Collection agency in rupert?

hey im curious if anyone knows if there is a collection agency in prince rupert, i got someone who owes me some money and doesnt seem to want to pay up

ps if anyone wants to make $100 getting my money from the dude, I’d be down for that too…i’ll even throw in $9.50 for a shovel handle.

Heh, for $100 you can take the person to small claims court, that might be an option for you.

Caledonia Bailiffs out of Terrace service the rupert area…for a fee

i’m out of town right now, and not coming back anytime soon.

You can download the court documents from the Internet, probably have someone file the documents for you at the court house and then serve the documents to the offending party by registered mail.  I don’t think you usually need to make an appearance for small claims court.
Or better yet why not just type up the forms and print off the small claims documents from the Internet and send the forms to the person and say you’ll be filing the documents in court by a certain date unless they pay up, try to bluff them.  That wouldn’t cost you anything but a stamp.  They might get scared and send you the money.  If that doesn’t work you can sue them.


Molten… You may want to send a registered letter to your debtor and make a demand for payment.  In a litigation process, the court will rely on the fact whether or not you’ve made a demand for the payment, and in most instances will require proof that you did.  In your demand, you can state what your intentions are, i.e. legal recourse,  and also provide a date, i.e. 10 days from the date of the letter to which payment is to be made.  You can also state that failure to remit payment will result in legal action and that all costs associated with the claim will be borne by the intended defendant.  If you need a hand, just send me a private message.



Okay.  I think it depends on how far the trial goes and if the other party registers a reply.  If the other party is in the wrong they may not fight it and settle out of court.  If you have supporting documentation proving they owe money they would be stupid to fight it.

If you file a small claims against someone you absolutely have to be there. If you don’t show up your claim gets dismissed. If the other party doesn’t show up, and you have proof of service, a warrant for thier arrest can go out if the judge issues one. No court lets you file a claim and not show up. In some cases an exception can be made to allow you to appear by telephone, but you would have to apply to the judge for permission. Of course you can settle “out of court” but there will be no court file at all if someone doesn’t show up on behalf of the claimant.

Also if no one shows up you would have lost your filing fee which I think is like $100 now.


Thanks for the correction, Mike:-) I know you work in the legal system.  This is good to know.  It is good to know that the original poster can apply to appear by telephone.

It does appear that you may have your jurisdictions a little crossed. You are attempting to protray what would happen in a criminal proceeding, i.e. Judge ordering a warrant? In a civil process, a claim for monies due and owing as in the case/matter here, the due course is handled differently than suggested. Basically, if the defendant does not show up, a “Default Judgment” is automatically awarded to the plaintiff immediately upon application. Granted the default judgment could be set aside for what ever reason the defendant may have for not appearing, prior to that, the judgment could be excersized on bank accounts, employers and even bailiff services to recover the amount of the judgment. To date, I have never heard of a judge issuing a bench warrant for the arrest of a defendant in a civil litigious action, who did not appear.

Better yet… screw the entire process and go for a Chambers Application on a Rule 18(a) Summary Judgment application. Fuck the process and go straight for the jugular. That’s what I would do.

I said a warrant can go out… not that it’s the usual process. And yes, it does happen. It happened last week for instance when I was over in Masset for court. The two defendants in a civil claim did not show up for court. The judge issued an immediate warrant for thier arrest (usually they send a warning letter first) as this wasn’t the first time this had happened. We went out and found them, brought them before the judge, and they made thier appearance. They were given direction to come to court next month (court is only one week a month over there) with further disclosure about thier finances. If they don’t show next month I’m sure we’ll see another warrant issued.

Most often the warrants are issued when someone doesn’t pay up after a judgement has been issued. Those warrants are basically “catch and release” as a way to get them before the court.


BINGO!  Keynote = “after a judgment has been issued”.

Rule 7.0 (sub 17) states… “A judge may dismiss the claim or make a payment order or other appropriate order against a party who does not attend a settlement conference.”  I read this rule as meaning if the claimant does not appear, the claim may be dismissed and that if the defendant does not appear, an order for payment against the defendant could be awarded.

Rule 13 deals with a Default Hearing, and under (sub 9) of that rule, it states… “If the creditor asks, the judge may issue a warrant (Form 9) for the arrest of a person who does not attend a default hearing and who was  (a) served with a summons to attend, or (b) ordered in person by a judge to attend.”  Without a copy of the Court Order Enforcement Act, I can only take Rule 13 as stemming from a Default Judgment being granted prior to the rule being applied.  In other words, I would assume that Rule 13 would only apply AFTER a settlement conference has been conducted.  (See Rule 7 Settlement Conference).

Hence, I guess anything is possible, including a bench warrent for arrest on executing a judgment.  I do remain firm though that I have never seen/heard of judge ordering this warrant in a small claims matter.  Since this does  exist, or so it appears, I guess my question would be… who is responsible for the court costs of the judge issuing the warrant?

You can play bingo or quote text all you like, my point still stands. Accept it or not I have real life experience with this stuff and have given you a real life example.

Oh and there is no cost to anyone for the issuing of the warrant in my example, nor is there a cost for the execution of that warrant. It’s just eaten up by the court system.