WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 745

Banks and Financial Institutions - As enacted, extends, from one to two business days following receipt of a garnishment, the period of time within which a garnishee must determine whether the garnishee possesses or controls money or property of the judgment debtor, place a hold on any available funds, and furnish to the judgment debtor a copy of the garnishment summons and the notice to judgment debtor; makes other changes related to banking. - Amends TCA Title 26; Title 45 and Title 47.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026)

HB 745 extends banks' garnishment response deadline from one to two business days, giving financial institutions more time to locate, hold, and report judgment debtor funds.

Comp. became Pub. Ch. 174
#banksandfinancialinstitutions
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 745

Legislative bill overview

HB 745 extends the timeframe for banks to respond to wage garnishment orders from one to two business days. The bill requires financial institutions to determine whether they hold funds belonging to a judgment debtor, place holds on available funds, and notify the debtor of the garnishment within this extended period. It also makes related modifications to Tennessee's banking and debt collection statutes.

Why is this important

Wage garnishment directly affects individuals' access to their paycheck and ability to meet basic living expenses. This change impacts both debtors (who get slightly more time before funds are frozen) and creditors (who face longer collection delays). The two-day window also gives banks more operational flexibility to comply with garnishment orders accurately, potentially reducing errors that harm both parties.

Potential points of contention

  • Debtor hardship vs. creditor interests: Extending the hold period may temporarily benefit debtors by delaying fund freezes, but creditors argue faster processing protects their ability to collect valid judgments
  • Implementation burden: Banks must determine whether they hold relevant funds and process holds correctly; the extra day may be necessary for accurate compliance or could be viewed as unnecessary bureaucratic delay
  • Notification fairness: The extended timeline affects when debtors learn about garnishments, which could be either beneficial (more warning) or problematic (prolonged uncertainty)

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.