Posted on July 29, 2009 at 5:01 pm Okay, so once again, I found out that my mom had an old credit card taken out in my name and this time, the charges go up to $13k. I've already gone over the various methods of payment so I don't need advice on how to break up the payments.The collections woman on the phone mentioned the statute of limitations on the phone being 7 years, (and 7 years would be coming up this april), so I decided to look it up.According to http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/credit-card-state-statute-limitations-1282.php, the statute of limitations in California is only 4 years. If I'm reading this right, this means that I'm only legally obligated to pay a debt collected within 4 years after after my last payment (and it's been way over that).The site also says that debt collectors often buy the accounts for cheap (the company that bought this debt told me they received it in April) with the hopes that they can bully people into paying off the debts when they aren't really obligated to..Anyway, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&group=00001-01000&file=335-349.4 is the source that the website cited for its info which looks to be legit (it's the Official California Legislative page).From what I'm reading, it sounds like the only price I'll have to pay is bad credit until 2012 (which doesn't matter since my mom's already given me bad credit and I won't need to buy a house or car any time soon).My two biggest issues though are:1. According to the site I first linked to, debts MAY be re-aged by me acknowledging the debt. Technically, I didn't acknowledge it, I just explained that it was likely my mother that did it... I'm not sure if this would be an issue though. I'm also not sure what they mean by MAY... is it a coin toss? Shouldn't there be some law that says in black or white whether they can re-age the debt? I've read elsewhere that the re-aging only occurs via acknowledgement when the person  does so in writing (i.e., making a payment).2. The site also says that the statute (which varies from state to state) must be determined by which state you live in (which is 4 years here in cali). Right after it though, it says that certain credit card contracts may change that to the state where the company is located. I don't know if they're referring to the collections agency, the original company and I also don't know how I'd get ahold of that original contract to see if that's in there (I doubt my mom has the original contract, but I can see).Could somebody with a better sense of legal jargon confirm this? It sounds like the debt collectors just bought a cheap debt and are trying to trick me into paying (even lying about the statute of limitation). My suspicions also come from the fact that the original charges were $9k, went up to $13k, and now they're willing to settle for $5k if I pay in a lump sum (meaning that the debt has lost considerable value).

Posted on August 5, 2009 at 3:54 pm The Statute of Limitations is the time alloted to the creditor in which they may pursue legal action to collect the debt. It does not mean you aren't liable for the debt, nor does it mean that collection activity will cease altogether, but their powers after that point by law are limited. To address issue #2- I am not positive but I would have to imagine it pertains to the original creditor, who you first signed a contract with. And finally, if you make a payment- it will restart the Statute of Limitations so if it has already passed that is the last thing you would want to do.

Posted on August 6, 2009 at 5:07 pm Thanks for the info, but I'm a little confused by something you said:I understand that the collectors can keep hounding me, but I don't understand how I can simultaneously be liable for the debt and immune from legal action.Or to put it simply, if the statute of limitations has indeed past, what's the worst that I can expect to happen?As far as I've read, my credit will just take a hit (which lasts 10 years) and I might get some annoying phone calls from the collection agencies.

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 3:29 am That's a good question bluered - and I don't have the official answer to that -but perhaps it's like this - if they sue you for that debt (even if the SoL is up) ifyou don't raise its expiration as a defense ... they might get a judgment against you (if somebody can verify) - once they get that, and you did not contest it, thenyou're obliged to follow the court order ...

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 3:32 am That's interesting 1casio - and bluered, for example your creditors/collectorskept on hounding you about it, and you don't know your rights under the FDCPA -you lost your cool -  you don't know that by admitting to the debt or promising to pay for it somehow - the SoL RESETS ... then you can't raise the SoL on collections defense anymore -if ever they sue ...

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 3:36 am If you want to read more on the statutes of limitations in California -read up on the California Rosenthal Act http://www.moranlaw.net/California%20fair%20debt%20collection%20practices%20law.htm

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 3:41 am It sounds like the debt collectors just bought a cheap debt and are trying to trick me into paying (even lying about the statute of limitation). My suspicions also come from the fact that the original charges were $9k, went up to $13k, and now they're willing to settle for $5k if I pay in a lump sum (meaning that the debt has lost considerable value). ----have you already requested them to validate the debt? If they fail to validate it, then it's as good as non-existent & you can request for it to be removed in your credit report.

Posted on March 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm  This is a wonderful article. The things given are unanimous and needs to be appreciated by everyone.