Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1

    Default Statute of Limitations on a Judgment in California

    I received a phone call today from a collection agency with respect to a debt that I had 15-20 years ago. They threatened to sue me and serve me with a civil judgement. They said that I had a judgement from years ago that they purchsed from another company. I have checked my credit report and public records office...no judgment on file. Since there no paper trail on this "so called" judgement, do I have any recourse to fight this old debt? Has the CA SOL run out? If I don't make payment arrangements with them, can they really take me to court?

    Is there anything that I can do to be in the driver's seat with this scenario?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    28,653

    Default Re: Statute of Limitations on a Judgement in California

    You need to check with the court which issued the judgment to verify that it exists, when it was entered, and to see if and when it was last renewed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    811

    Default Re: Statute of Limitations on a Judgment in California

    You can also ask the firm that called you to send you a letter since they recently "purchased the judgement". They are required to do so within 5 days of contact per the provisions of the FDCPA. A provision for debtors that allegedly owe money allow them to dispute that debt within 30 days of receiving the letter. I suggest doing so in writing AND via Certified Mail with a return receipt. There are a few good websites that have examples of these types of letters.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    28,653

    Default Re: Statute of Limitations on a Judgment in California

    If they're the owner of the debt, and thus not acting as a third party collection agency, the FDCPA does not apply to their actions.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    811

    Default Re: Statute of Limitations on a Judgment in California

    Quote Quoting aaron
    View Post
    If they're the owner of the debt, and thus not acting as a third party collection agency, the FDCPA does not apply to their actions.
    True. The Arbuckle letter is not binding but is just opinion and view of the FTC. The FTC, through Arbuckle, shows preference that a third party collector that purchases a debt should act as a third party even though they are now the owner of the debt.

    My hopes are that we will see some laws and "The Act" change as these billion dollar debt purchasers continue to violate the FDCPA and get brought into court time and time again. Many consumers have brought these these collectors to task for their blantant violations (false service, serving an old address and obtaining a default judgement (many people will pay it versus hiring an attorney to press fraud on the court), misuse of arbitration, and other actions. The downside is that they have also won a few of these battles.

    ...but you know what they say about hope. The road to hell is paved in hope.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Collection Lawsuits: California Statute of Limitations on Credit Card Judgment
    By gflores in forum Judgments
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-07-2009, 01:52 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-02-2009, 05:54 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-18-2008, 01:28 PM
  4. Renewal: Judgment Statute Of Limitations and Renewal In California
    By ABALLARD36 in forum Judgments
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-17-2008, 07:42 AM
  5. Collection Lawsuits: Statute of Limitations on a California Judgment
    By oksmom in forum Judgments
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-09-2007, 02:10 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 
Forum Sponsor
Find A Lawyer - Free, confidential referrals.
Legal Forms - Buy easy-to-use legal forms.




Untitled Document