What Is A First Attachment Notice?
Article 89 of the EBL regulates how the goods and rights of third parties shall be seized. According to the relevant article, the first attachment notice is first sent to the third party who holds a property or right (including the right to receivables) belonging to the debtor of the enforcement file. If this notice is objected to, no attachment shall be placed on the goods or rights; however, there is a legal presumption that if the notice is not objected to, the goods belonging to the debtor shall be deemed to be in the possession of the third party and the receivable shall be deemed to be in his/her possession. If the first attachment notice is not objected to, the second attachment notice is sent to the third party and then the third attachment notice is sent.
If the third party, who does not hold a property or right owned by the debtor, has not objected to the attachment notices or has made an incorrect notification, he/she may prove that he/she is not responsible for the debt by filing a “Negative Determination Case” within fifteen days from the notification of the third attachment notice. This issue is clearly stated in the third paragraph of Article 89 of the EBL. If the third party wins this lawsuit, it is understood that he/she is not responsible for the amount demanded and that he/she does not need to deposit it to the execution office.
If this lawsuit is not filed within the fifteen-day period regarding the negative assessment lawsuit, the third party is required to leave the property considered in his/her possession or the money considered in his/her embezzlement to the enforcement office.
For the third party who thinks that this payment is not based on a justified reason, but has paid the money to the enforcement office because he did not or could not fulfill the legal requirements, the fifth paragraph of Article 89 of the EBL provides the right to file a reclaim action within one year from the date of payment. In this case, the debtor of the enforcement proceeding is unjustly enriched in favor of the third party who had to pay this amount to the enforcement office even though he did not possess any property or right belonging to him. In addition, the action for restitution may be filed not only against the debtor who has been unjustly enriched, but also against the creditor who acts in cooperation with the debtor and causes damage to the third party (bad faith).