I Objected, but the Proceeding Continues

In short

“I objected,” and the objection having been entered in time, to the correct authority, and for this type of proceeding, are not the same thing. An open file on UYAP can also show a stopped proceeding. A partial objection leaves the accepted part open. The creditor’s action for setting the objection aside is a separate door. The first objection procedure is in the article on an objection to enforcement proceedings.

If you saw a bank block, a wage deduction, or a new enforcement paper even though you gave your objection petition, first verify that the two file numbers are the same. Then download the delivery document of the objection, the service date of the payment order, and the list of the last acts in the file. “I objected,” and “the objection was entered in the file in time, to the correct authority, and in a way suitable to this type of proceeding,” are not the same thing.

In a proceeding without a judgment by way of general attachment, a valid objection made in time stops the proceeding as a rule. By contrast, in a proceeding peculiar to negotiable instruments, in a proceeding on a judgment, and in some special proceedings, the place of the application and the stopping effect are different. A partial objection also affects only the part that was objected to. This article is general information. The lawfulness of the continuation act cannot be determined before the objection document and the file papers are seen together.

First make the expression “the proceeding continues” concrete

That the file looks open on UYAP may not mean the proceeding continues with compulsory-enforcement acts. A file that has been objected to can stay open and motionless until the creditor brings a new action. The following situations should be separated from each other:

• The file looks open, but there is no new act.
• The creditor has brought an action for the lifting or the setting aside of the objection.
• An attachment has been made for the part that was not objected to.
• The objection was given late, or to the wrong authority.
• In this type of proceeding the objection does not give birth to a stopping of itself.
• The provisional-attachment record continues.
• The bank or the employer has not yet processed the old writing that lifts the attachment.

When the name of the problem is put correctly, the application route also becomes clear. Preparing a complaint only because the screen says “open” can be unnecessary. Counting the file’s being open as unimportant while there is an active attachment can give birth to a loss of right.

Check whether the objection is in accordance with procedure

For a valid objection, the period, the authority, the file, and the will are assessed together. The checklist is as follows:

• On which date was the payment order served in accordance with procedure?
• On which date was the objection delivered?
• Was the petition submitted to the correct enforcement office or court?
• Was the correct file number written?
• Was the objection to the whole of the debt, or to a part of it?
• Was an objection to the signature or to authority stated openly?
• Was the paper recorded in the file, and did a receipt document arise?

In a proceeding without a judgment by way of general attachment, an objection made to the enforcement office, and an application to be made to the enforcement court in a negotiable-instrument proceeding, are not the same as a rule. The difference between a proceeding on a judgment and one without a judgment is for this reason not only a theoretical distinction. It directly determines the effect of the application.

Sending by electronic means or by post

Uploading a document from the electronic system may not mean the act was completed. If the signature, the fee, or the technical verification is missing, the paper can be rejected. In a sending by post there is also a risk of the wrong office, of delay, and of a file-number error. Beside the sending record, it should be confirmed that the objection appears on the paper list of the file.

If the period has not yet ended, correcting a faulty application can be possible. If the period has passed, the conditions of more limited routes, such as irregular service or a late objection, are examined. The expression “I left the petition somewhere” should not be relied on.

A partial objection leaves a part of the proceeding open

It is possible for the debtor to object only to a part of the principal or of the interest. The part that was not objected to can become final. For example, if the debtor objected to 40 units of a claim of 100 units and accepted the rest openly, the creditor can ask for an attachment for the part that became final.

In a partial objection the following items should be written separately:

• The principal that was accepted
• The principal that was objected to
• An objection to the interest rate or to the start date
• An objection relating to the proceeding cost and to the attorney fee
• The set-off amount of the payments that were made

An uncertain sentence in the form “I object to the excess of the debt” can give birth to an argument of which amount became final. The account of the enforcement office and the petition should be compared. It should be checked whether the attachment exceeds the amount that was not objected to.

The effect of the objection according to the type of proceeding

A proceeding without a judgment by way of general attachment

An objection in time and in accordance with procedure stops the proceeding as a rule. The enforcement office does not decide whether the objection is justified on the merits. The creditor cannot continue to attachment before making the objection ineffective by a suitable action.

A proceeding peculiar to negotiable instruments

In a proceeding based on a cheque, a promissory note, or a bill of exchange, an objection to the debt and to the signature can be raised at the enforcement court. The application does not stop the proceeding of itself in most cases. A separate stopping decision of the court may be required. The period is also different from the general proceeding. A general petition given to the enforcement office may not give birth to the expected result.

A proceeding on a judgment

In a proceeding based on a court decision, it is not possible to argue the merits of the decision again at the enforcement office. Special headings such as a stay of enforcement, payment, limitation, or a contradiction with the scope of the judgment can come onto the agenda. Applying for a legal remedy also does not stop the enforcement automatically in every case.

Rent and the other special proceedings

In rent receivables and eviction requests, the payment and objection periods can differ according to the type of the payment order. The effect of the objection on the eviction request and on the money receivable should be examined separately.

The creditor’s applications after the objection

When a valid objection stops the proceeding, the process does not end completely for the creditor. According to the nature of the document in hand, two basic routes come forward:

Lifting the objection

In cases where there is a document of the quality the statute seeks, the creditor can apply to the enforcement court. The examination can run over more limited documents than a general action for the receivable. If the objection is lifted, the proceeding can continue from where it left off.

Setting the objection aside

The creditor can ask for the objection to be set aside by proving the existence of the claim in the general court. The competent court changes according to the nature of the dispute. As a result of the action, the continuation of the proceeding, and if the conditions exist, results such as enforcement denial compensation can be argued.

The debtor should not leave the services of this action unanswered by saying “I already objected.” The grounds in the first objection, the payment documents, and the new defences should be arranged within the period of the action. The routes after an objection to enforcement proceedings are assessed in this frame.

The distinction of a provisional attachment and a final attachment

The creditor may sometimes have taken a provisional-attachment decision from the court before the proceeding, or together with the proceeding. This protective measure has a basis different from the proceeding without a judgment that stopped with the objection. Even if the debtor’s objection stops the proceeding, the provisional-attachment records may not fall at the same moment of themselves.

The following documents should be checked:

• The provisional-attachment decision, and its date
• The security the creditor deposited
• Which goods the decision was applied to
• The debtor’s objection against the decision
• Whether the attachment turned into a final attachment

Possibilities such as the lifting of the provisional attachment, its release against security, or its not being completed in time are assessed separately. Whether the block record at the bank is “provisional” or “final” should be understood from the bank and from the file writing.

If an attachment was applied despite the objection

If it is determined that the attachment came from the same file, that the objection is valid, and that the attachment was directed at the part that was objected to, a complaint for the cancellation or the correction of the enforcement act can come onto the agenda. In the application, not only the objection petition but the chronology of the file should be submitted:

• The service document of the payment order
• The objection petition and the delivery record
• The file record relating to the stopping of the proceeding
• The attachment request and the attachment writing
• The application date of the bank, the employer, or the registry
• The amount that was deducted or blocked

The learning of the attachment act can be the start as to some complaint periods. For this reason a long time should not be waited to gather the documents. The bank or the employer cannot assess a valid enforcement writing of itself. The lifting decision should be conveyed to the relevant institution.

Irregular service, and a late objection

If the proceeding continues on the ground that the objection period has passed, it should be examined whether the payment order was really served in accordance with procedure. Details such as an old address, service on the head of the neighbourhood, electronic service, or delivery to a person living in the same dwelling can change the result.

If irregular service is found, the correction of the service date as the date of learning, and the counting of the objection tied to this as valid, can come onto the agenda. Delay after actual learning weakens the claim. In a file learned by an attachment, a bank message, the payroll date, or a vehicle-registry query can show the date of learning.

If the service was in accordance with procedure, but an objection could not be made because of a serious obstacle that was not in the person’s control, the special conditions of a late objection can be assessed. Not every volume, forgetting, or being outside the city opens this route.

The later steps if the objection was refused

The enforcement court can lift the objection, or the general court can set the objection aside. After the service of the decision, the period of the legal remedy, the effect of the decision on the enforcement, and the option of a stay of enforcement if there is one should be examined. An application for appeal does not stop the enforcement of itself in every decision.

After the decision the following checks can be made:

• For which amount and accessories was the decision given?
• From which stage will the proceeding continue?
• Is the legal remedy open, and when does the period start?
• Is there a possibility of stopping against security?
• Were the collections made earlier entered in the account?

If there is separate and strong evidence showing that you are not the debtor, the possibility of a negative declaratory action is examined together with the concrete legal interest and the existing decisions. Carrying the same dispute to different courts with contradictory requests can create a procedural problem.

Following the file and the decision in Ankara

The volume of the enforcement offices in Ankara can delay the entry of the paper in the system, or the arrival of the bank writing. It does not change the legal effect of a valid objection. If it is thought that the application did not enter the system, a confirmation of the date and the number should be taken from the paper-record unit.

Even if the file is in another city, a bank branch or an employer in Ankara can apply the attachment. Assuming the complaint authority according to the physical place where the attachment was applied is not correct. The enforcement file, and the enforcement office that made the act, are taken as the basis. After the electronic application, the paper and the decision record that arose in the file should be checked.

Mistakes often made

After the objection the following mistakes are met:

• Supposing that the file’s looking open is the continuation of the attachment
• Accepting a petition given to the wrong authority as a valid objection
• Missing the part that was accepted in a partial objection
• Assuming that a negotiable-instrument objection stops the proceeding automatically
• Not following the action to set the objection aside that the creditor brought
• Mixing a provisional attachment and a final attachment
• Not checking that the lifting decision reached the bank or the employer

The correct method is to place all the dates in a single chronology and to determine the basis of each act. For the wider structure of the proceeding, the enforcement and bankruptcy law page can be examined.

The last assessment

Whether the objection stops the proceeding is understood not from the information “I gave a petition,” but from the type of proceeding, the period, the authority, and the scope of the objection. In a general proceeding without a judgment a valid objection can give birth to a stopping effect, while in special proceedings a court decision may be required. A partial objection and a provisional attachment can also explain the continuing act.

This text carries the purpose of general information. The objection document, the service, and the attachment record should be examined together. If there is a continuation act contrary to law, an application in accordance with the current legislation should be made without delay.

From where the objection record is read

This article separates the claim of a petition from the paper record. This article does not add the objection day if it is not in the file. That the office is in Çankaya does not choose the competent enforcement office is read from the enforcement request. This article does not suppose that the part a partial objection left open is a stopped proceeding. The basis is the text of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code in the sources.

Conclusion

Whether the proceeding stopped is read not from the claim of a petition, but from the period, the authority, the scope, and the type of proceeding. A partial objection and the negotiable-instrument route are often mixed. The creditor’s later action is in the article on setting the objection aside. If there is no paper number, the objection is not assumed.