Taken to court for old credit card debt

[happyjanis]

So I was taken to court by a law firm that specializes in getting money for old debt (CAs). Here's the deal: this was a credit card that was opened in 97, was considered charged off in 98. (I'm very sure nothing has been done as far as payments made to the said account since that time also).They just took me to court for the money today.

I pulled my credit report about two weeks back....There is nothing on my credit report anymore about this credit card. I'm pretty sure SL has already expired. So I went to court for my answer hearing where I said: I contest this debt as it does not appear on my credit report and I do not remember this debt. The plantiff and I were sent to the hall way to discuss the matter: He said just because its not on your credit report doesn't mean you don't owe the money, I responded again with I have no recollection of this debt and would like further documentation regarding the supposed payments or charges that were made in teh last 6 years. He then responded with, don't think you can use Statue of LImitations on this because it won't work.

My pre-trial has now been set for March 6th.

Am I correct that I can pursue my defense now of Statue of LImitations and win in this case. The SL in Wisconsin is 6 years.

I am now awaiting for the plaintiff to produce documentation showing payments and charges made on this said account. (They obviously were not prepared for me to show up to contest).

Should I write a letter to the courts and plaintiff once I have confirmed SL has expired stating that I am using this as my defense or should I save this all for the court date.

[happyjanis]

I forgot to say also, I do have copies of previous credit reports showing that the account was closed and nothing has been done on this said account since 98.

[Methuss]

If you can find an old credit report that shows when it was charged off, yes.

Not only that but you can sue the crap out of this CA attorney. Wisconsin has a firm prohibition on collecting SoL debt to a point where they are not even allowed to call you and ask about it.

For now, you should file a denial affidavit with the court denying you owe it, etc. That will kill off any affidavit of debt they may file and force them to produce real first-hand witnesses. Then you file a discovery motion demanding payment history on the account.

Once it becomes evident they are pursuing SoL debt, you can file a motion to dismiss with prejudice and ask the court for sanctions against them.

[willingtocope]

(Watch out for that "LOCK" button at the bottom of the page...its the "Submit Reply" button you want to use).

ANyway...welcome.

The really good news is...you're in Wisconsin. WI also has a "Status of Repose" in addition to the SOL. That means this debt no longer exists and is completely uncollectable. In fact, the lawyer may be in trouble for even trying to collect.

[happyjanis]

Thanks, Yeah I realized after I posted my first message that it was locked. Opps my bad.

So now I should file an affidavit with the courts denying and claiming SOL(once I have received their so called documentation).

We'll just say that today the lawyer was obviously trying to freak me out into thinking that I would have to pay this regardless of how old it is.

I really loved his response of: just cause its not on your credit report doesn't mean that you don't owe the money.

So now I guess I just wait until they provide more documents and then I file my affidavit and wait for the court date huh.

thanks

[StressPot]

For now, you should file a denial affidavit with the court denying you owe it, etc. That will kill off any affidavit of debt they may file and force them to produce real first-hand witnesses. Then you file a discovery motion demanding payment history on the account.

I agree completely! Do not wait for their "so called documentation" - do it now. Filing for discovery, as previously advised, will force them to produce the information.

StressPot

[nascar]

Why recommend all this nonsense? The Statute of Limations in Wisconsin eliminates the cause of action. MTD will end this now. It doesn't make sense to encourage the OP to pursue further needless litigation.

[Methuss]

Why recommend all this nonsense? The Statute of Limations in Wisconsin eliminates the cause of action. MTD will end this now. It doesn't make sense to encourage the OP to pursue further needless litigation.

OP doesn't have proof of the SoL expiring. Lack of the item on a current credit report is not proof of when the last payment was made. Since OP doesn't have those records, he needs to go through the process to make the collector produce it. Without anything to back up a motion to dismiss, the motion will fail.

[TheRoadBack]

If you can find an old credit report that shows when it was charged off, yes.

Not only that but you can sue the crap out of this CA attorney. Wisconsin has a firm prohibition on collecting SoL debt to a point where they are not even allowed to call you and ask about it.

For now, you should file a denial affidavit with the court denying you owe it, etc. That will kill off any affidavit of debt they may file and force them to produce real first-hand witnesses. Then you file a discovery motion demanding payment history on the account.

Once it becomes evident they are pursuing SoL debt, you can file a motion to dismiss with prejudice and ask the court for sanctions against them.

Methuss,

Can you be so kind to explain a denial affadavit. The name obviously says it all, but, exactly what does it say and how do you file it? I am a little confused so please forgive me if I sound naive.

Thanks!

[Methuss]

A denial affidavit is a simple, progressive sworn statement filed with the court after you have been sued that says

"I deny this is my debt and if it is my debt, I deny that it is still a valid debt and if it is a valid debt, I deny the amount sued for is the correct amount."

Obviously you adjust the language for your particular situation.

[TheRoadBack]

Thanks Methuss!

[isislc]

If at any point you find this too overwhelming, WI does also allow for attorney awards. So if you get an attorney and you win, the CA's attorney gets to pay their bill for ya. I would of course counter sue that they have put you in distress and you've had to miss work over their attempts to collect a time barred debt which had already expired.

[nascar]

I deny this is my debt and if it is my debt, I deny that it is still a valid debt and if it is a valid debt, I deny the amount sued for is the correct amount

This type of affidavit has its place, but a general denial is no more effective than the denials stated in your Answer. A denial affidavit, properly called a "affidavit of defense" is not effective unless it contains specific details as to the nature of your denial. A simple statement that you deny, deny, deny has no value. If you're going to use this, be specific as to why you are denying.

[Methuss]

That's why I said "Obviously you change the language for your particular situation."

But even a general denial is not useless. Unless you are addressing a specific accusation, you are supposed to answer in general terms. If you give too much info in a denial affidavit or an answer to a complaint, then you eliminate your ability to argue at trial. To much detail becomes an admittance or a self induced trap.

Read some of the answers people have posted here in the Lawyer forum that they have gotten from real lawyers. You will see they are very generalized with answers like "Denied. Not relavent." or simply "Denied."