I. Introduction
Being served with a “garnishment notice” (haciz ihbarnamesi) in enforcement proceedings in which one is not the debtor is one of the situations that causes the most uncertainty in practice. The notice is sent because the debtor of the enforcement proceedings is believed to have a receivable from the recipient (such as an unpaid invoice, rent or money in a bank account) or to have property in the recipient’s possession. This article explains what the garnishment notice regulated in Article 89 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (“EBL”) means, what the third party receiving it must do and within what period, and the consequences of remaining inactive. The attachment of employees’ wages is subject to the separate procedure in Article 355 et seq. of the EBL and falls outside the scope of this article.
II. What Is a Garnishment Notice?
A creditor may have the debtor’s receivables from third parties and the debtor’s movable property held by third parties attached. The document sent by the enforcement office to notify the third party of this attachment is called a garnishment notice. Under Article 89/1 of the EBL, the notice informs the third party that from then on it may pay its debt only to the enforcement office, that any payment made to the enforcement debtor will be invalid, that any property in its possession must be delivered to the enforcement office rather than to the debtor, and that otherwise it will be required to pay the value of the property to the enforcement office. In practice, the most frequent recipients are banks, companies with a commercial relationship with the debtor, the debtor’s tenants and the debtor’s relatives. It should be noted that the person served with a garnishment notice is not the debtor of the enforcement file. That person merely becomes obliged to pay to the enforcement office the debt, if any, owed to the enforcement debtor, limited to the attachment amount stated in the notice.
III. How Should a First Garnishment Notice Be Answered?
A third party served with a garnishment notice has two options: to declare its debt to the enforcement debtor and pay it to the enforcement office, or to object within seven days. The period runs from service of the notice. The day of service is not counted. If the last day falls on a public holiday, the period ends on the first business day following the holiday (EBL Art. 19). For electronic service through the National Electronic Notification System (UETS), service is deemed made at the end of the fifth day following the day on which the message reached the electronic address (Notification Law Art. 7/a). If the third party genuinely owes a debt to the enforcement debtor at the time the notice is served, that debt must be paid into the enforcement office’s account, limited to the attachment amount stated in the notice. A payment made to the debtor after service of the notice is invalid vis-à-vis the enforcement office and may result in the same amount having to be paid twice. If the debt is less than the amount written in the notice, this must be reported to the enforcement office within the period, with an objection to the excess, and only the actual amount of the debt should be paid. If there is a debt that is not yet due, this too must be reported and payment made to the enforcement office when it falls due. In the case of receivables arising from a continuing legal relationship, such as rent, the garnishment notice may also cover debts that will arise in the future, and these are paid to the enforcement office as they fall due (Court of Cassation, General Assembly of Civil Chambers, 12.02.2019, E. 2017/369, K. 2019/130).
If the third party owes nothing to the enforcement debtor or does not hold the property described in the notice, an objection must be made within seven days of service, in writing or orally, to the enforcement office that sent the notice. Article 89/2 of the EBL lists the grounds of objection by way of example: that there is no debt, that the property is not in the third party’s possession, that the debt was paid before service of the notice, that the property was consumed or lost without fault, that the property does not belong to the debtor, that the property has been pledged to the third party, or that the receivable was paid to the debtor or to the place designated by the debtor.
It should be noted that a letter sent to the creditor or its counsel, or a petition filed with a court, does not count as an objection. The ground relied upon must be stated clearly in the objection, and documents such as payment receipts, contracts and invoices should preferably be attached. The third party’s declaration is not subject to any fee. A timely objection renders the notice ineffective against the third party as regards the part objected to, and the enforcement office cannot send a second garnishment notice for that part.
IV. What Happens If No Objection Is Made?
If no objection is made to the first garnishment notice within seven days, the debt is deemed owed by the third party or the property deemed to be in its possession, and at the creditor’s request the enforcement office sends a second garnishment notice. The second notice may likewise be objected to on the same grounds within seven days of service.
If no objection is made to this either and the debt is not paid, a third notification, again sent at the creditor’s request, informs the third party that it must within fifteen days pay the money to the enforcement office or deliver the property, or within the same period file a negative declaratory action, failing which it will be compelled to pay the debt deemed owed (EBL Art. 89/3). The negative declaratory action is brought against the enforcement creditor before the civil court of first instance (asliye hukuk mahkemesi) of the place where the enforcement proceedings are conducted or of the third party’s domicile (Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, 06.11.2023, E. 2023/5228, K. 2023/6468). In this action the third party itself must prove that it does not owe the enforcement debtor. The action is subject to a fixed court fee. If the third party loses the action on the merits, it is ordered to pay compensation of not less than twenty percent of the amount in dispute. If the document showing that the action was filed within the fifteen-day period is submitted to the enforcement office within twenty days of service of the third notification, enforcement measures against the third party are stayed until the judgment becomes final.
The difference between a timely objection and this action lies not only in the burden of proof and the compensation risk. The third party is also at a disadvantage as regards litigation costs and attorney’s fees. For a time, some courts refused to charge litigation costs and attorney’s fees to the creditor even where the third party won the action, on the ground that by failing to object to the notices the third party had itself given rise to the action. With its decision of 07.10.2025 (E. 2025/3337, K. 2025/4641), the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation resolved the conflict between the regional courts of appeal as follows: where the action is accepted, litigation costs and attorney’s fees are as a rule charged to the creditor, but a creditor who did not give rise to the action by its own conduct and who accepts the claim before the preliminary examination hearing is not liable for these costs (Code of Civil Procedure Art. 312/2). Accordingly, a third party that fails to object to the notices in time and is forced to sue bears the risk of being unable to recover from the creditor the litigation costs and the attorney’s fee awarded under the tariff, even if it prevails. A timely objection, by contrast, is free of any fee and places the burden of proof on the creditor.
A third party that remains inactive throughout all of these stages despite proper service of the notices is forced to pay someone else’s debt out of its own assets, even if it owes nothing to the debtor. At this point, at the creditor’s request, the enforcement office adds the third party to the file as a debtor for the amount deemed owed and, without sending a separate payment order, directly attaches its bank accounts, vehicles and real estate. A third party that misses the deadline through no fault of its own, for instance because of a serious illness, may file a belated objection with the enforcement court within three days of the removal of the impediment and before the realisation of assets is completed, together with evidence of its excuse (EBL Art. 89/5 and Art. 65). A third party that has been forced to pay may reclaim the amount paid from the enforcement debtor and from a creditor acting in bad faith by an action before the general courts (EBL Art. 89/5). In the event of defective service, a complaint may be filed with the enforcement court within seven days of learning of it, requesting that the date of service be corrected (EBL Art. 16 and Notification Law Art. 32).
V. Consequences of an Untruthful Objection
An objection is not a formality to be used merely to stop the process. Where the third party objects, the creditor may prove before the enforcement court that the declaration was untrue and request that the third party be punished under Article 338/1 of the EBL with imprisonment from three months to one year and, in addition, be ordered to pay compensation (EBL Art. 89/4). A third party that declares “I owe nothing” while in fact owing the debtor therefore faces both criminal and compensation risks.
VI. Conclusion
What a recipient of a garnishment notice must do is note the date of service and inform the enforcement office of its position within seven days: pay the debt or declare its actual amount if there is one, or object with reasons if there is none. Ignoring the notice leads to the recipient being placed in the position of a debtor in a file in which it is not the debtor. Since the scope of the notice and the nature and amount of the debt vary from file to file, we recommend consulting a lawyer without delay upon receipt of a notice.
This note has been prepared for general information purposes on the basis of the legislation in force as of its publication date. It does not constitute a legal opinion or legal advice. The response to be given to a garnishment notice depends on elements that vary from file to file, such as the existence, amount, maturity and basis of the debt. Applying the explanations in this note directly to a specific case may lead to incorrect or incomplete results. We therefore recommend consulting a lawyer before taking any action.