exbb

is it true I can use the 3yrSOL of DE instead of where I live?

Recommended Posts

Some have suggested that the SOL has expired on my debt because of the governing clause in the Chase agreement which states:

The terms and enforcement of this account shall be governed and interpretted in accordance with federal law and to the extent state law applies. The law of Delaware without regard to conflict-of-law principles. The law of Delaware, where we and your account are located will apply no matter where you live or use the account.

SOL for Michigan is 6 years. My debt deliquency is now at 4 yrs.

What is the most time-saving way for me to search for case law in this regard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try looking up credit card cases involving Chase to see if the courts have allowed the DE SOL to apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on where you live and how your jurisdiction treats choice of law provisions in contracts. It would not fly here in NY, because Court of Appeals has ruled that choice of law provisions only applies to matters that are substantive and not procedural. SOL happens to fall under procedural, so it does not apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am in michigan and am looking into this myself. The alleged cc agreement says it is gov by AZ law which has a 3 yr SOL. IN Michigan it depends on the Judge. They are one of the few states that doesnt have it nailed down. I think I will be bringing it up if they are allowed to enter the alleged CC agreement. Here is a link to some information on Michigans Choice of Law Provision http://council.legislature.mi.gov/files/mlrc/1997/borrow.htm

I have read it and I think I need to re-read it. See what u get from it.

Edited by Hellonwheels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From NYS's NEDAP Website:

In April 2010, New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, confirmed that the statute of limitations that applies to a credit card debt may be shorter than six years, depending on where the credit card issuer is based. (See here for the Court’s decision, from Portfolio Recovery Associates v. King.)

Here’s how it works: New York has a law stating that the statute of limitations on a credit card debt is six years. But New York law also states that a creditor cannot take advantage of NY’s six-year statute of limitations if the creditor’s home state has a shorter statute of limitations. (This is what New York’s highest court recently confirmed.) Some of the biggest creditors – such as Chase, Bank of America, and Discover – have home states with three-year statutes of limitations. If you are sued on a Chase, Bank of America, or Discover credit card debt, a three-year statute of limitations will generally apply.

Example #1: Let’s say you had a Big Bank credit card. The last time you made a payment was in January 2007. You therefore “defaulted” in February 2007 (you usually “default” on a credit card debt about 30 days after your last payment). The statute of limitations starts running from your default, in February 2007. Big Bank sues you in a New York court in August 2010. Big Bank is based in Delaware, which has a three-year statute of limitations for credit card debts. Question: Has Big Bank waited too long to sue you?

Answer: YES. Since Big Bank is based in Delaware, which has a three-year statute of limitations for credit card debts, New York law says that Delaware’s three-year statute of limitations must apply. Big Bank cannot take advantage of New York’s longer six-year statute of limitations just because it sued you in New York. Because Big Bank waited more than three years to sue you on the credit card debt, the statute of limitations has expired, and the court must dismiss the case.

This same rule applies even if you are sued by a debt buyer on a credit card debt and not by the original creditor.

Example #2: The same facts as in Example #1, except now, instead of Big Bank suing you, a debt buyer called XYZ Funding has sued you on your Big Bank credit card. Question: Has XYZ Funding waited too long to sue you?

Answer: YES. You still look at where the original creditor is based – the debt buyer does not get any more time to sue you than the original creditor would have had. In Example #2, the statute of limitations that applies is still Delaware’s three-year statute of limitations, since Big Bank is based in Delaware. (It doesn’t matter where XYZ Funding is based.) Since XYZ Funding waited more than three years to sue on the Big Bank credit card debt, the statute of limitations has expired, and the court must dismiss the case.

Hope this helps the blog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know AZ law has changed to 6 years, but any contract before that date has to go by the SOL of that contract not the new law. It is expost facto something or other....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The legal principle here is that whenever a contract is vague or subject to interpretation, it is to be construed against the interests of the party who drew up the contract. Since Credit Card contracts are "contracts of Adhesion" (meaning "here is the contract, take it or leave it") this principle would apply. Where substantial negotiations occurred that led to the drawing of the contract, like in a Real Estate purchase, this principle would not apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where it will probably lose because the legislative intent of the "new" law is to correct what the Courts have (in the opinion of the AZ legislature) misinterpreted in the old law. The best you could hope for is if you obtained relief under the old law, you will not be placed back into jeopardy by the new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.