The biggest concern for a debtor against whom enforcement proceedings have become finalized is the jeopardy of the monthly income that provides their livelihood. Regardless of whether they are a blue-collar worker, a civil servant, or a retiree, when a foreclosure notification (İİK Art. 89) is sent to bank accounts by the enforcement office, banks frequently sign off on incorrect or excessive practices. Foremost among these is placing a blockage on all the money in the account where the debtor's salary is deposited. A citizen who wakes up one morning to find that their salary card does not work and the entire balance in their account is zeroed out experiences a massive panic. So, do banks have the authority to seize the entire salary account? What is the legal limit, and how should you seek your rights? In this article, we will examine the legal boundaries of salary attachment and the legal steps to be taken against bank blockages.

Pursuant to the mandatory provisions of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, a maximum of 1/4 (one-fourth) of the salary or wages received by the debtor can be attached. The legislator drew this boundary in a definitive language to protect the minimum standard of living of the debtor and their family. The remaining 3/4 portion of the salary cannot be attached and must be left to the free use of the debtor. When I analyze enforcement office and bank practices as a law student, I see that the most frequent dispute stems from an "account definition" error. When the enforcement directorate sends a general foreclosure notification to the bank, the bank directly places a blockage on the entire balance without distinguishing that the account is a "salary account," which gives rise to an explicit legal violation.

The Path of Complaint Against the Blockage Error of Banks

The moment you realize that a blockage has been placed on the entirety of your salary account or on more than the legal limit of 1/4, you must apply to the relevant Enforcement Directorate without losing time. A petition should be submitted to the enforcement directorate along with the account statement to be obtained from the bank showing that the account is a "salary account," requesting the removal of the blockage placed contrary to the law and the application of foreclosure only at the legal rate. If the enforcement directorate rejects this request or if the bank resists removing the blockage, a "Complaint Against the Transaction of the Officer" (İİK Art. 16) lawsuit must be filed in the relevant Enforcement Court within 7 days from the date the transaction was learned. The established jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation emphasizes that blockages placed on the entirety of a salary account are clearly unlawful and must be removed immediately.

"Three-quarters of the salary is the legal guarantee of the right of the debtor and their family to live humanely; banks placing a blockage on the entirety of this amount due to systemic reasons is an explicit violation of the law."

The Exception of Pension Salaries and Private Bank Loans

One of the most confused situations in salary attachments is the status of pension salaries. Pursuant to Social Security Institution (SGK) laws, pension salaries can never be attached without the explicit consent of the debtor, except for alimony debts and SGK premium debts. However, there is a very important exception here: If the debtor gave an explicit prior commitment stating "It can be deducted from my salary, a blockage can be placed" while taking out a loan or signing a credit card agreement from the bank, banks can apply a transfer (virman) or blockage process based on this contract. Although this situation is based on contract law rather than enforcement law, it can be made the subject of a lawsuit before consumer courts with the allegation of unfair terms. In short, you should not remain silent in the face of unjust blockages on your salary, and you must seek your legal rights by defending them to the right authority at the right time.