amount due or to become due has been assigned and must also be notified that payment is to be made to the assignee.” Buffalo Pipeline Co. v. Bell, 694 S.W.2d 592, 596 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1985, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Generally, “after a debtor receives notice of a valid assignment, payment made by the debtor to the assignor or to any person other than the assignee is made at the debtor’s peril and does not discharge the debtor from liability to the assignee.” Id. After reviewing the evidence, we conclude that Gulf Coast’s letters adequately notified Holloway that the accounts had been assigned and that payment should be made to Gulf Coast. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 9.406; BOC Group, Inc. v. Katy Nat’l Bank, 720 S.W.2d 229, 230-31 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1986, no writ) (<HOLDING>); Buffalo Pipeline, 694 S.W.2d at 596 (“[T]he
holding antiassignment provision precludes assignment of structured settlement payments holding that where payments are made on past due support they must first be applied to  current child support installments due then to accrued and outstanding interest on  delinquent child support obligations and finally to the principal amount due on unpaid child support holding that the amount that a defendant made available to himself by way of fraudulent deposits demonstrated the amount of loss intended holding assignment effective from letter that identified the parties noted principal amount and amount to become due noted that assignment was made and directed all future payments be made to assignee holding that a trial court should calculate an employers contribution due for the third partys future payments by using affidavits and other evidence to determine a lump sum amount and reduce the amount to its present value as of the date of the contribution judgment