Does the SOL on debt restart when the CA buys your debt and reports as new account?

[CompTweaker]

Hi all. Sorry if this has been asked before....so here goes.....
I pulled my credit report the other day and Unifund is reporting charged off debt from credit cards as being new accounts, which makes it appear as the SOL has restarted or something. I havent made a payment on these accounts for over 2 1/2 years because of my job situation and trying to keep my home and feed my family. Im curious if they can get away with doing this. I havent talked to Unifund at all or made any payments, so how can they do that? 2 accounts were renewed with 2007 dates.

I understand that SOL starts from the date of last activity, but my report doesn't show last activity, just shows when the accounts were opened and that the debt was charged off or sold to a collector. I tried to search for some answers here to keep from posting a question over and over but couldn't find anything. I may have to file BK, i just don't want to lose my home since my equity is about 15,000 over my allowed exemption.

[HHM]

No. the SOL does not restart.

Unifund is using the highly questionable practice of re-aging accounts for credit reporting purposes. Since you are into collection, disputing those entries is not really going to help you, you need an end-game plan for dealing with the debt itself, but you can attempt to dispute those entries on your credit report.

Note, you would dispute the entries with the credit reporting agencies, not with Unifund directly.

[WhatMoney]

I understand that SOL starts from the date of last activity

Not exactly. The SOL starts from the "Date Of First Delinquency", or the "Date Of Last Payment".

Normally there should not be an entry for Date Of Last Activity unless that is how a paid but closed account is listed. The DOFD is the best SOL start date. If you made a later payment, then the DOLP may apply.

Don't confuse any entry that used the word "reported". A reporting date, eg. "Date 1st Major Delinquency Was Reported" is not the SOL start date.

If there is no entry for DOFD or DOLP (or they differ by more than one month), then you need to dispute that. If only DOLA is present, without DOFD or DOLP, and DOLA is later then the actual DOFD from the original creditor, then that is disputable also.

I have one tradeline that is obviously wrong, from Wash Mutual/Providian. It has DOFD as 12/2005 and DOLP as 01/2007. I've made no payment since 11/2005, so the DOLP is an error. They even have a bogus payment amount listed. Haven't disputed it yet - It's been sold off several times since.

[WhatMoney]

I havent made a payment on these accounts for over 2 1/2 years... 2 accounts were renewed with 2007 dates

Just reread your post. Unifund, NCO, LVNV Funding, etc. usually list any account they have purchased as a new and open account as of the date they first purchased it. They call the loan a "Factoring Company Account". This adversely affects your credit score because it is recent and open. I guess that is why they do it this way. It is not illegal re-aging as long as they also list the correct DOFD.

Your Unifund account should list the DOFD, which should be the date you stopped paying years ago. All the other recent dates are meaningless and do not reset the SOL.

I have one tradeline that is obviously wrong, from Wash Mutual/Providian. It has DOFD as 12/2005 and DOLP as 01/2007. I've made no payment since 11/2005, so the DOLP is an error. They even have a bogus payment amount listed. Haven't disputed it yet - It's been sold off several times since.

Think I've figured this one out. In 01/2007 Wash Mutual/Providian finally sold my debt to a Junk Debt Buyer for 10 cents on the dollar. (Boy did the JDB get screwed for that price.) Then WAMU reports that sale amount on my tradeline as a "payment", dated 01/2007. It wasn't my payment, but the payment from the JDB. The tradeline still shows DOFD correctly, so in this case DOLP does not reset the SOL. I've never seen this type of reporting on my other accounts, so it still may be an error, but I don't care anymore.

[CompTweaker]

Thanks for the responses.

For some reason, all 3 of my CR's only show the dates when the accounts were opened....no date of first delinquincy or last activity or anything. Just says the debt was charged off and placed into collections. The funny thing is when Unifund first reports they have my debt, it shows the date open as being 1/1/0001. Then it goes a few months ahead and reports 2007 dates. Can anything be done about that little twist? Surely no statute lasts for 2007 years, lol.

If somehow I get sued after the sol has run out on this debt, and I show up to court and use that as my defense, how will I be able to prove no payment has been made on those accounts for that amount of time? Or prove the date of last delinquincy? Maybe the burden is on the CA to prove when the sol started (I hope not). Thats what I thought they were trying to do by refreshing the accounts with 2007 dates. I've read some pretty bad things about Unifund, and I'm afraid they are trying something fishy with me to keep the sol current.

[CompTweaker]

Wow how things got hectic over the last week. I've just found that Unifund has started the summons and complaint on me. Got it by checking my local courts Web site. So my tactics have changed, and the kicker is I have ch. 7 BK as my ace in the hole if need be (just found out the BK exemptions in my state have greatly increased.....homestead went from $5000 to $50,000) so I no longer have to worry about filing and losing my home. I probably won't lose anything since my vehicle is old and I fall below the $35,000 income level. But before I resort to filing, i want to play around with these bottom feeder collections guys buying this 2.5 year old debt and see how far I can fight them.

[WhatMoney]

Did Unifund ever send you any letters before filing suit against you? You should have had some warning and a chance to DV the claim first. It's an FDCPA violation to sue without any initial notification and chance to DV within 30 days. But this won't stop your present lawsuit and you are still within the SOL.

Is Unifund using a lawfirm to sue you or is Unifund local in your state?

They must have found something in their asset check on you that makes them think you can pay. At least you found out early and will be looking for the summons.

[CompTweaker]

Shouldn't the debt validation letter be sent by certified mail? It seems to me it should, in order for them to prove they sent you a chance to dispute. They did send me one and I sent them a certified letter stating they should validate this debt because the amount of the debt went from $19,000 something (from the original credit card) to over $40,000 in just 2 years. Well, they never sent anything stating the validation, no copies of the original creditor and no proof that they legally own this debt. The thing is, on one debt, i responded in time, on the other, the 30 days had already expired by the time I got the letter (I work out of town a lot, plus I'm just very disorganized). So I never sent them anything disputing the other debt ($18000). But anyway, they have re-aged both debts with 2007 dates, when I actually I stopped paying in 2005. And it shows on my credit report that the first time they took over this debt, they did it in 01/01/0001, then shows the 2007 dates afterwards. That mix-up in dates right there gives me a hunch that I have a chance to fight this, plus they never validated the debt on the other card (from 19000 to 40,000). In truth, this was debt from cc's I had, but lost my very lucrative job to NAFTA when my company sent the job to China, then other things snowballed and my interest rates went from under 8% to over 25% while I was unemployed. The cc's refused to work with me, so it was sold to collectors and I was hoping the SOL would run out. I'm so close because it will run out in August this year, but I guess them filing the summons and complaint starts the lawsuit and beats the SOL.

Before the summons is served to me, I think I am well within my rights to send a certified letter stating they need to validate this debt, prove they own it, and they will only have 30 days to do so, or stop collection activities and must remove it from my credit report.......regardless if they sent me a validation letter that only gave me 30 days to respond. They dont even have proof that I got that notice.

And yes, they are assigning this to a lawyer. Unifund is now selling accounts to lawyers, enticing them into the debt collections business (just check their Web site). I've researched the lawyer they sold it to and he brags about how much money he makes and his expensive cars from being a debt collector. The thing is, he has opened over 40 cases over the last two weeks. And everything I have seen in the past where Unifund has sued someone, the judgement was won by them through "default uncontested". Well, I'm not going to be part of those statistics. I will fight it, and if all else fails, I'll file BK as my ace in the hole. They thrive on default judgements and filing liens.

[WhatMoney]

I'll try to be brief. It's late here so I'm not in thinking mode anymore.

No, they don't need to send certified letters to you - first class mail is all that's required for initial notices.

On the debt you did not DV within 30 days, there is no reason to DV again. They have no legal reason to respond.

On the debt you did DV them, do you have the green card return receipt proving delivery? Without that, you have no proof. With it, and assuming this is the debt they have sued you about, you may have an FDCPA violation. But you cannot use that as a defense. You would need to sue them for this violation, and preferably in Federal court. That requires an attorney experienced in Federal Civil court. With only one FDCPA violation, you may have trouble finding anyone willing to take the case unless you want to hire them.

You can fight their suit in state court by responding with a general denial, and asking for proof with discovery and ongoing several motions. It will cost you $1500 or so with an attorney, or court costs - several hundred if you go it alone. If the court requires arbitration before trial, you have additional players to worry about. You will probably lose unless you can prove the debt is not yours. Sometimes they fold early and you win. Few try this game, and fewer win.

You are part of the judgment mill feed. Unifund and LVNV Funding all follow this recipe thousands of time a day all over the country. They know 98% of their suits will end up as defaults, or forced settlements. It's a profitable business for the junk debt buyer. You were chosen because your SOL was getting close. Their computers keep them up to date on expiring debt. I don't think your debt was re-aged, it was just your time.

[HHM]

Just an FYI, even if there is an FDCPA violation, that fact does not stop the underlying lawsuit, it would only entitle you to damages.

[CompTweaker]

Darnit, I thought I might be able to fight those guys.......oh well, I guess filing bk is the thing to do, and I'm ready anyways. I'm sooo far behind on filing taxes and other stuff, so I'm ready to take this head on, and get those tax filings caught up as the first part of this journey. I dont mind paying any back taxes from not filing (I never made a bunch of money so i wasn't hiding, just disorganized and lazy and didnt file).

But one thing I might do is answer the summons with a motion of discovery just to see if they produce anything. And even if they do, i will contact them via a pay-as-you-go phone just to let them know they will lose money on this account they bought and see what they are willing to negotiate. Hope they didnt pay much for it

I could say something like this:

"I can pay you the money I will spend on hiring a BK lawyer and filing ch. 7 if you want any chance of getting anything"......but im sure they will say no, and then I will file
and if they agree then thats a story I would proudly detail on this forum to help others in the same situation.

[kornellred]

Once a debtor validates a debt, for any reason, be it a day, a month, a year, or five years after delinquency, the statute of limitations on debt collection begins again. It can be as simple as the debtor saying "yeah, I owe you, so what?" over the phone. The game clock gets reset.

[WhatMoney]

Once a debtor validates a debt, for any reason, be it a day, a month, a year, or five years after delinquency, the statute of limitations on debt collection begins again. It can be as simple as the debtor saying "yeah, I owe you, so what?" over the phone. The game clock gets reset.

First of all, it is the collector who must validate the debt in a DV request by the debtor. That is what we are talking about. A DV request per the FDCPA has nothing to do with resetting the SOL. In a DV written request you should be careful to not acknowledge the debt is yours of course, since in some states this may serve as an acknowledge of claim and reset the SOL. And never make a payment on a debt, since that will reset the SOL in most states. Other states require a new written contract to reset the SOL.

Texas law for example has this requirement to reset the SOL:

A typical DV request might be:

I do not acknowledge this debt is mine, and I do not recognize the claimed debt dollar amount as distinguishable to any specific debt I may owe.

Be advised that this is not a refusal to pay or an admission of this alleged debt, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692(g) that I am disputing this debt and am requesting validation.

Please provide me with the following information for validation:

A simple accounting of the debt.
The name and address of the original creditor.
The original creditor account number.