I don't believe that debt tolling should be legal. For instance, I had a medical crisis while living in Illinois for college. Despite having insurance, I still ended up deeply in debt. I attempted to work with the debt collectors, but I just couldn't keep up due to the massive amounts. I moved back to Wisconsin where I'm from. The debt has since become time-barred in Wisconsin due to the statute of limitations. It's not on my credit report and I can't be sued for it here. However, should I ever wish to return to Illinois again, it's like I never left and I can be raked over the coals by debt collectors all over again, including being sued. This doesn't make any sense. Either I get sued or I don't. Why does a debt collector get the safety blanket of debt tolling? It's been over 10 years, and it's not like I skipped the country and "hid" from them. I'd like to return to Illinois, but doing so would kill my credit. They had 10 years to sue me. Isn't that enough? This is unfair and I believe the issue of debt tolling should be explored. It's just not right.
There needs to be a universal Statute of Limitations. The current system is an absolute mess. 17 states maintain a SOL of three to four years, while 19 others have the six years SOL time limit. The rest all have diverse SOL limits with some extending for even up to 10 years. Tolling provisions make it even more confusing. Simplify it. Have a single NATIONAL Statute of Limitations. Make it fair for everyone (debt collectors and debtors) 5 years seems reasonable. Having a universal Statute of Limitations will eliminate confusion and ambiguity as to when and where a debtor can be sued.
Hello- I believe that a universal statute of limitations would be an effective way to end debt tolling. If there was a universal statute of limitations, there would be no need for debt tolling. Collectors would be able to file suit no matter where the debtor lived based on a single set of federal laws. It also makes things less confusing for debtors (they know that they can be sued within X amount of years no matter where they go, hence they can't "run" from debt) and debt collectors don't have to go from state to state, wading through murky laws. Furthermore, debt collectors should not have the privilege of hiding behind tolling laws. Either they sue or they don't within a federally mandated set of time. Tolling simply keeps zombie debt going and going.
I agree 100% with this statement. Creditors should not simply be able to pull your credit report at their fancy. I had so many soft pulls (this was before I realized I needed to opt out of marketing) that my credit report from Equifax got "split." Basically, this means that my report got chopped in half and trade lines disappeared. Also, a legitimate creditor attempted to pull my credit and was told by Equifax that I didn't exist. Everything was GONE. After numerous fruitless attempts at reaching someone at Equifax, I finally got a real person. I was informed of the split and told that the burden was on me to provide them with the correct information to "put my report back together." I had to fax them my driver's license, social security card, and a utility bill, all because their software cracked due to too many inquiries that I didn't even authorize. It's still not resolved, and I've filed a report with the CFPB.
There are a few states that have the barbaric practice of actually arresting people for their debts by using a legal loophole. Some of the most egregious examples are in Minnesota, Illinois, and Missouri. The creditor sues the debtor in court. If the person fails to show, a warrant can be issued for their arrest. The police can actually arrest and jail the debtor until a court hearing, or until they pay the bond (which is usually the amount of the debt). This is a downright abuse of the legal system. These loopholes need to be closed in all states.
I've heard multiple stories of summons being dropped off or served to the wrong individual and summons being mailed to old addresses when the new address was clearly available. I don't believe that a summons should ever be served by mail. If the debt collector wants to sue, they should be required to serve the person directly in the city and state in which they currently reside. It's an especially dirty tactic to serve someone by mail. It's unreliable and puts the debtor at a disadvantage.
I agree. However, I believe that having a universal or national statute of limitations would alleviate this problem. The current system is too confusing.
This Draft Summary of Discussion fails to address the issues of confusion about the statute of limitations and how they vary among states. This is a big source of confusion in terms of collection of a debt and jurisdiction. Creating a more stanadrized set of rules would alleviate these problems. In 2010, the FTC released a report, "Repairing A Broken System," which made mention of the need a universal statute of limitations. Additionally, in 2011 ACA's plan, “The Path Forward: ACA International’s Blueprint for Modernizing America’s Consumer Debt Collection System" also advocated for a national statute of limitations. This is something that both sides of the industry actually agree upon. Why is it not being considered or discussed more? 50 different states and 50 different statutes make it too confusing for consumers. I also reiterate that a compromise in terms of years can be reached. Also, debt tolling needs to be done away with. It only adds to the confusion of when a debt becomes time-barred. We live in a transient society. A debt should not legally follow a person for the rest of their life:
For additional reading:
Repairing A Broken System - Federal Trade Commission: http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_events/life-debt/debtcollectionreport_0.pdf
InsideArm: Statutes of Limitations Frustrate Debt Collectors and Consumers
http://www.insidearm.com/daily/debt-buying-topics/debt-buying/statutes-of-limitations-frustrate-debt-collectors-and-consumers/
The Path Forward: ACA International’s Blueprint for Modernizing America’s Consumer Debt Collection System: http://www.acainternational.org/files.aspx?p=/images/18898/finalblueprint-designedversion.pdf
I respectfully disagree with your assessment. If anything, I believe that a national statute of limitations would actually stop the process of zombie debt. We live in a transient society. Assume that a national SOL were to be adapted… If it were three years, would your argument be the same? Also, you did not address the issue of tolling. Again, we live in a transient society. People move from place to place. For example, I had a medical crisis in Illinois. I was not able to keep up with the debt. I moved back to my home state of Wisconsin in a town 25 miles away from the Illinois border. Now, because I live in Wisconsin, the SOL has passed and I can no longer be sued here. However, should I ever choose to move back to Illinois (which I can’t unless I want my credit destroyed and want to get sued) it’s as though the debt never went away due to their tolling laws and longer SOL. It seems that the rationale behind your argument is to solely protect those people who live in states with short SOLs (3-4 years). That’s not even 50 %. A reasonable universal statute of limitations would make things more clear. At the very least, tolling provisions should be eliminated should states have their own statute of limitations. At what point does the debt finally die?
For further reference on debt tolling:
http://collectionagencydebt.blogspot.com/2012/08/tolling-debt-and-statute-of-limitations.html
So, again, it seems as though the SOL matters very little in these cases. Perhaps the bigger question is whether or not eliminating debt tolling should be considered as a new rule.
Esok
1
I don't believe that debt tolling should be legal. For instance, I had a medical crisis while living in Illinois for college. Despite having insurance, I still ended up deeply in debt. I attempted to work with the debt collectors, but I just couldn't keep up due to the massive amounts. I moved back to Wisconsin where I'm from. The debt has since become time-barred in Wisconsin due to the statute of limitations. It's not on my credit report and I can't be sued for it here. However, should I ever wish to return to Illinois again, it's like I never left and I can be raked over the coals by debt collectors all over again, including being sued. This doesn't make any sense. Either I get sued or I don't. Why does a debt collector get the safety blanket of debt tolling? It's been over 10 years, and it's not like I skipped the country and "hid" from them. I'd like to return to Illinois, but doing so would kill my credit. They had 10 years to sue me. Isn't that enough? This is unfair and I believe the issue of debt tolling should be explored. It's just not right.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
2
There needs to be a universal Statute of Limitations. The current system is an absolute mess. 17 states maintain a SOL of three to four years, while 19 others have the six years SOL time limit. The rest all have diverse SOL limits with some extending for even up to 10 years. Tolling provisions make it even more confusing. Simplify it. Have a single NATIONAL Statute of Limitations. Make it fair for everyone (debt collectors and debtors) 5 years seems reasonable. Having a universal Statute of Limitations will eliminate confusion and ambiguity as to when and where a debtor can be sued.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
3
Hello- I believe that a universal statute of limitations would be an effective way to end debt tolling. If there was a universal statute of limitations, there would be no need for debt tolling. Collectors would be able to file suit no matter where the debtor lived based on a single set of federal laws. It also makes things less confusing for debtors (they know that they can be sued within X amount of years no matter where they go, hence they can't "run" from debt) and debt collectors don't have to go from state to state, wading through murky laws. Furthermore, debt collectors should not have the privilege of hiding behind tolling laws. Either they sue or they don't within a federally mandated set of time. Tolling simply keeps zombie debt going and going.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
4
I agree 100% with this statement. Creditors should not simply be able to pull your credit report at their fancy. I had so many soft pulls (this was before I realized I needed to opt out of marketing) that my credit report from Equifax got "split." Basically, this means that my report got chopped in half and trade lines disappeared. Also, a legitimate creditor attempted to pull my credit and was told by Equifax that I didn't exist. Everything was GONE. After numerous fruitless attempts at reaching someone at Equifax, I finally got a real person. I was informed of the split and told that the burden was on me to provide them with the correct information to "put my report back together." I had to fax them my driver's license, social security card, and a utility bill, all because their software cracked due to too many inquiries that I didn't even authorize. It's still not resolved, and I've filed a report with the CFPB.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
5
There are a few states that have the barbaric practice of actually arresting people for their debts by using a legal loophole. Some of the most egregious examples are in Minnesota, Illinois, and Missouri. The creditor sues the debtor in court. If the person fails to show, a warrant can be issued for their arrest. The police can actually arrest and jail the debtor until a court hearing, or until they pay the bond (which is usually the amount of the debt). This is a downright abuse of the legal system. These loopholes need to be closed in all states.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
6
I've heard multiple stories of summons being dropped off or served to the wrong individual and summons being mailed to old addresses when the new address was clearly available. I don't believe that a summons should ever be served by mail. If the debt collector wants to sue, they should be required to serve the person directly in the city and state in which they currently reside. It's an especially dirty tactic to serve someone by mail. It's unreliable and puts the debtor at a disadvantage.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
7
I agree. However, I believe that having a universal or national statute of limitations would alleviate this problem. The current system is too confusing.
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
8
This Draft Summary of Discussion fails to address the issues of confusion about the statute of limitations and how they vary among states. This is a big source of confusion in terms of collection of a debt and jurisdiction. Creating a more stanadrized set of rules would alleviate these problems. In 2010, the FTC released a report, "Repairing A Broken System," which made mention of the need a universal statute of limitations. Additionally, in 2011 ACA's plan, “The Path Forward: ACA International’s Blueprint for Modernizing America’s Consumer Debt Collection System" also advocated for a national statute of limitations. This is something that both sides of the industry actually agree upon. Why is it not being considered or discussed more? 50 different states and 50 different statutes make it too confusing for consumers. I also reiterate that a compromise in terms of years can be reached. Also, debt tolling needs to be done away with. It only adds to the confusion of when a debt becomes time-barred. We live in a transient society. A debt should not legally follow a person for the rest of their life: For additional reading: Repairing A Broken System - Federal Trade Commission: http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_events/life-debt/debtcollectionreport_0.pdf InsideArm: Statutes of Limitations Frustrate Debt Collectors and Consumers http://www.insidearm.com/daily/debt-buying-topics/debt-buying/statutes-of-limitations-frustrate-debt-collectors-and-consumers/ The Path Forward: ACA International’s Blueprint for Modernizing America’s Consumer Debt Collection System: http://www.acainternational.org/files.aspx?p=/images/18898/finalblueprint-designedversion.pdf
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
9
I respectfully disagree with your assessment. If anything, I believe that a national statute of limitations would actually stop the process of zombie debt. We live in a transient society. Assume that a national SOL were to be adapted… If it were three years, would your argument be the same? Also, you did not address the issue of tolling. Again, we live in a transient society. People move from place to place. For example, I had a medical crisis in Illinois. I was not able to keep up with the debt. I moved back to my home state of Wisconsin in a town 25 miles away from the Illinois border. Now, because I live in Wisconsin, the SOL has passed and I can no longer be sued here. However, should I ever choose to move back to Illinois (which I can’t unless I want my credit destroyed and want to get sued) it’s as though the debt never went away due to their tolling laws and longer SOL. It seems that the rationale behind your argument is to solely protect those people who live in states with short SOLs (3-4 years). That’s not even 50 %. A reasonable universal statute of limitations would make things more clear. At the very least, tolling provisions should be eliminated should states have their own statute of limitations. At what point does the debt finally die?
View this comment in the discussion thread
Esok
10
For further reference on debt tolling: http://collectionagencydebt.blogspot.com/2012/08/tolling-debt-and-statute-of-limitations.html So, again, it seems as though the SOL matters very little in these cases. Perhaps the bigger question is whether or not eliminating debt tolling should be considered as a new rule.
View this comment in the discussion thread