Can disputing a debt reset the SOL?

[Brokestudent2012]

Hi,

I have a debt collector that is charging me a ton of interest on an account that it past SOL... I requested a DV, they sent it, and it states that "if account is not disputed within 30 days, the collector will assume it is valid"... I talked to these awesome people on the phone one time when they called me, and I believe I stated to them that "there was nothing in the original contract that stated that I owe that much interest", but I didn't outright deny the debt... and I'm freaking out because I'm hoping I didn't reset the SOL on it by not outright denying the debt. Help?!

[Torden]

The collector's assumption that it is valid because it is not disputed does not generally hold any weight. About they only thing they can get out your lack of dispute is a stronger challenge to an award of attorney fees if you sue them for trying to collect on a debt that is not yours (or that otherwise they cannot prove is yours). Their supporting argument would be that your failure to tell them it was not valid deprived them of a cause to do further research to discover the error (or some such like BS). They are still going to try to collect on it, anyway.

I'd go ahead and dispute it, through the CRA, then when that comes back confirmed, then directly to the CA. At that point they have to note on the tradeline that the account is in dispute, but can still try to collect. Check and be sure they do. If past 60 days (plenty of time for monthly cycle CRA updates) it is not so noted, then you probably have an FCRA violation on them. Then the fun begins.

A dispute does NOT reset or stop SOL. A payment would. In some states an agreement to settle might.

[Coltfan1972]

809 15 USC 1692g © The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.

[Brokestudent2012]

Dear Torden and Coltfan, <3.

[Brokestudent2012]

I guess to further clarify, this JDB had stated something like, "...did you have an account with X company." and I replied, "It's far past the statute of limitations, so it's no longer legally collectible." I also told them that there was nowhere in the original contract that I could recall where it gave them the right to charge almost 25% interest (in fact, I called the original creditor and asked if that's something standard that they do, and they replied that they do not)... I guess I'm just paranoid that me stating that "...it's far past the statute of limitations..." somehow acknowledges ownership of the account and debt, and may reset the SOL. And yes, lesson learned, when they call, I hang up, and after I speak with an attorney this afternoon, I will more than likely be sending them a C&D. I am all about paying my debts, but I never felt I even owed this one in the first place, and I'm certainly not owing 2x the principle in interest... Please advise

[nascar]

Once the statute of limitations has run, it is almost universal that the only way to "renew" it is through a written acknowledgement of the debt and promise to pay, or through the actual payment of any part of the principal or interest.

An oral acknowledgement does not have the effect of renewing the statute.

[Brokestudent2012]

Nascar, <3.

[Coltfan1972]

You can acknowledge the debt all day long. It being past the statute of limitations does not mean it's not a legit that you possibly owe. It actually does not mean they can't sue you and win. What it means is you have the affirmative defense of it being past the statute of limitations.

Stop worrying. You did fine. You pointed out it was past the statute of limitations so basically who cares if you have/had the account or if there is 25% interest or 250% interest.

As Nascar stated, the only way your going to get yourself to bring this back in statute is with a payment or some type of written agreement. You can't change the terms of a written contract with an oral contract.