MadinKS Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Accounts that originate from 1st Premier and Cortrust show up as collections by Arrow Financial. However, I just received letters from TrueLogic that say they are collecting for Arrow Financial. TrueLogic isn't on my wife's CR but Arrow is. Should I DV both of them or just Arrow? Also, both cc accounts are estimated to drop off CR in 2/2009. Wouldn't it be safe to assume the SOL is gone as well because the SOL on open-ended accounts is 3 years? And if you go back 3 years from 2/2009 it would be 2/2006. Am I reading that right? I guess I'm just not getting this stuff. Help please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Arrow is the JDB, TrueLogic is the CA for the JDB.DV the JDB, cc the DV to the CA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 I would not assume the SOL is 3 years on CC accounts either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Can you give me a good place to find out the SOL for these accounts. PLEASE. I know where the charts are but can't find it in KS statutes. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Forgot to say thanks for the earlier info. Wanted to add that the example all the sites give for an open ended account is a cc. Just can't find the verbage in KS statutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Can you give me a good place to find out the SOL for these accounts. PLEASE. I know where the charts are but can't find it in KS statutes. Any ideas?First google result for Kansas statutes turned up the page you want. You're almost always looking under civil procedure chapters to find out SOLs for the various causes of action (COAs).Despite what you may hear, a credit card debt is not always an "open account" or "open-ended account" or "oral account" or whatever else would be favorable to a defaulted debtor.Credit card contracts are fact specific. If a plaintiff can offer evidence sufficient to satisfy your state's definition of a written contract or written instrument, that's what it is. Period.Of course your state may offer a specific statute governing consumer credit accounts. If so you'd be in business. I don't think Kansas has one though.With that in mind, here's the written contract SOL (5 years). 60-511. Actions limited to five years. The following actions shall be brought within five (5) years: (1) An action upon any agreement, contract or promise in writing.And here's the non written contract SOL (3 years). 60-512. Actions limited to three years. The following actions shall be brought within three (3) years: (1) All actions upon contracts, obligations or liabilities expressed or implied but not in writing. (2) An action upon a liability created by a statute other than a penalty or forfeiture. That seems to be all they offer on contracts. Didn't check their state UCC yet.Those are the basics. Then there's tolling or resetting for absence from the state, fraud, promise to pay. All which vary somewhat from state to state.From there, you need to find the annotated statutes. In other words, what the courts have ruled regarding a specific statute. You will either have to go to a law library or pay for an online service like westlaw (I recommend the law library it's a fun experience).Under each law, they will have pages of caselaw that relate to a specific statute. Ideally, you'd want one that ruled credit card contracts are not written blah blah. Then you'd be in business. I highly doubt you'd find one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 THANK YOU. I will do some more investigating before I DV. I appreciate you taking the time to explain. My search continues. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Now, you said:Then there's tolling or resetting for absence from the state, fraud, promise to pay. All which vary somewhat from state to state.The statute states:60-520. Part payment or acknowledgment of liability. (a) Effect. In any case founded on contract, when any part of the principal or interest shall have been paid, or an acknowledgment of an existing liability, debt or claim, or any promise to pay the same, shall have been made, an action may be brought in such case within the period prescribed for the same, after such payment, acknowledgment or promise; but such acknowledgment or promise must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereby.This means that any tolling or resetting of the SOL must be in writing. Not just a phone call or some random payment. Right? Sorry for the contstant harping on SOL but I want to be crystal clear on this stuff before I go pissin' off the CA's. You know what I mean? Thanks for the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHateCAs Posted March 20, 2007 Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 This means that any tolling or resetting of the SOL must be in writing. Not just a phone call or some random payment. Right?It would be hard for a phone call to be in writing. As far as a "random payment" remember that checks and money orders are signed by the payer. In Georgia that is enough to create a new promise to pay. Sorry for the contstant harping on SOL but I want to be crystal clear on this stuff before I go pissin' off the CA's. Smart IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 Thanks. I think I will contact a lawyer here and see if they'll let me pick their brain. Lots of uncertainty can lead to problems. Thanks again. Until next post.MadinKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 20, 2007 Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 Payment does as well. Don't just pick out the parts you want to hear. We all do it, it is an easy trap to fall into.60-520. Part payment or acknowledgment of liability. (a) Effect. In any case founded on contract, when any part of the principal or interest shall have been paid, or an acknowledgment of an existing liability, debt or claim, or any promise to pay the same, shall have been made, an action may be brought in such case within the period prescribed for the same, after such payment, acknowledgment or promise; but such acknowledgment or promise must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadinKS Posted March 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 But what about the "but such acknowledgment or promise must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereby". Doesn't that mean once you've made arrangements, i.e. payment, the acknowledgment or promise thereafter must be in writing to reset the SOL? Because the way I'm reading it, the only way to reset SOL is to sign an acknowlegment. Am I crazy? Am I illiterate? Am I living a pipe dream? AHHHHH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 20, 2007 Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 Read the other thread, I addressed it there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts