Vacated Judgement resets Statute of Limitations?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DGS_

New Member
Here's the particulars, and thanks in advance for any assistance or advice offered:

My wife stopped paying a creditcard company on a $15,000 balance over a dispute regarding several thousand dollars in charges.

The company "charged off" this account. A 3rd party purchased the account, and sued us for the balance in December of 2002/January 2004. We were not served (oe were improperly served, I guess) , and had not been living at the location where they claimed to have served us for several months. We have utility bills and other documentation atesting to this. (We know that the property had been rented to another individual, with whom we are not aquainted) In short, the process server committed perjury. As such, we were unaware of the suit or default judgement.

We were just recently made aware of the suit/judgement, when it appeared on my wife's credit statement.

Given that process was not served - or not served correctly - we intend to file to have the default judgement vacated. (My understanding is that we have up to 180 days from the time we became aware of the judgement to do .)

We stopped payments in 2002, the statute of limitations would have passed by now, regarding the ability of the company to sue for this debt.

HERE's the rub: Does having the judgement vacated in any way "reset" the statute of limitations?[/B]

As this is my first post in this forum, I doubly appreciate any thouthful replies or advice.
 
Additional info ...

The original post does not seem to show the notation that this applies to Placer County in the state of California. Thanks again for any advice.
 
The suit itself tolls the SOL. But, once vacated (made void) it voids the tolling. So whatever was the final date on the original account is the date used for the SOL calculation. If they refile and it is outside SOL, use the affirmative defense and make it go away!
 
In CA: credit card creditor filed lawsuit in 2,000. Never served debtor( in addition this was an ID theft case and debtor never incured such debt and creditor was never able to produce valid debtor's signature, etc). Crditor received un opposed judgnment in 2,000.
Debtor served an at that time estranged relative where debtor never resided.
This relative who was served advised process server that debtor never lived there and he is not debtor and showed driver's license to prove it.
This relative has had one of his attorneys send letter to creditor's lawyer that it was not served on proper person, etc and to find debtor and due proper service. Have copy of such letter.
What would you do at this point? SOL is over?
Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top