when to quit and move on. Effectivecollectors have a very good feel for when to saywhen. But this will not occur until everyreasonable scenario for resolution has beenexamined and exhausted.

6. Punctual. Is the collector time conscious?Successful collectors are generally extremelytime sensitive. They have learned the value oftime, especially as it relates to collections.Effective collectors are effective clock managersand they keep clear and concise records of theircollection efforts. Is short, they can tell you who,what, where, and when on every account in theirassigned caseload.

The key to successful collections begins with soundprocess. Without a specific process new hires haveno starting point and no destination; they will belost. Establishing concrete steps to work from willprovide them with a road map. Practicing thosesteps will lead them to success.


1. Listen to the defendant. Listen to their moodbecause it will tell you what will be the mosteffective approach in controlling the call.

2. Remain calm with the defendant. Do not let anangry defendant stress you out. They will try todeflect your ultimate goal, which is simply to getthem to pay. If you argue, it gives them a reasonnot to pay. Stay relaxed, polite, and focused. Afirm, assertive calm approach will produceresults.

3. Keep your word. One of the most importantaspects of a collector’s job is credibility. If yousay that action will be taken on a certain date,then that action must be taken. When peopleknow that you do what you always say you’regoing to do, they take you seriously.

4. Follow up is critical to the collection process.• Always give your first call with the defendant

the benefit of the doubt. There aredefendants who will pay simply because youreminded them of the payment due.

• Be firm and assertive. Have a plan for asecond, third approach for the defendant. Ifthe first technique does not work the secondshould be designed to get the defendant topay and stop you from calling.

• Be clear to explain the consequences ofnonpayment if you have to make a third call.This is the time to apply necessary pressure.

5. Never say “Never.” Calling defendants who owemoney is never a pleasant task, but it does nothave to be an unpleasant experience. Remainupbeat and professional. Your mood will beinfectious in helping to get issues resolved.

6.5 A Collector’s Professional Demeanor



6. Ask defendants the correct questions. What isthe question most commonly asked by anycollectors? “When will you be making thatpayment?” A better question would be, “Willyou be making that payment today?” or “Willyou be sending that payment this week?” Withboth of these questions you maintain control ofthe time frame and it eliminates manipulation ofthe answer.

7. Get a commitment from the defendant accordingto the payment plan they signed



Chapter 7CONTRACTING

COLLECTION SERVICES

A collection agency is typically thought of as takingon the job of collecting debts that the court itselfcannot collect because the court has limited or nointernal effort, or after it has exhausted its efforts. Acourt may contract, however, for as little or as muchof the collection process as it needs: it can pay acommission or a per-unit charge and piece outspecific tasks like generating and mailing notices,making phone calls, locating defendants, andproviding warrant notification. A court shouldconsider its internal capabilities and determine whatservices are most cost-effective to outsource.

Although outsourcing collection services defrayscosts through authorization of a collection fee,outsourcing presents several legal and logisticaldifficulties; specifically, contractors cannot performthe following tasks:

• Rescind a warrant;• Require a defendant to appear in court;• Set a court date;• Discount or reduce judgments;• Institute a payment plan; or• Authorize an alternate disposition of a case 1

Given these deficiencies or hurdles, the court muststill retain control and monitor the file, expendadministrative energy tracking the progress of thecollections, maintain accurate and detailed records,and periodically audit the contractor to ensurecompliance with contractual obligations andadherence to applicable policies and procedures.

This section was written by Michael A. DiMarco, ConsolidatedCollections Manager, Arizona Supreme Court.

Collection agencies can be useful for rural, small, andunderstaffed courts, as well as large-volume courts,which can become inundated with calls, returnedmail, etc., while attempting to collect monies owedto the court. While a collection agency(“contractor”) can be beneficial in collecting on olddebt, it can also be used proactively to reduce thechances of the debt becoming delinquent at all.

Pre-delinquency “Collections”A pre-delinquency collections program is one inwhich the contractor is proactively working a casefrom the creation of the case. This includes mailingnotices to remind the defendant of upcoming courtdates, as well as reminders of payments owed oncases with no mandatory appearance. Additionally, avehicle-registration hold can be placed on a failure-to-appear case and a letter mailed to the defendantinforming them of this action as an incentive for adefendant to appear in court.

A web site link and interactive voice response (IVR)number are included on the mailed notices to informdefendants of these payment options, as well asinformation that they may mail a payment to thecourt or visit the court to make a payment. Thismanner of noticing occurs throughout the pre- andpost-disposition life of the case. In Arizona, there is aflat fee of $7.00 per charge added to the case forthese services. If the case becomes delinquent,additional fees are added to the case for collections(these fees are added in the court’s CMS as well),including a $35.00 per-case fee (which pays forcollection programs such as the Tax InterceptProgram [TIP] and the Traffic Ticket EnforcementAssistance Program [TTEAP] maintained by AOC) anda 19% collection fee.

7.1 Role of Outsourcing Collection Services inCourt Collections

1 www.blgpclaw.com/articles/Collections%20GCAT%20060304%20Galveston.pdf, p. 12.

http://www.blgpclaw.com/articles/Collections%20GCAT%20060304%20Galveston.pdf,



Collecting on Delinquent DebtOnce the case enters the delinquency phase, thecontractor can initiate a variety of sanctions to thedefendant, with notice to the court, if payment is notmade, which includes TTEAP and credit bureaureporting. All actions are updated in the court’s casemanagement system via real-time, batch, or e-mailalerts to allow the court to be aware of and notateactions taken by the contractor. It is important toacknowledge that the court is the keeper of therecord, and that all information that the contractorobtains (with the exception of new addressinformation from skip tracing) is to be obtaineddirectly from the court. This disallows the contractorfrom negotiating lower amounts owed by thedefendant to be collected.

Keeping the Court in Control of the RecordsTo aid in this, payments made on a case (includingIVR and Internet payments) are sent directly to thecourt to receipt, which includes collection-agencyfees, which are then paid out to the contractorusually at the end of the month. This is to ensurethat the contractor is paid the percentage amountthat was agreed upon and to keep both entities inbalance. Payment reports are sent from thecontractor to the court daily via e-mail for trackingand reconciliation purposes (and receipting to a caseif it is not automatically done). Because all paymentsgo to the court first, they are kept up to date as tothe remaining balance owed on each case as well asif a case balance has been satisfied. Additionally,weekly compare reports are used to ensure balancesmatch in both the contractor’s and the court’ssystems.

Exclusions and CautionsIt is important that any collection agency used by thecourt be bound by a contract to act within guidelinesaccording to law and up to the court’s standards toensure insulation to the court should the collectionagency attempt debt collecting using unlawfulmethods.

In regard to the collection agency being paid for allmonies collected, the only exclusion in Arizonacurrently are payments collected through TIP. If acase that has been assigned to Arizona FARE forcollection has money intercepted by the TIPprogram, it is not considered to be collected by thecontractor; therefore, the fees are excluded fromthat payment. The new balance is then reported tothe contractor for collection.



This section was written by Beth Barber, Trial CourtCollections Project Manager, State Court AdministrativeOffice, Michigan Supreme Court.

Pursuing collections is a discretionary action that isfunded entirely by the local funding unit. Third-partycollectors usually charge a fee ranging from 20 to 35percent of the amount collected. For the easiestcollections, the costs of a third-party collector will begreater than the costs of the court pursuing its owncollection efforts. For more complex collectioncases, the costs of a third-party collector may not bea factor, because after the court’s internal collectionefforts have failed and the court has deemed thedebt to be uncollectible, any money that a thirdparty collects is money that would not have beencollected otherwise. In most instances, it will bemore cost-effective to provide the courts withresources for the front-end processes and initialfollow-up and to contract with third parties to workcases after all internal efforts have been exhausted.

The determination to use a third party for collectionsshould be made on a court-by-court basis. If courtschoose to refer cases to a third party for thecollection of court-ordered fines, fees, costs, andrestitution, the third-party collector will keep apercentage (usually 20% to 35%) of the total moneyit collects. Consequently, a court must determine atwhat point in the collection process it has little hopeof collecting the obligation and when the expense ofusing a third-party collector is justified. And whilethird-party collections is probably most valuable forlocating transient litigants or collecting amountsconsidered uncollectible by a court, the results willdiffer from court to court based on the age and typeof cases, the court’s internal efforts, availablecontact information, support from the court, anddemographics.

Even though state law may not require it, the courtshould issue a request for proposals (RFP) to find thecontractor with the best capabilities and mostadvantageous business terms.

Copies of actual requests for proposals for collectionagency services are available from the NCSC, forboth statewide and single-jurisdiction use. A modelcontractor collection services agreement is includedin materials on changes to Texas law in 2004concerning outsourcing collections contracts. 2

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Does state law permit the court to turn

collections over to contractors? Does thisinclude collecting restitution or commercialbail bonds?

• Who is the contracting agent for the court (thechief judge, the prosecutor, the city, or thecounty governing body)?

• Is the contractor paid on a flat-fee or acontingency basis (and at what percentage ofthe proceeds) for collections?

• At what time after adjudication is it mostadvantageous for the court to refer accountsto an external collection services, i.e., at whatpoint is the net cost to the court of using anexternal agency to collect delinquent fines lessthan that of the court making its owncollections?

• Is data exchange between the court and thecontractor automated, or is paper-based dataentry required?

• If the contractor uses unlawful methods, is thecourt insulated?

• How would the court handle a disputebetween the collection agent and a payer?

7.2 Collection Services Considerations7.3 Requests for Proposals for Collection

Services

2 www.blgpclaw.com/articles/Collections%20GCAT%20060304%20Galveston.pdf, p. 17.

http://www.blgpclaw.com/articles/Collections%20GCAT%20060304%20Galveston.pdf,



Practice Tips

Most courts give accounts to a collection agency or agovernmental collection unit to collect, based onsome criteria that is locally determined.Understaffed courts with limited staff or technicalcapabilities, or high-volume courts, are the mostlikely to use an external agency because they don’thave the internal resources to follow up ondelinquent accounts. Many courts believe that withadequate technology (particularly large-scalecapacity to generate and send notices) and use ofproviders of related services, they could do virtuallyall functions performed by collection agencies. Withbetter and cheaper automation increasinglyavailable, many believe that collections could bebetter handled by court staff.

The contractor may be amenable to providecustomer service representatives at court locations,as in Los Angeles Superior Court. The court providesa counter window, desk space, cash registers, andsafes, and outsources this role to their collectionagency. The web pages of the court and thecontractor are linked, and defendants can pay ateither Web site.

Below are some suggested guidelines for using acontractor, which should be identified in thecontract with the contractor:

• A court should retain accounts for the initialcollection steps and as long as payments arebeing received, unless the defendant cannotbe located or does not respond. The court canthus collect the “easy” cases and still turnrelatively new accounts over to the contractor.Waiting too long will hinder the contractor’ssuccess.

• Clarify how and when the court will recall orotherwise get accounts back from thecontractor. Possible methods are to limit thetime to “work” the account and to take backaccounts with no funds coming in. Thecontractor should prove that it is continuingcollection efforts to keep an account.

• Define any exclusions from the contract. Willthe contractor be paid its percentage for allthe cases it receives, whatever the reason forpayment? One court was surprised to have itscollection agency claim its percentage for allpayments made to accounts it had previously“worked” before a court-run amnestyprogram. Although the payments were madesolely as a result of the amnesty and notthrough any effort by the collection agency,the terms of the contract required the court topay the agency its percentage.

• Clarify the contractor’s experience andcapabilities for skip tracing since this is usuallythe most important service the contractorprovides the court.

• A collection agency should have the capabilityto look up credit information and to reportdelinquent accounts to credit bureaus.

• Require the agency to follow the rules of thefederal Fair Debt Collection Act, for thepurpose of maintaining public trust andconfidence in the courts.



7.4 Communications with External CollectionAgencies

This section was written by Amy Johnson, FARE/DSOBusiness Analyst (Fines/Fees and RestitutionEnforcement), Arizona Supreme Court.

When collecting on a debt, it is very beneficial to (1)get information out to the contractor (collectionagency or vendor) as soon as possible to begincollection actions and (2) to keep informationregarding the case accurate between the contractorand the court. Getting information out quickly canhelp to collect on a debt faster as many defendantstend to change their locations frequently, so thequicker the debt is forwarded to the collectionagency, the better chance there is on collecting onthat debt.

Keeping information accurate between thecontractor and the court can help keep thecontractor current with information that is updatedin the court’s system. For example, if a date of birthis not available at the time a case is sent to acontractor, but is discovered by the court at a laterdate, this information may be beneficial for thecontractor to have when attempting to collect on adebt. Additionally, information passed to the courtfrom the contractor is essential for the court to keeptrack of payments made on the case, as well ascollection fees that are being assessed (in an effortto hold the contractor to a previously agreed uponrate), noticing, and many other events.

Issues from Lack of Court Visibility of ContractorProcessesThe contractor’s “normal” or traditional practice isreceiving a paper copy of the case file from the courtand beginning to “work” the case. The contractorcollects payments and forwards them to the court,minus collection fees. Beyond that, not muchinformation is passed to the court from thecontractor. Essentially, this leaves the court blind asto what is being done to collect on the case, if thecase is being “worked” at all, and what percentage of

each payment the collections contractor is trulywithholding from each payment.

Increasing Court Control over Accounts Referred toContractorsArizona decided to put technology to work incollecting monies due to better manage casesreferred to contractors, resulting in the creation ofthe full FARE (Fines/Fees and RestitutionEnforcement) program. A fully automated interfaceallows the court’s case management system tocommunicate with the contractor’s system through acentralized storage system that keeps a record of allcases appearing in the court. It was created with theplan that the court could “pick and choose” cases tosend to a certain contractor on a routine basis by thecourt electronically entering codes into their system(real time or batch) that would refer the case tocollections. To do this, an event code and tworeceivable types (cost types) are set up in eachcourt’s system that will (1) send the case tocollections (via event code), and (2) assess theamount of the collections fees directly into the casein the court’s system (via cost types), which holdsthe contractor to collecting only the percentage ofthe case that has been previously agreed upon.

The FARE program was also set up to have anypayments made by the defendant directly sent tothe court, first to be receipted, and then send thecollection fees to the contractor (usually at the endof each month). This allows the court to maintaincontrol of how much is truly being paid on a case andthe case balance at all times.

Additionally, this program allows the court toautomatically send updates to the case (namechange, date of birth, disposition changes, additionalmonies assessed, monies waived, etc.) in real time tothe contractor’s system to aid in collections or toreflect increased or decreased balances.



Development of a Data WarehouseThe court’s case management system wasprogrammed to communicate with a datawarehouse maintained by the Administrative Officeof the Courts, which stores information regardingcases.

When a case is assigned to FARE, certain informationpertaining to the case needs to be sent to the datawarehouse for a case to be successfully collected.Examples of the information needed include thecurrent balance existing on the case, partyinformation, address, date of birth, initialassessments to a case, adjustments to dollarsassociated with a case (jail time in lieu of fines),initial dispositions or changes, and charges. This iscommunicated to the data warehouse through aseries of transactions that are formatted to fitcertain information into certain areas that can beaccepted by the data warehouse.

Once the information is accepted by the warehouse,it is passed through another series of transactions tothe contractor, who then adds the defendant to theirsystem. Subsequent address changes, dispositionchanges, payments, etc., that occur at the court aresent via batch or real time to the data warehouse,which then routes the information to the contractor.Additionally, any payments received by thecontractor, or TTEAP (Traffic Ticket EnforcementAssistance Program), or holds that are placed on acase are sent from the contractor to the datawarehouse, which then updates the court’s systemautomatically through an event-triggeredtransaction.

This process allows information regarding all aspectsof the case to flow real time (nearly immediately) orbatch (nightly) from the court to the contractor andfrom the contractor to the court.



Chapter 8MORE-COERCIVE

ENFORCEMENT MEASURESAfter routine collection efforts have apparentlyfailed to bring about full payment, a court canconsider other means to collect accounts receivable.These methods are widely used in collection of childsupport in most states and are increasingly used incollection of fines and fees.

Whether or not a criminal judgment is collectible asa civil judgment is a matter of state law. In somestates, fines and restitution may be collectiblethrough civil means, but not fees or costs. Civilremedies include filing property liens andgarnishment of bank accounts and wages.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Does the court have a legal basis for obtaining

a civil judgment and initiating garnishment orlien proceedings?

• Who must pursue a civil judgment andremedies? Will the cooperation of anotheragency (e.g., the prosecutor, attorney general,or city attorney) be required?

• How complicated and expensive is the civil-remedies process; will the potential returnsjustify the effort involved?

Practice Tips

Use of wage garnishment assumes that a defendanthas a stable job and that employment information isobtainable. Courts that procure Social Securitynumbers and employment background fromdefendants or that have access to the state’semployer-paid payroll-tax database have successfullyused wage garnishments. In some states,considerable paperwork may be involved, or anoutside agency attorney will be needed to prosecutea civil judgment, factors that should be weighed indetermining the cost-effectiveness of the process.

Some states allow garnishment of prison wages ofincarcerated defendants to pay fines and restitution.Given the relatively low wages of prisoners and therelatively high fines of defendants sentenced toprison terms, garnishment may provide little benefit.See section 9.3, “Payment from Inmate CommissaryAccounts.”

Property liens and garnishment of bank accounts areusually simpler than wage garnishment. Mostcollectors agreed that the odds of locating assetsowned by most delinquent defendants are not great.They generally do not pursue account garnishmentsunless the process is very simple or they have easilyverifiable evidence of the assets.

8.1 Collection of Fines as a Civil Judgment:Garnishment and Liens



Income tax intercept procedures are available for thecollection of fines in many states. They permit acourt to seize a state income tax refund due adelinquent defendant to satisfy unpaid fines andfees.

Legislation has been introduced in Congress for thepast few years for intercepts of federal tax refunds.It appears likely that eventually it will pass,particularly in light of the current economicsituation.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Is this method available for fine and fee

collection?• What identifying information will be required

by the revenue agency to execute anintercept?

• How will information be communicatedbetween the court and the revenue agency?

Practice Tips

There are common hindrances to income taxintercepts. The first is developing a process fortransferring information between the court and therevenue agency. In automated systems, informationexchanges usually can be fairly easily achieved. Theprocess is more complicated for courts that usemanual systems.

The second problem is lack of identifying informationabout the defendant. Generally, at least a SocialSecurity Number and full name, including middleinitial, are required, information that courts often donot have.

Nationwide, most warrants are served when adefendant is stopped for a traffic violation or otheroffense, and law enforcement checks foroutstanding warrants. Most localities do not havemarshals or warrant officers to actively servewarrants. Court management should consistentlytarget offenders, such as defendants with the mostoutstanding warrants or other scofflaws. This mayrequire dedication of some resources, but thestrategy is likely to provide considerable payback,both in terms of enforcement and in favorablepublicity for the justice system.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Which warrants are targeted?• Is there jail space available to incarcerate

defendants arrested on warrants?

Practice Tips

Although serving warrants is time-consuming,expensive, and sometimes dangerous, the threat ofarrest is often the most effective tool available toforce compliance. Some of the techniquesdeveloped to increase the effectiveness of warrantsinclude:

• The officer calls before serving the warrant;often, defendants will come in voluntarily toavoid arrest.

• If the defendant is not home, the officerleaves notice of the attempt to serve andinformation on how to contact the court. Afew jurisdictions use a brightly colored stickeror doorknob hanger.

8.2 Income Tax Refund Intercepts(“Tax Setoff Program”)

8.3 Arrest Warrants and Incarceration



Courts in smaller cities and towns sometimes publishthe names of individuals for whom warrants havebeen issued in the local paper.

Where a regular warrant-service program is notfeasible, the court uses occasional warrant-serviceinitiatives. One municipal court carries out periodicDWI warrant sweeps, arresting 30 to 40 defendants.The media are tipped off to ensure publicity. Thecourt claims that the combination of significantenhanced revenue and favorable press coveragemore than compensate for the investment inovertime pay. A municipal court in Arizona, on theother hand, did not publicize its warrant sweep toprevent defendants from evading service of thewarrants. Nevertheless, word of the effort reachedmany defendants who appeared to pay their finesvoluntarily to avoid arrest. The court took in two orthree times the amount spent on overtime forofficers in payments made after arrest and an evenlarger amount of voluntary payments.

Wise use of resources is necessary, of course, butsuch efforts help create an environment in whichoffenders cannot ignore their court obligations.Ultimately, the success of a court’s collection systemmay depend upon the availability and use of jail tothreaten or punish defendants who are able to paytheir fines and fees but are unwilling to do so. Short-term incarceration or even simple detainment,coupled with telephone access to raise bail, hasproven to be effective in some courts. However,regular warrant programs or sweeps will work best ifseveral jail slots are available to house arresteddefendants who fail to produce sufficient bail tosecure their court appearances. Lack of jail spaceundermines the whole effort, making bothdefendants and law enforcement cynical about theefficacy of the justice system.



Chapter 9PROBATION/PAROLE

DEPARTMENT COLLECTIONACTIVITIES

Some courts have a probation department thatcollects fines and fees. The probation departmentthat is the subject of this section, however, may beeither a judicial or executive branch department thathandles presentence investigations and supervisionof defendants convicted of misdemeanors orfelonies.

Sentences with probation may include incarceration,restitution, and a relatively high fine (frequently$1,000 or more). Failure to comply with conditionsof probation subjects a defendant to imprisonment.Collection of higher fines may present a special set ofproblems compared to lower fine amounts.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Is fine payment clearly a condition of probation?• Is probation used by the court as a means of fine

collection?• Does the probation department consider

payment of fines, restitution, and costs animportant obligation?

• Can and does the probation department file aviolation of probation for nonpayment of a fineor restitution? Is a violation of parole fornonpayment treated seriously by the prosecutorand by the court?

• At the end of probation, does the obligation topay expire as a condition of probation? Isprobation extended until the fine is paid? If not,does the money judgment carry over afterprobation automatically, or is court actionrequired? If probation ends without full payment,who is responsible for further collection efforts?

• Can/should the court seek payment from inmateaccounts?

• When a defendant is released from prison onparole, does collection activity begin again?

While not feasible in most courts for traffic or minoroffenses, some probation officers typically preparepresentence investigation (PSI) reports to provide awritten recommendation to the court regarding adefendant’s ability to pay a fine, as well as apayment plan. In one court, the collection unitprepares the presentence report for cases involvingunsupervised probation and a fine. The presentencereport includes a thorough financial investigation, arecommendation for a fine suitable to defendant’sfinancial circumstances, and a payment plan.

In the same court, prosecutors often include finepayment terms in the plea bargain offer they maketo a defense attorney. The plea agreements usuallyrequire the defendant to pay a portion of the fine,costs, and restitution on the day of sentencing orsoon thereafter.

9.1 Pre-Sentence Investigations



In many jurisdictions, probation officers areinstructed to consider payment of fines, fees, andrestitution as an important aspect of sentencecompliance. In most jurisdictions, however, changesindicative of rehabilitation and behavior modificationare considered more meaningful than payment offines. In some cases, this is department policy. Inothers, it reflects the preference of individualprobation officers; in such an environment,probation officers are less likely to “violate” aprobationer for nonpayment. Some probationoffices have successfully resolved this tension bydesignating one probation staff member as the“collection” officer, assigned to be the “bad guy”associated with payment compliance.

Many defendants sentenced to prison also aresentenced to pay a fine. Frequently, the fine isunpaid at time of release. Most jurisdictions arediligent in investigating whether or not a fine orrestitution is outstanding at time of release, and inmaking payment a condition of parole. Payment ofrestitution is often a higher priority because ofstatutory mandate. Some parole officers are moreinterested in seeing that a parolee finds employmentand makes appropriate adjustments to reentersociety, rather than in seeing that fines are paid. Insuch circumstances, the court may want to developits own monitoring and enforcement procedures.

The Michigan Experience of Inmate Collections1

In Michigan, the 17th Circuit Court’s finance divisiondirector knew that the circuit court was receivingrestitution payments for crime victims from prisoneraccounts. She contacted the Michigan Departmentof Correction (DOC) and learned that DOC would alsodeduct funds from prisoner accounts for otherfinancial obligations upon receipt of a court order.The State Court Administrative Office (SCAO)contacted DOC representatives and reached anagreement on standards for statewideimplementation of the sweep process.

SCAO developed specialized forms to initiate andterminate collection of prior debt. For new cases,the order is included with the judgment of sentence,and collection can begin as soon as the offender isremanded to prison.

DOC processes orders monthly and collects 50percent of the funds the offender receives over $50.DOC transmits funds to the court when theyaccumulate to at least $100. To encourage othercourts to participate, the SCAO hired temporary staffto prepare 886 sweep orders for 20 circuit courts. Inaddition, a special financial match program wasdeveloped that enables courts to match cases withoutstanding balances against the DOC prisoner file toautomatically generate collection orders. Theprogram has matched 7,262 cases and generatedorders for circuit courts in an additional 26 counties.

9.2 Fine Payment as a Condition of Probation orParole

9.3 Payment from Inmate CommissaryAccounts

1 Nial Raaen, “The Turnip Field – Prison Account Sweeps Yield Unexpected Results for Collections,” Court Communiqué 6, no. 4(2005).



From inception to the date of publication in 2005,the 46-county sweep and financial match hadalready generated more than $333,000 in fine andcost revenue from prisoner accounts. Beth Barber,SCAO’s trial-court collections-project manager,credited the effort’s success to cooperation betweenDOC officials and the courts and believes that theprogram will eventually become a regularcomponent of collection programs.

The Texas Experience of Inmate Collections2

Upon arriving at a state prison, inmates turn overany money on their persons to the TexasDepartment of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). This money isplaced in an inmate trust account. Any money thatan inmate receives during confinement (e.g., fromfamily and friends) is also placed in his or her inmatetrust account. Relying on Section 501.014(e) of theGovernment Code, district judges ordered TDCJ towithdraw money from individual inmates’ accountsto satisfy fines and court costs. Typically, judgeswould issue a separate order of withdrawal,independent of the judgment, several months afterthe date of sentencing.

The Texarkana Court of Appeals held in 20073 ruledthat formal garnishment proceedings are necessarybefore withdrawals can be made from an inmate’saccount to satisfy a fine and court costs. Two othercourts of appeals also issued rulings on the subject,one following Texarkana and the other not.Subsequently, the TDCJ decided to stop following thedistrict court’s orders to withdraw money frominmate accounts to satisfy outstanding fines, fees,and court costs.

In 2009, however, the Supreme Court of Texas ruledthat inmate trust accounts can be tapped to recovercourt fees and costs assessed against inmates,because they are civil in nature and not part of theunderlying criminal case.4 Post-judgment collectionefforts are designed to reimburse the State, not topunish the inmate, and due process is satisfied if theinmate receives notice and the opportunity to beheard after funds are withdrawn. The TDCJ set up aprocedure to reinstate the process for withdrawal ofmoney from individual inmates’ accounts.

2 CourTex, Texas Judicial Branch News, Special Edition – Collection Program (August 2007), pp. 12-14.3 Abdullah v. State, 211 S.W.3d 938 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 2007, no pet.).4 Harrell v. State of Texas, No. 07-0806, June 5, 2009.



Chapter 10USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN

COLLECTIONS

The use of technology allows tasks to be automatedin ways that extend the capabilities of a person and

provides capabilities not previously possible. Use oftechnology requires good policy and businessdecisions to guide it; this Handbook is intended toprovide such guidance, and this chapter is aimed atdiscussing the tools to implement them. Table 9below sets forth business capabilities needed tomanage collections and technology tools thatprovide those capabilities.

10.1 Building Business Capabilities UsingTechnology

Business Capability Technology Tool/Consideration1. Record payments correctly in cases with more than

one defendant and where joint and severalpayment towards restitution are ordered

1. Have the ability to credit payments to a particular person andcharge in a multi-defendant case and, in a case with joint andseveral obligations, reduce the total obligation with eachpayment

2. Identify financial obligations that requiremonitoring

2. Have the ability, with a minimum of effort, to manually orautomatically set tickler review dates

3. Set up a payment plan for each case, or modify anexisting plan when a defendant is convicted in acase and is granted the opportunity to makedeferred or installment payments

3. Have the ability to set up a payment plan for a person, and eitherallow more than one payment plan per person or add to anexisting plan, to accommodate multiple cases and multipleobligations

4. Convert financial obligations to non-financialobligations (e.g., community service, jail time.)

4. Have the ability, with a minimum number of steps, to convert afinancial obligation to a non-financial one, and set up monitoringof the new obligation

5. Send letter notices to a defendant with languageappropriate to the stage in the collection process(e.g., first notice, subsequent notice, notice ofimpending additional sanctions.)

5. Have the ability, with a minimum effort, to track what stage inthe collection process a defendant is, and send an appropriatenotice

6. Improve the quality of addresses and reducemailing costs for returned mail

6. Have the ability, with a minimum effort, to obtain new addressesfor non-delivered letters (skip trace) or use a service to improveaddress data quality and populating the database with updatedaddresses

7. Contact defendants by phone in a cost-effectiveway, using the language spoken by the defendantand ensure that allegations of abusive calls can beavoided or refuted with evidence

7. Have the ability to automatically make phone calls on specificdays and at times of day, use prerecorded scripts appropriate tothe defendant’s language and type of call, leave a message,allow the defendant to immediately call the collector back,monitor hang-ups, and record all conversations

8. Provide a means for defendants to accessinformation about their obligations and pay byphone or Internet

8. Have the ability for defendants to look up their obligations andto make payment through interactive voice response (IVR) andthe Internet, and with a minimum of effort, update the databasewith payment information

9. Provide a means for staff to identify priorities inapplying efforts to collection tasks

9. Have the ability to produce screen displays or reports identifyingindividual or classes of cases, according to prioritization criteria,for directing their efforts

Table 9Business Capabilities and Technology Tools



Software that improves the monitoring andenforcement of financial obligations may be part of acase management system (CMS) or a standalonemodule that should be integrated with a CMS. Notevery CMS has all of the functions needed for in-house collections, so a standalone module may be asolution to making collection staff more productive.The more closely integrated with the life cycle of acase and overall case management functions acollection module is, the less labor will be requiredof the system users, e.g., no duplicate data entry orupdates.

Defendant/Account InformationSoftware used for collections needs to keep track, bydefendant/account, of a variety of kinds ofinformation. Table 10 sets forth a list of thesefunctions.

Collection-Related Software FunctionsSoftware useful for in-house collections must be ableto perform a variety of functions that fulfill thebusiness capabilities and the defendant/accountinformation needs described above.

Some actions can be automatically initiated by thesoftware based on business rules, notifying the user.For example, the software can be configured toidentify the occurrence of a condition becoming“True,” as when the current date matches a tickler,or when the current date matches a due date set bystaff or set automatically by the system. Staff thentakes the action that the system prompts. To theextent that the business rules are completelyanalyzed and completely implemented, no financialobligation will “fall through the cracks.”

Other actions are initiated by events that occur incourt or at the counter and are carried out by stafffor administrative reasons (e.g., apply funds receivedfrom third parties) or under direction of a judge(e.g., convert fine to time served). To the extentthat the software has workflow capabilities, when a

10.2 Software

Type of Information Examples

1. Status of the obligation, as a trigger to abusiness rule or selection criteria for on-screenor printed report or letter

Payment duePayment delinquentWhich letters have been mailedBroken promisesNon-sufficient fund (NSF) check(s) received

2. Account and payment history , as a trigger to abusiness rule or selection criteria for on-screenor printed report

Number of days outstandingNumber of days without payment

3. Contact logDate and time of contactType of contact (in-person, phone, mail)Staff person making log entry

4. Status and history of address/phone dataActive address/phone, including type of phone

(home/work/cell)Mail returnedDisconnected

Table 10Defendant/Account Information for Management of Collections



chain of events is manually initiated by staff, furtheractions can be accomplished by the software withminimal human involvement (e.g., staff schedules ahearing, and the system automatically generates anotice, makes a docket entry).

Still other actions may be initiated either by staff orby the system automatically, depending on the type

of function or decision being performed. The systemmay send a notification to staff because an accountmeets some criteria, or staff may recognize the needby occurrence of some event or generate a reportperiodically.

Table 11 below sets forth a list of these functions.

Function or Decision How Initiated

Receipt payment Initiated by staff

Distribute funds daily/ weekly/ monthly to appropriate fundsin the jurisdiction

Initiated by staff

Generate document from template, e.g., notice, letter, order Either by staff or automatically by system,depending on context

Create payment plan, including multiple plans for adefendant for additional cases resulting in a fine before anexisting account is paid off

Initiated by staff

Monitor payment due/delinquent dates System automatically notifies staff

Prioritize collection tasks for collector (e.g., by debtor statuscode, type of obligation, amount of obligation, number ofdays outstanding, number of days without payment)

System automatically notifies staff

Notification to staff to remind debtor by phone System automatically notifies staff

Notification to staff to remind debtor by letter System automatically notifies staff

Suspend/Reinstate license, e.g., drivers, hunting, professional System automatically notifies staff

Put hold on vehicle registration System automatically notifies staff

Refer account to external collection agency System automatically notifies staff

Withdraw account from external collections Initiated by staff

Intercept funds, e.g., state income tax refund, lotterywinnings, prison account

Initiated by staff

Apply funds received from third parties, e.g., collectionagency, tax intercept

Initiated by staff

Garnish wages Initiated by staff

Execute wage assignment Initiated by staff

Initiate show-cause proceeding, e.g., failure to pay or comply System automatically notifies staff

Issue warrant Either by staff or automatically by system,depending on context

Convert fine to time served Initiated by staff

Convert fine to/from community service Initiated by staff

Skip trace Debtor Initiated by staff

Suspend collections, e.g., bankruptcy, death Initiated by staff

Write off bad debts System automatically notifies staff

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

Table 11Collection-Related Software Functions



Performing these functions should entail a numberof related functions:

• Making a docket entry of action taken• Saving documents generated in the

document management database, andcreating a link to the docket entry

• Making an indication of the status of a caseor person based on the action taken, for usein taking further action, measuringperformance of the overall collection effortand of individual performance, and inproviding an audit trail for actions taken.

Another software function is information exchangebetween the collection module of the casemanagement system and other systems, internally orexternally operated. An automated interface avoidsdata entry from paper and the productivity issuesassociated with it: resource expense of handling/storing paper and performing data entry, delay inprocessing, and errors in data entry.

Exchange of data requires attention to detail insending and receiving agreed-upon data in a specificformat and putting constraints on how theinformation can be used. A contract with an externalunit, or an intergovernmental agreement ormemorandum of understanding with a governmentagency, is advisable to govern the relationship.

When importing data, it is advisable to incorporateon-screen or printed exception reports to enableusers to view items that do not meet data edit andacceptability requirements. Data should not beblindly incorporated into a court database withoutreview and acceptance by a clerk.

Export of data to a word processor through a mailmerge operation is often considered a standardsoftware function of a case management system. Ina collection environment, it is useful for generatingcustom documents, notices, and addresses for file oraddress labels.

Data can be exported to and imported from a varietyof other systems, depending on the capabilities ofthe collection module. Exporting data is a simpleroperation, since importing data requires review ofdata or exception reports.

Export of data in a comma-separated-values (CSV)format used by spreadsheets is a common feature ofdatabase systems. Each line in the CSV filecorresponds to a row in the table. Within a line,fields are separated by commas, each field belonging

10.3 Software System Interfaces



to one table column. Managers with spreadsheetskills can analyze data from the database in more adhoc and analytical ways than system displays orreports can provide.

Export and import of data in custom formats,according to the needs and capabilities of anexternal system, requires custom softwaredevelopment. Changes to data fields or data formatin the external system must be reflected in theinterface, so coordination between the two systemsis required (point-to-point interfaces). To the extentthat standard interfaces for exchange of collectionrelated information are developed (using, forexample, data elements in the National InformationExchange Model [NIEM]), the prevalence of customdata formats will be reduced.

The most common interfaces between the court’scase management system and county, state, orcommercial applications include the following inTable 12 below.

Ideally, interfaces should have both export andimport capability (two-way interfaces). Automatingonly export of data achieves some savings, butmanual data entry of information coming backcompromises the benefits of the interface. Forinstance, sending accounts to a collection agencyinvolves sending case number, name, identifiers,contact information, and amount owed. When thecollection agency sends information monthly onamounts received, this information should be inelectronic format to facilitate updating the cases inthe case management system with paymentinformation.

Information Exported to or Received fromInterface

Receiving Agency/System

Scanned images of documents useful incollections

Document management system, viewable withlinks in the case management system

Accounts referred to a third party forcollection that meet agreed to criteria,payments made directly to the court onreferred accounts, and recalled accounts

External collection agency (public or private) orspecialized collection software module, fortracking, collecting and reporting back to theinternal court system

Amounts received and related informationcollected by external agency

Internal case management system, fromexternal agency system

Individual or groups of defendantssubmitted to the service provider to obtainadditional function

External service provider or internally hostedsoftware package (e.g., autodialer, addressverification, NSF items, and skip tracing)

Responses to queries from external serviceprovider, by individual account or grouplists of information,

Internal case management system, fromexternal service provider or internally hostedsoftware package (e.g., autodialer, addressverification, NSF items, and skip tracing)

Accounts meeting state criteria for the taxintercept program

State revenue department tax interceptprogram

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Table 12Case Management System Interfaces for Court Collections



A data warehouse is a centralized database used toshare information originating from disparate datasystems to improve system and informationintegration. The typical approach is to downloadinformation from systems to a warehouse that isaccessible to the justice community. The warehouseis used not only for sharing of information and thecollection of statistical data, but also for othermessaging and subscription service applications thatcan push information to appropriate agencies whenspecific events occur.

Some states and jurisdictions have a judicial datawarehouse with data that is apart from dailyoperations, typically loaded from operationalsystems at regular intervals. Data is organized in away that is meaningful for business analysis andreporting, and facilitates queries for decision making,data mining, and knowledge discovery to meethigher-level goals. Data warehousing creates onedatabase from multiple sources. The final result,however, is homogeneous data which can be moreeasily manipulated.

Michigan’s judicial data warehouse, for example,gives court personnel the ability to search for aperson known to the Michigan Judicial System andall cases in which he or she is involved, withoutregard to a specific county or court CMS. This hasbeen found to assist judges and administrators in anumber of ways, including assisting in locatingdefendants by providing more current addressinformation. A collection use would be looking forpotential matches of delinquent obligations, and inparticular with the Department of Corrections forprison data on defendants, and seeking collection ofmoney from commissary accounts.

The Arizona Supreme Court has created JUSTIS(Judicial Statewide Information Services), whichincludes a statewide data warehouse. The datawarehouse is a component of the central hub thatmanages and routes cases to the courts’ collection

partners. It provides the internal capacity to matchparties across courts in the state and provideinformation on possible alternate addresses. It alsocombines receivables across courts as inputs to thetax intercept program and the vehicle registrationsuspension process . Some of the data sourcesinclude court case information (criminal, civil, andprotection orders), court financial information, andadult/juvenile probation data. JUSTIS not only dealswith the Arizona courts, it deals with externalagencies such as the Arizona Department of PublicSafety (DPS), the Arizona Motor Vehicle Division(MVD), and other external entities.

10.4 Data Warehouse




An autodialer is a device or software that canautomatically dial telephone numbers using phonenumbers loaded from the court database, saving theeffort of looking up and manually dialing a phonenumber. Telephone numbers are queued for dialing,and the autodialer will begin to call each number onthe list. When the autodialer senses that aconnection has been made, an automated message,including instructions on how to get to a live person,will begin to play. In other versions of autodialingsoftware, a connected call will be routed to acollector, who will interact with the person called.

A court that implements a program of phoningdefendants will find that an autodialer device, or aservice that provides such a device, will makecollection staff more productive. Some labor isrequired to enter and maintain phone numbers inthe autodialer system software if there is noautomated interface, and a procedure for identifyingwhich accounts should be called is also needed.

A predictive dialer is a type of autodialer, butenhanced with computing power that can perform avariety of functions, depending on the vendor.Generally, it can predict when a collector will beavailable to speak to a defendant and will timeprogrammed calls so that a collector will likely beavailable. Numbers are then dialed at anappropriate pace, and calls are transferred tocollectors only when a live person has answered andseeks to talk to a collector.

A predictive dialer can automatically dial batches oftelephone numbers for connection to one or morecollection agents, like an autodialer, but it hasadditional features that increase collectorproductivity, such as allowing the person called totalk to a collector, and dynamically controlling thepace of calls based on collector availability.

The dialer gets 70-80% penetration by obtainingvoice or voice-mail contact. Success depends partlyon the unit’s 90-95% rate of good phone numbers.Collections verify contact information at everyopportunity, and the unit uses a skip-tracing serviceand address verification through the U.S. PostalService. The dialer software identifies phonenumber anomalies and duplicates, and producesdaily statistical breakdowns of the total callsscheduled that day, including invalid numbers, noanswer, and busy numbers; the number ofconnections and whether they were answered live orby an answering machine; and the number of peoplewho chose to talk to a collector, and during whathours. This information allows the unit to direct itscollection efforts more effectively.

As an overall evaluation, after five months using thepredictive dialer in Montgomery County, it changedthe entire operation. Collectors can actively work onmore cases because it automated contactingdefendants. Collectors spend more time talking topeople, rather than manually dialing numbers,waiting for calls to go through, or hanging up on busysignals and answering machines. It allows thecollection unit (with 14 collectors) to makethousands of contacts a day instead of hundreds.

Features of a Predictive DialerThe system allows creating custom messages. Thefirst few words are key to keep the person beingcalled listening, and the manager should write scriptswith this in mind. The messages are loaded into thesystem by creating a voice-format file andtransferring it to the predictive dialer software.

The predictive dialer can be set up to call at certaintimes of the day, with options to allow calls to bemade one to four times or wait for a live voice.Montgomery County has built a weekly schedule ofall its collectors and the courts for which it collects(e.g., justice, county, district), and each day thedialer sends out a court’s calls. The recipients of adialer call on a given day may be people past due, orpeople who have missed a payment, depending onthe manager’s priorities.

10.5 Autodialers and Predictive Dialers



The software has a feature that lets the defendantselect option “3”on the phone that allows the personbeing called to speak (“link back”) to a collector.When this happens, before the collector answers, hehears a “whisperback” that identifies the casenumber of the person on the line and says howmuch money the person is behind, and then theperson is connected to the collector. The collector isable to start working with the person, informedabout the status of the account. This allows acollector to handle many more calls per day by nothaving to look up account information beforestarting to talk.

The predictive dialer generates daily reports of howmany people chose to link back, and how many hangup, so collectors can call them all back.Management can see what levels of court got whichcalls and individual collectors. With experience, thecollection unit learned the best time of day to call,and the most effective messages, in relation topayment rates. With such information, they havefound that for each person who gets a call, 90% thenmake a payment within two days.

The technology is appropriate for courts of all sizes.No equipment is required if the system is hosted bythe vendor on the Internet. Courts can use basicfunctionality, such as sending out pre-hearingnotifications for defendants, reminder calls toreduce number of failures to appear, pre-warrantnotification, and juror notification. For instance, amessage can say, “If you do not pay or appear, in 10days this case is going to warrant.”

Effect on Collector Staff ProductivityAt the collector level, staff can determine the besttime of day to call, what message is appropriate forvarious sets of circumstances, and when payment ismade. The collector can be sure the call is beingmade – the system scrubs bad numbers andduplicate numbers. The system also tracks cost –the collector may reduce from four calls to three ifcalls for a given segment of defendants are lesseffective. Collectors can set it for all calls to end at4:30 when they leave the office, and accounts notcalled are loaded into the next day’s call list. They

can use different voices and languages. The systemcan also operate on Saturdays.

The manager can monitor system activity during theday and every day of the week. If the dialeroperates on the weekend, experience will show thebest time of day to find people at home. At 12:15PM on Saturday, for example, even though acollector is not on the phone, the message offersWestern Union as an option to press a key and pay.The following Monday collectors come into theoffice and find many Western Union checks alreadyreceived.

Collectors call people who haven’t been hit by thedialer the exceptions. Collectors are receiving calls,not making them. Defendants at work generally willanswer their cell phones, and they will call back ifthey have the number. Collectors can put whateverthey want on the caller ID to help ensure thatdefendants are more likely to pick up the call.

All calls are recorded, so collectors can prove that agiven call was not abusive if the defendant alleges itwas. Recordings are also a training tool, becausecollectors can hear themselves and be coachedtoward better performance. This makes managersmore productive too, by seeing what works best.(Texas law allows recording of calls with the consentof only one party.)

When the collection unit adopted the dialer, somecollectors were concerned because of the rate thatcalls were coming in. They tested how many callscollectors could handle per minute and set astandard that everyone could achieve withmoderate effort. As collectors became used to thenew workflow, management was able to increasethe call rate gradually, and collectors did not evennotice, though the manager did not want to setunreasonable workloads.



Cost of a Predictive DialerThe predictive dialer costs Montgomery County$1,200-1,500 per month for a subscription, forabout 8,000 calls. It is a subscription, not apurchase. The vendor customized the dialer tomeet the needs of the operation, and customizationwas included in the cost. The dialer has delivered agood return on investment, because the unitimproved its collections by over $400,000, vastlyexceeding the cost of the dialer.

Collector Auditing and Training BenefitsWhere the manager used to do 50 audits to makesure people were calling and mailing, the managernow has two screen displays and can watch all daywhat’s going on. A manager simply cannot watchevery collector and know how they handled all theircalls. The predictive dialer allows the manager tospot-check collector performance and develop aconcrete understanding of how each collector isdoing.

Since all calls are recorded, the manager can goback and verify what transpired during aconversation between a collector and a defendant.If a judge wants to hear the conversation, they findthat it is not always what a complaining defendantis portraying to the court.

The predictive dialer is also a training tool.Collections experience is not a prerequisite foremployment as a collector, because people can betrained. At the beginning, or as a refresher, themanager can listen to phone conversations, eitherthe collector’s side or the caller’s side, or the entireconversation. The manager can use this capabilityas a training tool to coach a collector’s responsesand performance. Because this is such an effectivetool, it has freed up significant time, allowing themanager to more effectively manage both the staffand the entire workflow.

One of the realities of collection is that people movefrequently, and the more time that passes increasesthe likelihood that the address will produce areturned notice. Skip tracing is a term used todescribe the process of locating a person’swhereabouts. Services are available to automateprocessing to locate new contact information. Skiptracing used to be difficult because addressdirectories were printed; now skip-tracing servicesare available online. The more information that acourt has about a person, the more effective skiptracing will be.

A certain percentage of notices and other mailings todefendants will be returned as undeliverable.Postage will become increasingly expensive, soobtaining a current address saves money and makesmail notification effective. Before sending a group ofnotices, a court can run the addresses through a skiptracer to get a good list, and then do the mailing.

A variety of services are available to locate people,including the following:

• The U.S. Postal Service offers a variety ofaddress-verification services and products

• The Social Security Administration canvalidate Social Security numbers to theirowners, and compare SSNs against the DeathMaster File to screen numbers for fraud

• Commercial databases of addresses andphone numbers

10.6 Skip-Tracing Services



Credit-reporting companies also provide, for a fee,collection scores to identify accounts with thegreatest recovery potential. The Los AngelesSuperior Court through its collection agency uses acollection prioritization service to locate a debtorand determine a debtor’s financial capability to pay.

Commercial debtor location services are moreeffective if the court has a defendant’s SocialSecurity number. Some courts are prohibited fromkeeping this identifier, while others may capture itfrom a payment-plan application.



Chapter 11OPERATIONAL

INFORMATION ANDPERFORMANCE MEASURES

Court managers need information for operationaland management purposes. A collector needsemployment and family-contact information to aid inlocating a defendant who has not paid. A managerneeds information on the whole collection effort toevaluate the effectiveness of current practices andto measure the effect of different collectionpractices.

A critical first step for any collection strategy isdetermining if and when a defendant has thecapacity to pay a fine or fee and whether to pursuedelinquent accounts. The best-managed collectionprograms require at least a financial affidavit from adefendant before permitting a deferred-paymentarrangement. In addition, some courts employ finecollection personnel who also review the affidavits,interview defendants, and verify the informationprovided.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• Can more or better information about a

defendant be collected at the time of theoffense or at the time of the courtappearance?

• Can the court obtain a current address andphone number from state agencies?

• Can the court obtain a current address andphone number from utility companies, creditbureaus, or other commercial sources atreasonable cost?

Practice Tips

Information from State Taxation AuthorityIn many states, the department of taxation(department of revenue) will furnish current addressinformation to a court for its confidential use incollecting accounts receivable. Local taxationrecords also can provide addresses.

Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV)In many jurisdictions, a direct link now existsbetween the court and state DMV, allowing thecourt to provide online suspension notification alongwith access to DMV driver histories and addresses.

Other Courts and Governmental AgenciesSince other local courts and governmental agenciesmay have information useful in locating defendants,fostering relations with individuals within theseagencies can be worthwhile. Courts should notaccept at face value a refusal to provide informationon the basis of confidentiality. In some cases,governmental information not subject to publicaccess may be available to a court. One courtmaintains a link with the state labor department toaccess unemployment claims. They’ve found thataddresses are almost always accurate with a claim toensure that the unemployment check arrivespromptly.

Consumer Credit InformationAlthough a fee is involved, private agencies areexperts at skip tracing and often can find a missingdefendant more quickly than a court can on its own.When a court can negotiate electronic informationexchange relationships, the court can gain access toinformation at reduced cost compared to enteringdata from a paper source.

11.1 Obtaining Defendant Information forCollection Purposes



Managing court collections is simply post-dispositioncaseflow management. Court administrators needinformation to manage the collection process. Theinformation collected and reported will varydepending on the court’s goals. Possible goals mayinclude:

• Accurately report on effectiveness ofcollection efforts

• Determine the effect of policy or operationalchanges

• Justify additional collection resources (e.g.,staff, equipment, software)

• Do revenue projections• Develop goals for improving timeliness of

collections (i.e., 50% in the first 30 days) anddetermine if the goals are being achieved

• Develop goals for reducing receivables (i.e.,reduce the number of accounts six monthsold by 50%)

Managers can take comfort in the fact that there isno “national standard” collection rate. Each courtneeds to find its own current level and employmethods to improve it.

Issues to Guide Policymaking• What is the court’s current collection rate for

fines? For restitution? For costs? Forappointed counsel fees?

• Can the court’s information system generatea list of defendants with outstanding finesand fees that are a given number of days old?

• How quickly are fines, fees, and restitutionposted to court records after orderedpayable to the court?

• How quickly are payments posted andwarrants quashed?

• Does satisfaction of a judgment require acourt order?

• At what point is a debt written off?

CourTools Measure 7 is defined as “paymentscollected and distributed within establishedtimelines, expressed as a percentage of totalmonetary penalties ordered in specific cases.” Theresults of this measure should be reviewed regularly(e.g., monthly, quarterly, annually). If reviewedregularly, the court can establish baselines, setperformance goals, observe trends as they develop,and aggregate the data for annual reporting.

The first task is to compile a list of all misdemeanorcases (or other case types) in which (1) a financialpenalty was ordered on any date, and (2) the duedate for final payment falls within the reportingperiod. The term total monetary penalty includes allfinancial obligations associated with misdemeanorcases, regardless of local terminology and practice(e.g., fines, fees, assessments, restitution, etc).2 Thenumber and dollar total of monetary penalties willlead to some understanding of the dynamics ofjudicial sentencing.

CourTools Measure 7 proposes calculating thecompliance rate for cases in which monetarypenalties were due in full in a given month. Onlycases in which final payment of the total monetarypenalties is due that month are counted. (Mostcourts look only at the dollar volume received duringa month.) The illustration in the CourTools Measure7 brochure, set forth in Figure 2, explains theapproach.

11.2 Policy Issues Related to CaseflowManagement Information

11.3 CourTools Performance Measure 71

1 National Center for State Courts (2005), “Measure 7: Collectionof Monetary Penalties,” CourTools. http://www.ncsc.org/D_Research/CourTools/Images/CourTools_measure7.pdf.

2 If the case includes an order for restitution, additionalinformation will include the amount of restitution ordered, theamount of money collected and applied to the restitutionobligation, and the amount disbursed to the victims. For thepurposes of the measure, separate restitution“accounts” (multiple victims/payees) can be aggregated into asingle balance.

http://www.ncsc.org/



By examining payments received within thereporting period, and categorizing paymentsaccording to their age, one can see how long theobligation has been outstanding. When this isperformed regularly, one can see whether policy andoperational changes (e.g., different colloquy in thecourtroom, notices sent, show-cause proceedingsinstituted) are producing results. Collecting thenumber of payments also will allow calculation ofaverage payments, which will lead to someunderstanding of the dynamics of payments bydefendants.

CourTools Measure 7 identifies eight essential dataelements:

1. Case number2. Date of the order of sentence3. Due date for final payment of the total

monetary penalty

4. Total monetary penalty in the case5. Amount of total monetary penalty received

(collected) to date6. Total amount of restitution ordered in the

case7. Amount received that is applied by the

court to restitution8. Amount of restitution received that is

disbursed to victims

Following this procedure will result in calculating thepreliminary compliance rate: the total monetarypenalties that were collected as actual dollars.Courtroom realities include conversion of fines andfees to jail served in lieu of payment and communityservice. Subtracting these adjustments produces theoverall compliance rate.

Figure 2CourTools Measure 7 Reporting Period Example



This section was written by Alphonso Jefferson, Jr., SupportServices Department Administrator, Office of Lydia Gardner,Orange County, Florida, Clerk of Courts Administration. 3

Collections within a Certain Time PeriodThe basic approach to collection measures is tocapture the amount of revenue that has beencollected within a certain time period. Figures arenormally expressed in dollar amounts and arecalculated separately for each revenue source. Thisprocess allows for organizations to fully understandhow collection activities are affecting the revenuesource rather than as an aggregate.

The following is a list of measurements that can beused to evaluate the performance of a revenuecollection system:

• Current year’s versus prior year’scollections

• Dollar value of collections• Total amount collected• Number of cases assigned to collections

• Age of collections• Collection rate• Cost per transaction• Cost of collections• Electronic transaction turnover• Average collection period• Collection effectiveness index• Prior month past-due collection rate• Active customer account (cases) per

collection employee• Operating cost per employee• Operating cost per transaction• Productivity• Cost-benefit• Return on investment

For explanation of the meaning and the calculationof the measures listed, please refer to Table 13.

Measure Definition FormulaReportingFrequency

Current year versus prioryears’ collections

This measure compares collection activity forthe current to prior years’ activity.

Total amount collected forcurrent year and prioryears.

Monthly

Dollar value of collections This measure identifies cases that haveamounts outstanding receivables to becollected on.

Dollar value of collections Monthly

Total amount collected This measure identifies the total amount ofdollars collected.

Total amount collected Monthly

Number of casesassigned to collections

This measure identifies cases that have beenassigned for collection.

Number of cases Monthly

Age of collections This measure identifies the age of receivablesand the time frame in which they werecollected.

Age of collections –Normally recognized inincrements of 30, 60, 90,120 or more days

Monthly

Collection Rate The collection rate is the total of all collectionsrelated to the assessment control group dividedby the actual assessments of the reportingperiod. A high percentage rate indicates howeffective the program.

Total amount collection /(Total amount assessed-adjustments toassessments)

Quarterly

Table 13Performance Measure Definitions

3 One source used in the development of this material was the Government Financial Officer’s Association (GFOA) atwww.gfoa.org.

http://www.gfoa.org.



Measure Definition FormulaReportingFrequency

Cost of collections This measure identifies the total amount of costassociated with collection efforts that isprovided by the organization.

Total cost of collections Annually

Electronictransaction turnover

This measure calculates the percentage oftransactions that are processed electronically.The higher the percentage, the more effectivethe use of technology.

Number of electronictransactions processed /Number of total transactionsprocessed

Monthly

Average collectionperiod

This measure identifies the average days tocollection outstanding receivables. The lowerthe number, the better the collection activities.

Sum of number of days /Number of days

Monthly

Collectioneffectiveness index

This percentage expresses the effectiveness ofcollection efforts over time. The closer to 100percent, the more effective the collection effort.It is a measure of the quality of collection ofreceivables, not of time.

(Beginning receivables +(Credit sales/N*) – Endingtotal receivables / Beginningreceivables + (Credit sales/N*) – Ending currentreceivables) X 100*Where N = Number ofmonths or days

Monthly

Prior month past -due collection rate

This percentage expresses the amount that hasbeen collected in the current month of the priormonth’s past-due amount.

1 – (Current month’s past-dueage categories / Beginningreceivables of prior month)

Monthly

Active customeraccount (cases) percollection employee

This figure represents the total number of casesper employee. This figure illustrates the volumethat is assigned to employees.

Number of active cases /Number of collection staffassigned

Monthly

Operating cost peremployee

This figure represents the total dollars spent peremployee. The lower the cost, the moreeffective use of technology and people.

Operating cost / Number ofcollection staff assigned

Annually

Operating cost pertransaction

This figure represents the total dollars spent pertransaction. The lower the cost, the moreeffective use of technology and people. Thiscalculation can be used to evaluate individualsystems associated with the collection process.

Operating cost / Number oftransactions processed

Annually

Productivity This figure represents the productivity level ofstaff assigned to the collection activity. Thehigher the amount, the better.

Outputs / Inputs Monthly

Cost-benefit A process by which you weigh expected costsagainst expected benefits to determine the best(or most profitable) course of action.

Benefits / Costs Annually

Simple return oninvestment

This figure represents how effectively anorganization uses its capital to generate gains.The higher the ROI, the better.

(Gains-Cost) / Cost Annually

Table 13 (Continued)Performance Measure Definitions



Performance measures are most effective when theyalign with the overall organization’s strategic plan.This allows for specific objectives to be met that areunderstood by primary stakeholders. Anorganization is best able to achieve theserequirements when measurement is part of theroadmap. A performance measure should beaccurate, relevant, and actually used within theorganization.

Performance measures also help local officialsevaluate services and demonstrate accountability tocity councils and the public. Measuring performancein areas that matter most to stakeholders is criticalto improving communication with the public anddemonstrating accountability for the limitedresources available.

Practice Tips

Baseline Information and Testing Effects ofManagement ActionsBefore starting a collection program, managers needto collect baseline information for a comparisonbasis . If a manager wants to test, for example, theeffectiveness of sending delinquency notices, ahistorical basis is needed to determine if theprocedure increased collections. Ideal baselineinformation will include numbers of accounts as wellas dollar amounts.

One method for creating baseline data is using acontrol group. A manager can select arepresentative random sample of “old” unpaid cases,do a notification campaign on half, leaving the otherhalf as a control group. The effect of sending noticesto one group of cases can then be compared tocollections in cases that received no notice.

As an example, a judge in one court used a simpleprocess that can be adapted to any court with amanual or less-sophisticated automatedmanagement system. To test the efficacy of a newcollection strategy (a series of monthly collectionletters), the judge randomly selected a group ofabout 100 cases with overdue fines on which to test

his plan. Another similar group was selected as acontrol. Manually tracking the response to hisefforts in the test cases, as well as payment rates forthe control group, was not difficult or time-consuming and provided clear proof that thestrategy increased collections. Similar samples canbe made at regular intervals to ensure that acollection program continues to be effective.Sampling also should be done to test any newtechniques a court may be considering.

One danger in developing management informationis creating too many reports, reports that aredifficult to understand, or reports in which no onehas any interest. For these reasons, the overall goalsof the collection plan must first be established, andinformation must then be developed to report onthose goals. The court should format reports so thata disinterested party will find them interesting andeasy to review.

Continuous Monitoring of Collection ResultsIn general, an effective information-tracking systemshould be available to the collection programcontinuously. Depending upon the court’s collectiongoals, the following information may be generatedto assess status or progress:

1. An exception report of cases 30, 60, and 90 dayspast due. This report tells the court how old itscollection caseload is and can be used to triggerapplication of the next progressively coercivemethod of enforcement at a predeterminedtime.

2. A report showing cases of a specified age or witha lack of activity (addressee moved, noforwarding address). This report can helpdetermine whether a case should be released toa private collection agency or declareduncollectible and written off.

3. The number of pending open fine accounts,including the age and status of the case.

4. Average/median times required to collect in fullby case type.

5. The number of collection letters that have beenreturned undelivered.



6. The number of accounts (payment plans) closedin a month and year.

7. Total monies received, including locally retainedfunds and funds mandated by the state.

8. The number and percentage of cases in whichfines have been fully collected within specificperiods of time following their imposition (i.e., 1-7, 8-14,15-21 days, etc.).

9. Percentage of total amount imposed that hasbeen collected by month and year, to determinethe seasonal pattern. Number and amount ofpayments collected by specific procedures:

(a) mail-in payments(b) payments at the counter reminder(c) notice for delinquent payments and

the payments received(d) phone notifications and the payments

received(e) bench warrants issued

An ideal system would generate all of thisinformation; but typically some portion of theseindicators can be reported from the financial systemand loaded into a spreadsheet for furthermanipulation. This information will help staffmanage collections and determine the effectivenessof different techniques used to improve collection.

Most court financial management systems captureonly dollar amounts, which are important forrevenue reporting and “political” purposes.Determining the number of accounts receivable, onthe other hand, is more important for collectionsmanagement purposes. A high aggregate dollaramount of collections for a month may be the result,for example, of seasonal variation, or a single largeatypical restitution or fine payment.

Calculating Cost of CollectionsA manager can determine the cost per financialtransaction by reviewing each receipting process andconducting a time and motion study to identify eachstep in the process, who is involved, the amount oftime needed to complete the step, and the out-of-pocket and operating cost of each mode of receivingrevenue. In 2008 the Orange County, Florida, Clerkof Courts found the “point of sale cost” of themethods they use to receive payments, as follows:

• Internet payments, where the defendantpays a convenience fee: $0.13 per transaction

• Payments received through a check-cashingbusiness under contract with the county(AMSCOT), where the customer pays $1 perfinancial transaction: $0.43 per transaction

• Payments received through Western Union:$0.43 per transaction

• Payments through phone payment system,where the customer pays a $3.99convenience fee to the money transferservice Link2Gov: $0.43 per transaction

• Lockbox at bank, with no fee to customer:$0.43 per transaction

A jurisdiction can calculate its marginal cost ofcollections (the cost associated with collecting adollar) by dividing the cost of collections (labor andother expenses) by the amount of collected receipts.The Orange County Clerk’s overall cost of collectionsover an eight-year period was $4.6 million, andcollected receipts of $75 million, at a cost of about$0.06 of every dollar received. The MontgomeryCounty, Texas, Collections unit’s cost of collectionswas $700,000, and collected receipts of $12 million,at a cost of about $0.06 of every dollar received. TheArizona FARE program collects approximately $30million per year with a budget of $1.2 million, at acost of about $0.04 of every dollar received.



Chapter 12OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO

COURT COLLECTIONS

Some collection practices may not be institutedwithout supporting legislation, while others mayrequire a court rule. A jurisdiction should obtainlegal advice, as variations occur across states.

Nonrenewal of Motor Vehicle Registration andDriver’s License HoldSome jurisdictions can suspend vehicle registrationsor render them ineligible for renewal for failure topay parking tickets, or place a hold on the owner’sdriver’s license. Similar provisions for failure to paytraffic citations also would create effectivemotivation to pay moving violations. The argumentagainst such legislation is that many drivers,particularly spouses and dependents, need to usevehicles that are not registered in their names.

Income Tax and Other OffsetsSimilar to income tax refund setoffs for delinquentchild support, a number of states have enacted a lawallowing jurisdictions to report unpaid fines and feesto the department of revenue for offset against statetax refunds and lottery and gambling winnings.Copies of statutes from other states as examples areavailable from the NCSC.

At the federal level, in 2009 Congress wasconsidering the latest of several bills introduced. Ifsuch a bill becomes law, it is likely that courts willcertify the debt to the state’s general revenue office,and delinquent fines and fees will be added to thestate’s list of obligations to the federal program thatintercepts federal tax refunds for unpaid child-support debt. Intercepted refunds would go to therevenue office who, in turn, would return it to thecourts. Most state administrative offices of the courtalready have this arrangement, but there are somethat do not return anything back to the state courts.Further information on federal legislation can beobtained from the NCSC’s Government RelationsOffice.

12.1 Legislative Issues



Many jurisdictions are struggling with escalatingexpenses for counsel provided to indigent criminaldefendants. Many court officials noted that unpaidcounsel fees are one of the major collectionproblems faced by their courts.

In most jurisdictions, counsel fees are costs orderedfollowing conviction. Thus, the order comes at apoint when the defendant, who often has beensentenced to time in jail or prison along with a fine,is least able to pay the costs related torepresentation. Enforcement tools for costs oftenare more limited than for fines. In particular, manycourts cannot issue a warrant for nonpayment ofcosts, including appointed counsel fees.

Some jurisdictions have made a philosophical shiftfrom viewing counsel fees as an aspect of thepenalty imposed on those convicted. Instead,counsel fees are considered a cost of defense forwhich financially able and qualifying defendants areasked to contribute, similar to the expense incurredby those who hire private attorneys. Defendants areordered to pay toward the cost of their defenseaccording to their ability before trial or other casedisposition.

Financial screening and payment toward counselcosts at the beginning of a case has obviousadvantages for the court system, since a defendant ismore likely to have the financial means to contributeto the costs of defense. Additionally, under a pre-conviction model, contribution toward indigentdefense costs are spread among all appropriateusers of appointed counsel, not just those who areconvicted. The process also has advantages fordefendants. First, screening coupled with incomeguidelines will ensure enhanced consistency andfairness in the amounts ordered to be paid. Second,borderline defendants who may now narrowly fail toqualify for counsel appointment may be eligible ifrequired to pay all or most of their counsel fees.

Since appointed counsel usually are compensated atbelow market rates, these individuals are better offwith an appointed attorney, even if they arerequired to assist substantially with defense costs.

A shift to prepayment of counsel fees involves asignificant change in how a court system views adefendant’s responsibility for the costs of his or herdefense. It is not expected that any court will easilyembrace such an important change. The issue maybe explored as a means of helping to restraingrowing costs and enhance collectability of theseamounts.

12.2 Cost Recovery of Indigent Defense



A few states have instituted statewide traffic-violation bureaus that process all traffic infractionsand handle fine enforcement. The central approach,with the economies of scale offered by a largeoperation, has been particularly effective in statesthat previously processed traffic cases through manysmall courts.

Some states maintain central governmentalcollection agencies to collect amounts owed to stateagencies, including courts. The courts pay a setannual fee to support the government collectionagency.

Fine amnesty programs have helped bring insubstantial revenue and close delinquent cases in anumber of courts. Amnesties are most effectivewhen an incentive can be offered to inspirepayments (e.g., waiver of interest, late fees, orcosts). The level of incentive must be carefullyconsidered. It should generous enough toencourage a substantial number of payments whilenot cutting too greatly into revenue.

Amnesties may create more problems than theysolve, since many defendants will wait for the nextamnesty if there is any indication that another onemay be offered. In addition, amnesties should becoupled with strong fine enforcement efforts. Thereis little reason to pay voluntarily during an amnesty ifpublic perception is that the court is not going toenforce the fine anyway. Instead of an amnestyprogram, a court may first try a mass mailing to alldelinquent accounts, see Chapter 13, “SampleCollection Strategies”. Particularly for a court with aweak history of fine enforcement, a strong demandletter may generate as many payments, without thedisadvantages of an amnesty.

12.3 Centralized Traffic and GovernmentCollection Units

12.4 Fine Amnesty



Chapter 13SAMPLE COLLECTION

STRATEGIES

The following sample programs are based onsuccessful collection programs observed in a numberof courts.

Requiring payment on the same day as sentencingfor traffic, misdemeanor, and felony fines is aninexpensive way to improve collection of fines andfees. The courts with the best collection rates usethis policy. Success will require that all or mostjudges use the same methods.

Communicating the Court’s Attitude towardCollection

The court needs to make payment an immediatematter in the lives of guilty defendants bycommunicating this message at the followingopportunities:

• When the citation is issued throughinformation provided with the citation

• When the defendant appears in court, eitherat the clerk’s office or in the courtroom

• When the defendant receives any writtennotice from the court concerning payment ofthe fine

Courtroom Communications

The court has five opportunities to communicate“payment on date of sentencing”: (1) orally and/or inwriting at the initial hearing or pretrial, (2) orallyand/or in writing at the probation screening, (3)orally during mass admonition at the beginning ofthe docket, (4) orally upon sentencing of everydefendant, and (5) in writing by handing thedefendant a fine-payment due date following

sentencing. Some courts have signs notifyingdefendants that fines are expected to be paid thesame day. Defendants should be given a notice ofany future hearing date and the list of consequencesthat the court has the power to invoke if thedefendant does not pay.

Consistency is important to success. Unless all ormost of a court’s judges agree to notify defendantsof the policy of “payment on date of sentencing,” thelikely result is forum shopping for more-lenientjudges.1 Members of the court are in the bestposition to draft a few sentences that the court canagree to use.

Exceptions to Same-Day Payment PolicyAn answer of “no” to the question “you will be ableto pay today, won’t you?” raises the issue of how todeal with exceptions to the same-day paymentpolicy. Unless the court controls this moment, everydefendant who believes there is a means of avoidingimmediate payment will exploit the opportunity. Ofthe options available, maintaining the position thatpayment is due and the defendant will have to eitherfind the money or risk the consequences ofnonpayment is probably the better course to take inthe courtroom.

One court with an excellent collection rate for trafficcases never formally approves an extension of timeto pay. Defendants are advised that under state lawa license suspension cannot be completed until thefine is 30 days overdue, providing those with difficultcircumstances an informal grace period.

How does a judge recognize when an exceptionshould be made to the same-day payment policywithout colloquy with the defendant? One way is toinstitute the screening function (“in-house collectionunit”) described in Chapter 6. The screening staffposition has different names in differentjurisdictions: a collection investigator, judicialenforcement unit, or a probation collection officer.Staff members collect information about defendants

13.1 Sample Program 1: Payment-on-Day-of-Sentencing Program

1 It is likely that the strongest advocates for delayed payments in any court are the defense attorneys who prefer that adefendant’s scarce resources first be dedicated to paying legal fees.



by requiring completion of a financial affidavit andinterview. Filling out the affidavit and waiting for aninterview may be enough to discourage somedefendants from seeking a delayed payment. Theyare likely to be individuals with resources who do notwish to disclose their financial status.

Some courts allow the collection unit staff to setterms of payment. State law may require judges todetermine the sentence, including the terms ofpayment and whether a defendant qualifies for adeferred or installment payment. If the duty cannotbe delegated, a court can create a “special master”with power to recommend payment terms subject tocourt approval.

Screeners also assume collection enforcementduties. Following default, collection unit stafftelephone the defendant at work or at home, andsend notice of sanctions to be applied if payment isnot made. If the defendant still fails to pay, thecollection unit may suspend the defendant’s driver’slicense, garnish his or her wages, or issue an arrestwarrant.

A primary purpose for same-day payment is to avoidrepeat appearances for payment hearings. Onereferee observed conducting a traffic docket doesallow an additional 30 days to pay upon request forfines over $25. However, the court imposes a $10late fee to discourage delays. Courts in anotherstate assess a $12 fee for establishing a delayedpayment arrangement. The fee must be paid on theday of sentencing. Extensions are an acceptablepractice if they do not encourage defendants toappear in court repeatedly, clogging dockets andwasting valuable court time.

Every court has some inventory of uncollected finesand fees, which should undergo screening. Whetherthe court does this in-house or refers these cases tosome outside agency, the procedure is the same. Thenames, addresses, and amounts owed can beentered into a simple PC-based database system tofacilitate preparation of address labels and trackingof responses.

The court can send a letter stating the amount owedand demanding payment or appearance at a hearing.Mail sent to the last known address with “ADDRESSCORRECTION REQUESTED” stamped or printed onthe envelope will automatically be forwarded if theaddress has been filed with the postal service. Thepostal service also will then provide new addressesto governmental agencies upon request.

Some percentage of letters demanding payment willbe returned by the postal service. Court staff caneither attempt to find those defendants or turnthose accounts over to a collection agency.

Addresses on letters that come back undelivered canbe checked in a variety of ways: through a lawenforcement system, a new warrant, or the driver’slicense file. Many delinquent defendants don’t fileaddress changes, or they use relatives’ or friends’addresses, and thus are difficult to track.

Demand letters not returned presumably werereceived, and some percentage of defendants willpay or appear at the hearing as required by theletter. Active collection can be pursued with thisgroup. Defendants who apparently received theletter but did not respond are more problematic.Additional effort will be required to obtain aresponse from them, and some percentage of thesefines will become uncollectible.

13.2 Sample Program 2: Reducing a Backlog ofAccount Receivable



A mass mailing is a good mechanism for launching anew fine collection program. It identifiesuncollectible accounts and accounts moreappropriately handled by a private collector,eliminating the need for further court action. Moreimportantly, courts that use this process reportsignificant success. In all cases, the revenuegenerated exceeded by several times the expense ofthe program.

Many courts have found a multi-contact approacheffective in reaching defendants who have not madepayments for some time.



CONCLUSION

Courts can receive significant benefits from many ofthe methods discussed in this handbook at little orno cost. For example, emphasizing immediatepayment appears to improve collection rates andrequire no additional court time or resources. Same-day payment requirements almost certainly reduce acourt’s overall collection costs by eliminating theneed to force compliance in many cases.

While low-cost or no-cost strategies appear toincrease collections, courts that added resources forfine and fee collection have found that the expenseis more than compensated by even greater revenueincreases. Improved technology and use ofcollection investigators are justified by faster andhigher payments, both in total and on an individual-case basis. Savings are realized by using in-housecollections rather than hiring a private agency, withthe added advantage that a court retains full controlover its caseload. Although some collection methodsrequire an investment of staff, facilities, or softwaredevelopment, most require only one criticalelement: a court leader’s time and commitment.

Effective and efficient collection of fines and fees willcontinue to be an important issue for courtsthroughout the country. While the emphasis incollections should not be on enhancing ajurisdiction’s revenue stream, the reality is thatfunding authorities will be tempted to view courts as“money-making” operations. In many localities,pressure on courts to pay for themselves is likely toincrease. Courts that fail to improve and documentthe success of operations in this area are likely to bethe targets of criticism from the legislature, media,and public.

More importantly, any court with a poor collectionsrecord should consider the message to the public “afine unpaid is a lesson unlearned.” The philosophyof several judges interviewed is that fineenforcement, particularly for first-time offenders, isan opportunity to teach social responsibility andprevent criminal behavior. If a court fails to enforcefines for lesser offenses, many defendants willdepart the legal system with a belief that theconsequence of breaking the law is, perhaps, someminor inconvenience.

A nonprofit organization improvingjustice through leadership and service to

courts

WWW.NCSC.ORG

Phone: (303) 293-3063Fax: (303) 296-9007Toll Free: (800) 466-3063

John T. MatthiasPrincipal Court Management

[email protected]

Daniel J. HallVice President

Court Consulting ServicesNational Center for State Courts

707 17th Street, Suite 2900Denver, CO 80202

Laura KlaversmaCourt Services [email protected]

http://WWW.NCSC.ORG

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

current practices in collecting fines...during the research period of 2007 to 2009. the project...

Documents