SCRA Default Judgment Protections: What Section 3931 Requires Before You Go to Court

Every year, courts across the country enter default judgments against people who do not show up to defend themselves. In most civil cases, that is unremarkable. But when the defendant is a servicemember deployed overseas or stationed at a base hundreds of miles from the courthouse, a default judgment is not just procedurally unfair. It violates federal law.

Section 3931 of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. § 3931) prohibits any court from entering a default judgment in a civil action without first requiring the plaintiff to file an affidavit about the defendant’s military status. If the defendant is a servicemember, the court must appoint an attorney before proceeding. If the affidavit is knowingly false, the person who filed it faces up to one year in federal prison.

This is not a technicality. It is one of the most actively enforced provisions of the SCRA, and the one that has produced some of the largest settlements in the statute’s history.

What the Law Requires

When a defendant does not appear in any civil action or proceeding (including child custody cases), the court cannot enter a default judgment until the plaintiff files an affidavit stating one of three things:

1. The defendant is in military service (with supporting facts)
2. The defendant is not in military service (with supporting facts)
3. The plaintiff is unable to determine whether the defendant is in military service

If the affidavit or other evidence indicates the defendant is on active duty, the court must appoint an attorney to represent the servicemember before entering any judgment. Actions taken by that court-appointed attorney do not waive any defense or bind the servicemember.

If the court cannot determine the defendant’s military status, it may require the plaintiff to post a bond before entering judgment, a bond the servicemember can later claim if the judgment causes loss or damage.

The standard verification tool is the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) database. A search with the defendant’s name and Social Security number produces a certificate confirming or denying active-duty status. That certificate is the factual basis for the affidavit.

What Happens When the Affidavit Is Wrong

Filing a knowingly false affidavit under Section 3931 is a federal crime, punishable by a fine under Title 18, imprisonment for up to one year, or both. Beyond criminal exposure, a default judgment entered on a false affidavit can be reopened and vacated if the servicemember later shows that military service affected their ability to defend and that they have a meritorious defense.

The enforcement record shows this is not theoretical.

HESAA: The Textbook False Affidavit Case (2021)

The New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority’s outside counsel conducted DMDC searches that confirmed two servicemembers were on active duty. Then that counsel filed affidavits in New Jersey state court falsely stating those servicemembers were not in military service. Courts entered default judgments against both borrowers based on those false affidavits.

The DOJ settlement required $15,000 in restitution to each servicemember, a $20,000 civil penalty, SCRA training for all employees and outside counsel, and new policies and procedures.

The case is instructive because the pattern is so stark: DMDC certificate in hand showing active duty, false affidavit filed anyway.

Capital One: $12 Million (2012)

One of the largest early SCRA enforcement actions. The DOJ alleged Capital One obtained default judgments in foreclosure proceedings without filing proper military status affidavits. Violations spanned from July 2006 through November 2011.

The settlement required approximately $7 million in servicemember compensation (including at least $125,000 per wrongful foreclosure) plus a $5 million fund for interest rate and other account violations.

Lincoln Military Housing: $200,000 (2016)

The first DOJ case alleging unlawful evictions of servicemembers. Lincoln Military Housing and San Diego Family Housing obtained default judgments in eviction actions without filing correct military status affidavits.

The settlement required $140,000 in damages ($35,000 to each of four servicemembers), a $60,000 civil penalty, vacatur of the eviction judgments, credit bureau remediation, and DMDC-based compliance procedures.

Goines Towing: Consent Order (2024)

A North Carolina towing company disposed of servicemembers’ vehicles after failing to file, or filing inaccurate, military affidavits in court proceedings, a pattern dating to at least 2017.

The factual record in one incident was particularly stark: the company’s agent filed a declaration claiming she could not determine the defendant’s military status because she lacked his Social Security number. The court record showed that at the time of filing, she had been told directly by the servicemember that he was an active-duty Marine deployed overseas, had observed a Marine Corps decal on the vehicle, found photographs of servicemembers in uniform inside the vehicle, and counted 16 military patches in the interior.

USAA: $85 Million (2020)

The OCC found 546 SCRA violations at USAA Federal Savings Bank, including the filing of inaccurate affidavits in default judgment cases. The $85 million civil penalty was the largest SCRA-related fine ever imposed by a banking regulator.

Where Default Judgment Violations Occur

Section 3931 applies broadly: any civil action where the defendant does not appear. In practice, violations cluster in five areas.

Foreclosures. Before seeking a default judgment in a judicial foreclosure, the lender must file a military status affidavit. Capital One’s $12 million settlement was driven primarily by this failure. The OCC’s 2021 SCRA examination handbook makes clear that lenders bear the affirmative obligation to check DMDC before any court filing.

Debt collection lawsuits. Any civil suit to collect a debt where the servicemember does not answer triggers Section 3931. HESAA’s student loan case is the clearest example: routine state court debt collection, default judgment sought, false affidavit filed, judgment entered against an active-duty servicemember.

Vehicle repossession and lien enforcement. When a lienholder seeks a court order to repossess and sell a vehicle, the affidavit requirement applies. Goines Towing’s consent order established that even non-bank actors (towing companies, storage facilities) must comply when seeking court orders against potentially SCRA-protected individuals.

Evictions. A landlord seeking a default eviction judgment must file a military status affidavit. Lincoln Military Housing’s 2016 consent order (the first DOJ eviction case under the SCRA) established that vacatur of the judgment, not just monetary damages, is a standard remedy. Military housing operators face heightened risk because their entire tenant population is SCRA-protected.

Child custody proceedings. A 2008 amendment to the SCRA explicitly brought child custody within Section 3931’s scope. A parent seeking a default custody order against a deployed servicemember must file a military affidavit, and the court must appoint counsel if the defendant is in service.

The 90-Day Stay

Section 3931(d) provides a mandatory minimum 90-day stay of proceedings when the servicemember has not appeared. The court must grant the stay if it determines either:

• There may be a defense that cannot be presented without the defendant, or
• Counsel has been unable to contact the defendant or determine if a meritorious defense exists after due diligence

The statute uses “shall grant”: this is mandatory, not discretionary, when the conditions are met. The court may grant a longer stay at its discretion. No judgment of any kind can be entered during the stay period.

The Compliance Pattern

Every major enforcement action follows the same fact pattern: the plaintiff had access to DMDC data showing the defendant was on active duty, but filed an affidavit misrepresenting that status to obtain a default judgment.

This is not about technical noncompliance. The DOJ treats it as one of the most serious categories of SCRA violation because it involves affirmatively misrepresenting facts to a court to obtain a judgment against someone who is constitutionally unable to defend themselves due to military service.

The minimum required practice is straightforward:

1. Run a DMDC search before any court filing that could result in a default judgment
2. Retain the DMDC certificate
3. File an affidavit that accurately reflects the DMDC result
4. If the defendant is on active duty, notify the court so it can appoint counsel
5. Document every step

The organizations that get into trouble are not the ones that lack awareness of the SCRA. They are the ones whose processes allow court filings to proceed without a verified DMDC check, or worse, where a DMDC check is run but the result is ignored. Continuous monitoring ensures that military status is current at the time of filing, not stale from an earlier lookup.

How civrel.io Helps

civrel.io automates military status verification through DMDC integration, creating an auditable record of every search before any adverse action. For organizations that file court proceedings as part of foreclosure, debt collection, repossession, or eviction workflows, automated verification eliminates the gap between knowing a defendant’s military status and accurately representing it in court filings.

The affidavit is simple. Getting the facts right before you file it is the hard part, and the part that automation solves.

---

Capital One paid $12 million for failing to cap interest rates on military loans. If a servicemember submitted a rate cap request tomorrow, would your team know exactly what to do?

Check Your Exposure → · See Pricing →