4 ms·

Statute of limitations should apply in situations like this. It's really weird that it doesn't.

RijilV 7y ago
If I’m reading the article correctly and following the governments line of reasoning these cases have already seen trial and are not going to trial now. Hence no statue of limitations issues. But I agree with you - there needs to be consideration for the debtors in light of the negligence of the collector
- prepend 7y ago
  Debt does have a statute of limitation that varies state to state [0]. So even if there is a trial and judgement, after a certain amount of time it is invalid and there is no legal recourse to collect (although collectors will still ask). I think the issue here is that this debt is not subject to the statute of limitations. Some other federal debts- student loans- have similar exemptions and special considerations. [0] https://www.incharge.org/understanding-debt/credit-card/what-is-statute-of-limitations-all-50-states/ https://www.incharge.org/understanding-debt/credit-card/what...
  - testvox 7y ago
    > The “Statute of Limitations” for credit card debt is a law limiting the amount of time lenders and collection agencies have to sue consumers for nonpayment. This makes it sound like the limitation is on how long you have before you can't sue. But if you have already sued and won then the statute of limitations wouldn't apply. I think instead there is a time limitation for collecting on the judgment from the suit.
    - Mountain_Skies 7y ago
      Yes and in some states judgements can be renewed indefinitely.
Clubber 7y ago
Even the Statute of Limitations is gone in the US. Companies can sue you in court for debt right before the limit is up and your debt limitations has just increased 20 years. They also tack on interest. Someone I know had $4K debt that ballooned to $25K due to this tactic. The original debt is from 1997 and this person is still on the hook. It's all corrupt. https://creditcards.usnews.com/articles/what-happens-when-your-credit-card-company-sues-you https://creditcards.usnews.com/articles/what-happens-when-yo...
- mytailorisrich 7y ago
  > Companies can sue you in court for debt right before the limit is up Nothing wrong with that. The point of any statute of limitations is to prevent action after a period has elapsed, with the full range of remedies available before that. Edit: why the downvotes? Clearly many posters here do not know what a statute of limitations means, and assume it means something it doesn't. Obviously this depends on the jurisdiction, but in general, and as mentioned, it puts a limit on how long one has to sue. But if a lawsuit is started right before the limit then obviously the limit does not apply and the lawsuit and any court order will stand. Nothing new here. This is how it is meant to work. Don't shoot the messenger.
  - cat199 7y ago
    > Nothing wrong with that. there is if you are deliberately using interest compounding and deferring the suit vs a likely slow repayment schedule which would result if the debt was settled earlier in order to expand your balance sheet and maximize your profits.. this is not acting in good faith.
    - mytailorisrich 7y ago
      This is a perfectly legitimate course of action, not least because the debt and interests were freely agreed. A statute of limitations is not aimed at helping people wriggling out of paying off their debts. Depending on the debt and jurisdiction there is bankruptcy for that.
peter303 7y ago
SOL can altered retroactively as in pedophile cases where they have been abolished.
beerandt 7y ago
Debts owed to the government don't usually expire, whether via statue of limitations or otherwise. This is fairly universal. They view it just the same as if you owe taxes from 20 years ago.

If I’m reading the article correctly and following the governments line of reasoning these cases have already seen trial and are not going to trial now. Hence no statue of limitations issues. But I agree with you - there needs to be consideration for the debtors in light of the negligence of the collector

prepend 7y ago
Debt does have a statute of limitation that varies state to state [0]. So even if there is a trial and judgement, after a certain amount of time it is invalid and there is no legal recourse to collect (although collectors will still ask). I think the issue here is that this debt is not subject to the statute of limitations. Some other federal debts- student loans- have similar exemptions and special considerations. [0] https://www.incharge.org/understanding-debt/credit-card/what-is-statute-of-limitations-all-50-states/ https://www.incharge.org/understanding-debt/credit-card/what...
- testvox 7y ago
  > The “Statute of Limitations” for credit card debt is a law limiting the amount of time lenders and collection agencies have to sue consumers for nonpayment. This makes it sound like the limitation is on how long you have before you can't sue. But if you have already sued and won then the statute of limitations wouldn't apply. I think instead there is a time limitation for collecting on the judgment from the suit.
  - Mountain_Skies 7y ago
    Yes and in some states judgements can be renewed indefinitely.

Clubber 7y ago

Even the Statute of Limitations is gone in the US. Companies can sue you in court for debt right before the limit is up and your debt limitations has just increased 20 years. They also tack on interest. Someone I know had $4K debt that ballooned to $25K due to this tactic. The original debt is from 1997 and this person is still on the hook. It's all corrupt. https://creditcards.usnews.com/articles/what-happens-when-your-credit-card-company-sues-you https://creditcards.usnews.com/articles/what-happens-when-yo...

mytailorisrich 7y ago
> Companies can sue you in court for debt right before the limit is up Nothing wrong with that. The point of any statute of limitations is to prevent action after a period has elapsed, with the full range of remedies available before that. Edit: why the downvotes? Clearly many posters here do not know what a statute of limitations means, and assume it means something it doesn't. Obviously this depends on the jurisdiction, but in general, and as mentioned, it puts a limit on how long one has to sue. But if a lawsuit is started right before the limit then obviously the limit does not apply and the lawsuit and any court order will stand. Nothing new here. This is how it is meant to work. Don't shoot the messenger.
- cat199 7y ago
  > Nothing wrong with that. there is if you are deliberately using interest compounding and deferring the suit vs a likely slow repayment schedule which would result if the debt was settled earlier in order to expand your balance sheet and maximize your profits.. this is not acting in good faith.
  - mytailorisrich 7y ago
    This is a perfectly legitimate course of action, not least because the debt and interests were freely agreed. A statute of limitations is not aimed at helping people wriggling out of paying off their debts. Depending on the debt and jurisdiction there is bankruptcy for that.

peter303 7y ago

SOL can altered retroactively as in pedophile cases where they have been abolished.

beerandt 7y ago

Debts owed to the government don't usually expire, whether via statue of limitations or otherwise. This is fairly universal. They view it just the same as if you owe taxes from 20 years ago.