[robertlinn]

I defaulted on a credit card account in May 2003. I recieved a summons Jan 23 2008 and I filed with the State Court my answer to the complaint on Feb 1 2008. I used as my defense the SOL in GA being 4 yrs for open end accounts. Iam aware of the TILA, Title 15, Chapter 41, Section 1602 (i) regarding what a credit card account is. However since my filing i have been swamped with legal advertisements from local law firms encouraging me to file chapter 7 or 13 or use there services to win my case.(when you file an answer to a complaint your entire file and case appears on the court website and suddenly you get tons of mail from lawyers asking you to retain their services..aka..ambulance chasers..) One collection attny told me that i would lose my case because the SOL for cc was 6 yrs in GA. Now im getting worried because I cant afford counsel and besides i thought the judge would dismiss my case because of the SOL defense. If the SOL is in fact 4 yrs, why would any law firm go after me..I have my credit report from Experian and it clearly states that the date of last activity on my account was Mar 2003. I sent a SOL letter to the plaintiff before the summons was issued and they still went after me. If the plaintiff argues the the SOL in GA is 6 yrs how do I rebut that? Is it 4yrs or 6yrs//Why the ambiguousness? How could i lose this case if the SOL defense is a "slam dunk". Could i lose this case even with the SOL defense? What is my worse-case scenario? Do I cave in to these vultures or do fight them like Perry Mason///:The Ranger

[Betty3]

Ga. is one of the states where more & more courts are considering credit cards (unless it's a store card) as a written contract with a 6 yr. SOL as opposed to a 4 yr. SOL on an open acct. I have read some info by a debt collector, who is trying to keep up with the SOL rules in all states, that some consumers have gotten back to him that the longer written contract SOL was used in Ga. It's hard to say what any individual court will do.

However, I believe the Ga. Court of Appeals has recently stated that credit cards are written agreements ("contracts") with a 6 yr. SOL.

[gljay]

Sounds like someone needs to read information in the Federal Truth in Lending Act section 127 to some of these judges. I would think that defining what the debt is would be my first approach. If federal law and state law agree then this should be a slam dunk. I am no lawyer but I have been researching some of this for a case that may or may not be filed against me this year. It seems to me that if I could prove that billion dollar companies, credit agencies, and the law all agree (and you could take that into court) why would a judge disagree. After all, a leopard does not change his spots just because of where he is does he?