Hello everyone as you can tell I'm very new. Well I'm posting to seek advice on how to handle this problem that arose yesterday. I recieved a letter from a collection agency stating that they are trying to collect the balance of a debt owed of $150 to a car lot. This caught me completely off guard, because A) this debt is more than ten years old and B) I disputed it on my credit report more than three years ago and had it taken off because of no response from the car lot. The other funny part is I think I owed around $1500 on this car when I faulted on the original loan and now they only want $150? This was originally a car loan for my first car when I was 18 and I'm now 28. I ended up getting the car repossesed and obviously defaulting on the loan. It was put on my credit report as bad debt and that was it. When I tried to clean my credit report up 3-4 years ago this was one of the many claims I disputed and eventually had wiped off my report. Besides the SOL is only 7 years in Kentucky where I live and it's long past that limitation time. My question is does this collection agency even have a legitimate case to make me pay or are they just seeing if they can sqeeze a few bucks from me? Also what should my next step be with this because they are saying I have 14 days to contact them to work something out or "it could follow me for many more years to come" was their exact words. I don't want this to go back on my credit as bad debt, but I sure as hell don't want to give them $150 unless it's my only choice to keep that from happening. Thanks to anyone who can give me advice. Thank you, Ben
Send the collection agency written communication wherein you demand they never contact you again either in writing or over the phone.
If the account is actually past the SOL then it can not be reported back to the CBR unless you make a payment, in some states. If the debt is valid they have every right to contact you regarding re-payment, regardless of age.
Well if I write them and tell them to quit writing and calling me about this can they still mess with my credit and have this put back on even though it's been taken off once?
If you tell them to stuff their bill up their buttholes, that's about all they can do with it. If they sue, they violate FDCPA. If they threaten to sue they violate FDCPA If they put it on your credit report they re-aged it and violated FCRA If they do any of the above they owe you $1000.
First, IF there is a balance owed (say after the repo they got $150 less than the balance owed on the car..) THEN, there is a debt still owed, and they CAN ATTEMPT collection of the $150.00, BUT... 1) If the debt is past SOL for legal collection activity, they can sue, but you the defendant MUST raise the defense of debt is past SOL, no one else can do this but the defendant. There is a lot of misconception regarding the SOL for legal action on debt collection. A CA can still attempt collection, but you must raise the defense of past SOL. Due to its age of ten years, this is obviously past SOL in any state. 2) Due to its age, there can be no reporting of this account on your credit reports, UNLESS...you somehow agree to make payments, and then default on that arrangement. IF they do report this account to your crdit reports, then it is a legal violation of the FCRA. Action Steps: 1) Respond in writing, send Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested (CMRRR) requesting validation of debt (see examples in forum "stickies"). 2) Include in letter demand for "Cease and Desist", until legal right to collect on debt is established> (Again, see examples for form letters) 3) STATE, debt is past legal SOL, and therefore you will exercise legal rights and defense to this fact. Demand any inquiries made into your credit reports be removed also, as this will be considered as "illegal continued collection activity" 4) If no response to debt validation, C&D request received within 30 days of receipt, send another letter (CMRRR) stating "this matter closed unless further evidence provided". Ensure all communication is in writing, no calls. Most likely this was "cheap debt" that has been sold as part of bundled bad debts" many times over. It is worth the cost of a stamp to try and collect the $150.00. If you respond to them per above descriptions, I am certain this will all go away, BUT...you must respond, if not, then the CA is within their legal rights to continue actions.
Agree with the first part, but disagree with the second. Yes, even though the SOL has passed on a breach of contract, a creditor may continue to attempt to collect the debt. However, the primary purpose of the SOL is to restrict the period during which a party can sue on a particular cause of action. After the applicable limitations period has passed, a suit can no longer be brought. In layman's terms, once the SOL has run on a breached contract, the creditor can NOT use the legal system for an avenue of remedy. This is basic knowledge from Business Law 101 regarding contracts.
Have to disagree, "Past SOL" is the legal defense to legal collection activity, see below: "The term statute of limitations means the time allotted to legally enforce the debt. If a statute expires and someone sues you, It is up to you to bring the expired SOL defense to the other parties attention. If you say nothing or do not bring up the expired statute then the judgment can be entered. Don't assume it means the other party is barred from attempting to collect. It simply means that your defense is the expired SOL not to enforce the lawsuit. If your statute of limitations has expired that means that the debt cannot be enforced by lawsuit, that does not dismiss the debt and the creditor can still leave it on your credit for 7 years (excluding some public records, those can remain for 10 years) but legally you do not have to pay it if the statute has expired. "
Please provide the source for the above citation, bizwiz41. Updated: Oh, I should have guessed: Carreon & Associates. The "we're not a credit repair organization, but why don't you buy our book and follow some of these pay-per-click links to "third party" credit repair organizations" place ... Number one, why would you cite a for-profit website that specifically states "We are not a law firm and do not offer tax, legal or financial advice"? Number two, why did you conveniently leave out the sentence in the paragraph ABOVE the one you cited? You know, the one that says, "The legal meaning for statute of limitations is: THE TIME OF COMMENCING ACTIONS-Time allowed that litigation-lawsuit can be brought"?
Here's how one provides a legitimate citation from a legitimate source: "As mentioned earlier in the text, statutes of limitations restrict the period during which a party can sue on a particular cause of action. After the applicable limitations period has passed, a suit can no longer be brought. For example, the limitations period for brining suits for breach of oral contracts is usually two to three years; for written contracts, four to five years; and for recovery of amounts awarded in judgments, ten to twenty years, depending on state law. Suits for breach of contract for the sale of gods generally must be brought within four years after the cause of action has accrued. By their original agreement, the parties can reduce this four year period to not less than one year, but they cannot agree to extend it. Technically, the running of a statute of limitations bars access only to judicial remedies; it does not extinguish the debt or the underlying obligation. The statute precludes access to the courts for collection. If, however, the party who owes the debt or obligation agrees to perform (that is, makes a new promise to perform), the cause of action barred by the statute of limitations will be revived. For the old agreement to be restored by a new promise in this manner, many states require that the promise be in writing or that there be evidence of partial performance." Source: Clarkston, Miller, Jentz, and Cross (2006). West's Business Law (10th Edition). (p. 334). Ohio: Thompson West
They are junk debt buyers and while they can attempt to collect for the rest of your life, you do not have to worry about it as you are past the SOL. They cannot put it back on your reports and if they do, it's nothing that they can make stick and a letter containing the word sue will make them go away. Chances are, if you disregard the letter they will drop it and move on to the next uninformed consumer. They bought that debt for pennies and if someone even pays half of what the JDB says the might owe, they make money. People think that they need to "or else" and that is how the JDBs stay in business.
Very nice, but bacl to your "business law 101", the key here is your word "remedies". In our adversarial court system, anyone can "attempt" suit at any time. Past SOL for debt collection does not mean a CA cannot "attempt" legal remedy. Past SOL is the defense to this.
A bit more for reference, using West's Business Law" also, posted link details many other details regarding SOL legal definitions: http://www.answers.com/topic/statute-of-limitations "The statute of limitations is a defense that is ordinarily asserted by the defendant to defeat an action brought against him after the appropriate time has elapsed. Therefore, the defendant must plead the defense before the court upon answering the plaintiff's complaint. If the defendant does not do so, he is regarded as having waived the defense and will not be permitted to use it in any subsequent proceedings." Legal Encyclopedia information about statute of limitations West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Copyright © 1998 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
I said "judicial remedies". That means: using the legal system to create an enforceable obligation. In this thread, you stated, if a creditor brings a suit against you AFTER the expiration of the SOL (that allows for judicial remedy) and if you do NOT bring up SOL as your defense at that civil trial, that a resulting judgement against you creates a LEGALLY ENFORCABLE OBLIGATION. It does NOT, which is my point. Sure, ANYBODY can bring a suit against ANYBODY, so long as they find an attorney ignorant or willing to try such nonsense and some moron libreal judge willing to allow it to be introduced. But that doesn't mean that it creates ANYTHING that is legally enforcable. I think we're in general agreement, even if our paths to get there involve different scenery ...
Yes, but don't you find it convenient how you cherry-pick the definitions on THAT VERY PAGE and only cite the ONE that supports your argument? Here are others from the same page of YOUR cited source: "Statutes of Limitations are laws passed by legislatures that set an amount of time following certain events, after which legal proceedings involving those events may not begin." "Law that fixes the time within which parties must take judicial action to enforce rights or else be thereafter barred from enforcing them." "A specified statutory period after which a claimant is barred from enforcing his claim by suit." "A type of federal or state law that restricts the time within which legal proceedings may be brought." "... statute of limitations is a statute in a common law legal system that sets forth the maximum period of time, after certain events, that legal proceedings based on those events may be initiated." Do you notice the underlined words in those quotes? "May not begin" "May be brought" "May be initiated" That means the judicial remedy process CAN'T BE STARTED. I could go on and on, but you get the picture. Next time, don't cherry pick the results to match your argument.
Our posts are crossing in cyberspace, see mine just before yours. The danger here is "But that doesn't mean that it creates ANYTHING that is legally enforcable.". IF the defendant does NOT bring the defense of past SOL, then the defendant has waived his rights (implied) and "allowed" a legally enforcable remedy. It simply comes down to knowing your legal rights and acting on them. It is very simple to thwart this by following the "process" of ANSWERING any communication from a debt collector. A simple request for validation, with using the defense of past SOL for collection, if applicable, will end things right there. But...the danger is in NOT answering, and dealing with the issue. I am not alone in receiving "bogus notices" from a famous CAs with bogus accounts and debts. (No offense Collectman if you're reading this!). As much as it is a pain in the ... to reply with the letter, send CMRRR, etc., due to this forum I realize I must take such action. I had to counsel a work associate who received such a letter from this CA, and this gentleman is the type that AmEx and Visa probably owe him money! I am referring to actual actions and proceedings here, yes you are technically correct that past SOL negates "legal" rememdy, but the real detail is that it is a legal "defense". I maintain it is better for the forum readers to take the position, and act accordingly, to "past SOL" as an action of legal defense. There are too many "horror stories" of legal actions where the defendant assumed the case was bogus and did nothing. The legal system provides a wealth of tools for the defendant, BUT they must be used.
Okay then, "what would you do if you received a notice from a CA, and it was clear that the debt was well past SOL for any legal remedy? Would you ignore it completely? Would you answer the notice with repsonse of "past SOL"?
More than likely, I'd have my attorney contact the CA or creditor and let them know I'd be suing their pants off if they didn't take a hike ... Again, I think we're generally in agreement here (and pissing in the wind) ...
