CRAZY CIVIL COURT ← Back
TULSA COUNTY • CS-2025-42

Crown Asset Management, LLC v. Dereck Hale

Filed: Jan 2, 2025
Type: CS

What's This Case About?

Let’s get one thing straight: nobody wakes up in the morning dreaming of being sued for $6,113.56 over a car loan they probably forgot they even had. But Dereck and Markie Hale? They’re living that dream—or more accurately, that financial nightmare—after a debt collector showed up in Tulsa County District Court with a spreadsheet, a prayer, and a very specific dollar amount. This isn’t Breaking Bad; this is Breaking Budget. We’re talking about a lawsuit so textbook it could be used to teach law students how debt collection works… if law schools ever decided to spice up their curriculum with “Petty Financial Disputes 101.”

So who are these people? On one side, we’ve got Crown Asset Management, LLC—basically the financial equivalent of a repo man with a law degree. They don’t manufacture cars or hand out shiny keys at dealerships. No, their business model is simpler: buy up old debts from banks like Santander Consumer USA Inc., then chase down the borrowers who ghosted their payments. It’s like being a ghostbuster, but instead of proton packs, you carry demand letters and court filings. Representing them is RAUSCH STURM LLP, a firm that proudly declares itself “Attorneys in the Practice of Debt Collection,” which is about as romantic as calling yourself “Professional Microwave Dinner Enthusiast.” Leading the charge is attorney Nicholas Tait, OBA #22739, who probably has more collection cases on his docket than most people have unread emails.

On the other side of this high-stakes drama? Dereck and Markie Hale. We don’t know if they’re married, roommates, siblings, or just two people who somehow ended up on the same loan application. But what we do know is that at some point, they got a car loan from Santander—likely one of those “$0 down, drive today!” deals that sound amazing until the payments start piling up. They received the car, presumably enjoyed some open-road freedom, maybe even played air guitar to Born to Be Wild a few times. Then, somewhere along the way, the payments stopped. Life happened. Money got tight. Or maybe they just decided the car wasn’t worth the monthly hit. Whatever the reason, they defaulted. And when you default on a car loan, the dominoes start falling—first comes the calls, then the letters, then the ding on your credit score, and finally? The lawsuit.

Now, here’s how we got to court. At some point after the Hales missed their payments, Santander said “nope” and sold the debt to Crown Asset Management, LLC. This is totally legal and shockingly common—banks do it all the time to clear bad loans off their books. Crown swoops in, buys the debt for pennies on the dollar, and suddenly becomes the new creditor. They didn’t lend the money originally, they didn’t shake the Hales’ hands, but now they’re legally allowed to collect it. And collect they shall. According to the filing, the contract was “accelerated,” which sounds like something out of Fast & Furious, but in legal-speak just means the entire balance became due immediately after the default. After “all due and just credits applied” (lawyer code for “we did the math and subtracted what you already paid”), there’s still $6,113.56 left on the table. Crown wants it. And they’re not asking nicely.

So why are we in court? Because Crown wants a judgment. In plain English: they want a judge to officially say, “Yes, the Hales owe this money.” That’s the whole point of the lawsuit. Once they get that judgment, they can start garnishing wages, freezing bank accounts, or even putting liens on property. And get this—they’re also asking the court to force the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission (OESC) to hand over the Hales’ employment history. That’s not some random bureaucratic request. No, this is reconnaissance. They want to know where the Hales work so they can figure out how to collect. It’s not personal. It’s just business. Cold, calculating, spreadsheet-driven business.

Now, what do they want? $6,113.56. Let’s put that in perspective. That’s not a life-ruining sum, but it’s not pocket change either. It’s about the cost of a used Honda Civic with 150,000 miles and a questionable air freshener situation. It’s three months of car insurance in Oklahoma. It’s a solid chunk of a tax refund. For some people, it’s six months of ramen dinners. For others, it’s a vacation they’ll now have to cancel. But here’s the kicker: Crown isn’t just asking for the principal. They want “costs, post-judgment interest, and all subsequent costs.” Translation: if the Hales lose, they’ll end up paying even more. And Crown wants an attorney’s lien claimed, which means if the Hales ever sell property or get a settlement, Crown gets first dibs. This isn’t just about getting paid—it’s about making sure they stay paid.

Now, here’s our take: the most absurd part of this whole thing isn’t the amount, the legal jargon, or even the fact that a debt collector is demanding employment records like some kind of financial detective. It’s the sheer banality of it all. This isn’t a story about fraud, betrayal, or a wild spending spree on yachts and caviar. This is about a car payment gone sideways. Two people probably made a bad financial decision, life got harder, and now they’re being hunted by a faceless corporation with a calculator and a court filing. And yet, the system marches on. Lawyers file petitions. Clerks stamp documents. Judges review claims. All for $6,113.56.

Are we rooting for the Hales? Sure, a little. Not because they necessarily did anything right, but because debt collection lawsuits like this feel like watching a sledgehammer crack a walnut. Is it fair that Crown bought this debt cheap and now wants full value? Is it fair that the Hales might lose wages or face financial penalties over a few missed payments? Maybe not. But is it legal? Absolutely. And that’s the real story here: the quiet, relentless machinery of consumer debt in America, grinding people down one defaulted car loan at a time.

At the end of the day, this case won’t make headlines. It won’t inspire a Netflix docuseries. There are no dramatic courtroom confessions, no surprise witnesses, no twist ending. Just a number on a page, a couple of names, and another reminder that in the world of civil court, even the smallest debts can turn into full-blown legal battles. And if you think this could never happen to you? Well, check your credit report. You might already be on someone’s spreadsheet.

We’re entertainers, not lawyers. But if we were, we’d probably bill by the hour—unlike Crown, who’s just trying to collect.

Case Overview

$6,114 Demand Petition
Jurisdiction
District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma
Relief Sought
$6,114 Monetary
Plaintiffs
Defendants
Claims
# Cause of Action Description
1

Petition Text

292 words
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA Crown Asset Management, LLC assignee of Santander ) Consumer USA Inc. ) PLAINTIFF, vs. DERECK HALE ) MARKIE HALE ) DEFENDANT(S). No. CS-2025-00042 DON NEWBERRY, Court Clerk STATE OF OKLA. TULSA COUNTY PETITION COMES NOW the law firm of RAUSCH STURM LLP, by and through its undersigned attorneys who hereby enter their appearance on Plaintiff’s behalf, and for cause of action against the Defendant alleges and states the following: 1. Plaintiff is duly and legally organized and is authorized to transact business in the State of Oklahoma. 2. Defendant, for valuable consideration received, entered into a contract for a car loan with Plaintiff’s Assignor SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.. 3. Defendant defaulted on the contract, which has been accelerated by its terms, and after all due and just credits applied and after demand, there remains due, owing and unpaid the amount of $6,113.56. 4. Plaintiff is the successor-in-interest to SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the Defendant(s) in the sum of $6,113.56, plus costs, post-judgment interest, and for all subsequent costs; that the Court order the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission (OESC) to produce in writing the employment history for the Defendant for the period specified in Plaintiff’s request; and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem equitable, just, and proper. RAUSCH STURM LLP ATTORNEYS IN THE PRACTICE OF DEBT COLLECTION By: Nicholas Tait, OBA #22739 5200 South Yale Avenue, Suite 505 Tulsa, OK 74135 (877) 215-2552 TTY: 711 Fax: (855) 272-3575 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Account Representative Contact Information: (833) 899-0421 ATTORNEY’S LIEN CLAIMED This is a communication from a debt collector. This communication is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained from this communication will be used for that purpose.
Disclaimer: This content is sourced from publicly available court records. Crazy Civil Court is an entertainment platform and does not provide legal advice. We are not lawyers. All information is presented as-is from public filings.