@Anonymous wrote:
SOL's based on being sued depend on what state you reside in, also. But yes, I used BOTH issues to my defense. And won. They reported inaccurate info to credit bureaus AND also sued once SOL was passed.
FYI "wonderin", I think people in these forums are looking for information, not a lecture on why you should pay your debts, etc. I am sure anyone, including yourself, who have had credit trouble in the past (like myself) or presently (like yourself) have heard enough lectures.
True, SoLs vary by state. But AFAIK, there is no law forbidding creditors from suing once SoL has passed. In fact, there are several laws in place that allow them TO sue. Any judge that penalized a creditor for suing (especially since we live in such a litigious country) would quickly find himself before the Bar.
Our right to sue is unalienable. No judge can take that away. Now a judge COULD penalize the plaintiff for bringing a frivolous or fraudulent lawsuit, but merely suing outside of SoL doesn't constitute a "fraudulent" or "frivolous" lawsuit. I think it's likely that you argued both that the lawsuit was invalid because of SoL AND that they reported inaccurate info and won because of the inaccurate info, but it's really impossible that you could have won on the grounds that the creditor sued outside of SoL.
And in case you misunderstood me, I was NOT lecturing anyone about paying their bills. I was advising the OP (and anyone listening) that being outside of SoL can give one a VERY dangerous sense of FALSE security. I've seen too many people believe legal "urban legends" such as restrictive endorsements being legal (very, very few states accept them) AND being outside of SoL as protecting them from lawsuits.
HOWEVER, if you ARE sued outside of SoL and are savvy enough on the law, you CAN file a motion to have the judgment dismissed due to SoL. But really, all that is, is asking the courts to reassess the situation and allow you another "bite at the apple." And even then, courts are notorious for not cooperating -- since just as the courts expect the plaintiff to take legal remedy within a certain amount of time, the courts expect the defendant to present their defense within a reasonable amount of time (meaning, at the time of the lawsuit).
TBH, I'd rather come off as being the B-word rather than risk some poor guy thinking he's untouchable due to SoL and end up with a judgment on his CRs. While I don't think it's TOO likely that the OP could end up sued, I'd much prefer that s/he be aware that it's a possibility and be wary rather than caught off-guard.
