determined Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 debt is over 7 years old. can the still pull report after 7 years in California? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 If a judgment is 10 years, and this debt is over 7, what exactly was the attorney looking for? There's no judgment, and the debt is beyond the 7-year reporting period... there shouldn't be anything there to look at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
determined Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 that what i asked him and he told me of my tax liens and so that is how he said he know i will not pay him!!! Tax lien was corrected last month it was a error he pulled 3 months ago according to him. i am going to pull report tommorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I apologize, but I don't understand what it is this attorney is looking for? Do you owe the attorney money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
determined Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 It's allegely about a household account back in 1989. He got mad because i did'nt recall the debt and said " i guess you don't know you owe the IRS either?' I said " what do you know about a IRS and he said because i just pulled your report in October and you owe that to the IRS.The IRS made a mistake and it was corrected last month, i need to check and see if it is still on my report now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 So he was recently assigned to collect on a debt that is obviously waaay outside SOL. Correct?I would say as an attorney/CA, he's aware of the SOL and had no PP to pull your credit report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
determined Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 exactly, I have another question for you since i am not getting a response in the lawyer area.Who is responsible for a medical bill that is over the Sol. The mother or the Father? The mother and father were never married and agreed for the father to pay child support without the court. The mother has full custody of the child but the father put the child on his insurance in 2000 because it was cheaper for him and he had better insurance. the mother signed all of the medical consent forms and agree to pay but they put it on the fathers credit and will not remove it and he has dv'd them for a signature of authorization. They even went as far a contacting his insurance company November 18th 2004 the bill occured in 1999. they misrepresented them selves as the hospital to the insurance company and sent the mothers medical information to him via fax to prove the child was his. Was that legal. Should'nt they be going after the mother since all the consent forms she signed and acknowledged she would be responsible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 I don't know about Cali law, but I can tell you the Friend of the Court steps in regardless of any agreement between the parents here in MI.If the father placed the child on his insurance, then the husband is utilimately responsible for any monies not covered by insurance (unless there is a court order, which in this case, there is none).I'm not sure what you mean by "they misrepresented themselves to the insurance company". If the child was brought there for treatment, I'm not quite sure I follow the problem.Best bet is to leave the question in the lawyer section. I can't provide a definitive answer to your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
determined Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Thank you i appreciate your comments, i just hope someone will give me answer. but for your information he put the child on his insurance a year after his son had treatment in 1999. He put him on in 2000 just to save the mother money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts