So, I'm getting really old collection letters. . .

[hnhlvr]

I've always torn these up. They way beyond the SOL (say 12 years old). One is an old AMEX debt and another is from Chase. At this point if I send them DV letters and dispute the debts, will my credit be improved by much after ALL these years?

[magyar123]

When did you first become delinquent on those? Are they still on your credit reports?

[BigJohn]

I got a feeling you are beyond the Statues of Limitations, so the charges probably don't show up on your credit report. Have you done a recent credit report?

[AngelinaCat]

Go and read through the WikiHow on dealing with old debt that I posted yesterday. Don't acknowledge the debts in any way. Its on the front page, but here is the link to it.

http://www.wikihow.com/Deal-With-Zombie-Debt

[treehugger1]

And, keep this in mind! SOL is a defense on your part upon being sued. Many folks think that because a debt is beyond SOL, they can;t be sued. It is your responsiblity to raise this defense. I think many CA's are now onto this and play the numbers. Most folks will think the debt is SOL and ignore it, only to find that they were sued, no defense was raised, and now a judgment was rendered against them. SOL applies if YOU (the defendant) are willing to enforce it. Just my 2 cents.

[domaingamer]

That is tough that the burden is on you to defend yourself after the SOL has run its course. What is the purpose of the SOL if anyone can grab up an old debt and then go after you?

[treehugger1]

It is a tough one, and I'm not entirely sure how the SOL works from state-to-state. I've read a variety of stories related to lawsuits on SOL debt. Some require the SOL defense upfront as an answer upon being served a summons. I think other states allow an argument against a judgment if the judgment was obtained on a SOL debt. Still, I think it is up to the defendant (debtor) to raise the objection.

I'm quickly learning that it doesn't seem to matter whether you are answering an original summons, or arguing against improper procedure, there is another twist that generally involves a cost to the defendant. As an example, if I'm sued in circuit (not small claims) court in my county, I have to pay approximately $180 to "file" my answer. It really makes one stop and think about how far they are willing to argue against a debt they know they owe. On the other hand, $180 is relatively cheap if the suit has tacked on a few grand in "collection fees, other fees, etc." Here again, if one fails to answer, one gets stuck with the otherwise potentially illegal fees. It is a mysterious legal system that we have developed. I guess that's why we have the BK-bomb.

[GoingDown]

In this particular case, since the debt is SOL, and you want to prove that you raised this objection in case they later file a lawsuit, I say that the original poster should send a letter stating the debt is beyond the statute of limitations and that he/she will file an answer to any lawsuit based upon the fact that this is a time-barred debt beyond the statute of limitations for his/her state. That one sentence will most likely make the debt collector lose all hope of collecting and quit their collection efforts because they know you are not going to roll over and play dead and they know you know your state laws about this matter. Then add a few sentences disputing the validity of the debt and demanding that they cease and desist from calling you on the telephone. In this case, it is wise to send it by certified mail so you can prove to the court that you already raised this objection before they paid for any attorney fees or court costs, and therefore those costs were completely unnecessary on their part.