Statue of Limitations and Getting Sued

[vollbree88]

I have an old debt from when I was 17 years old. I had attended a University and had a portion of my tuition that I did not pay due to illness. I tried to work out a payment plan but they wanted it all in full and would not accept monthly or even bi-weekly payments. I received a summons to appear in court today via sheriff that arrived at my dad's house. They had tried to send through certified mail however I am out of state and they would not allow my dad to sign for it. A friend had mentioned that there was a statue of limitations of four years that someone can sue for a debt in the state of Pennsylvania. As of October 2009, it has been four years since the debt was owed. However, does the statue of limitations apply to this?
To clarify--it is NOT a student loan owed rather money to the actual university. I have records and documents supporting the fact that I tried to work out a payment plan. However, I need to know if the statute of limitations applies to this and if it is really "time-barred". If it is, what do I do next?

Can someone please clarify this for me. Thank you.

 

[tpajet]

Normally on any debt the SOL (great double meaning here....) starts after your last contact with them in regards to the matter, not from the time you took out the loan. So 4 years from the date of your last letter to them trying to work all of this out.

The best bet is go to court and show the judge your documentation. Make sure you also show anything you have from them stating they were not willing to work out the plan. I'm willing to bet the judge is not going to look to favorably on them for this. You will still have to pay, but they will still have to accept a payment plan. This will show up as a judgment against you until it is paid, but since you were willing to pay it anyway, don't let that part worry you.

Something else to look into - if you are having to travel out of state to go deal with this, I would contact the court that they have filed the suit in, and file a counter-suit for your travel expenses. In court use the argument that you had tried to work this out with them and they weren't willing to do so. Had they been willing to work with you, then you wouldn't have to have flown back, etc.

 

[fredrikklaw]

One step at a time!

You are putting the horse before the cart, arguing apples with oranges, and are running when you should be walking!

Statute of limitation for breach of a written contract is four years and two years for implied and quasi contracts. But that in and of itself does not operate as an automatic bar and a judge is certainly not going to throw it out sua sponte; it has to be argued against properly by way of a reply pleading, without which the plaintiff can and will walk away with a default judgment.

Also, a creditor is under no obligation and does not have to accept an offer of payment in lieu of settlement in an amount less than what is due under the contract, and, it is not an affirmative defense, so do not waste your time arguing it as it will go nowhere. By the same token, there are statutes which authorize and enable a plaintiff to force a defendant residing in California (for example) to appear to defend a case filed against him in Georgia and I am yet to hear of an opposing statute or law that provision for a defendant's inconvenience or travel expenses.

There are however, statutes which if you prevail in the case, will enable you to demand of the losing party payment of all attorneys fees and courts costs.

That you have to appear to defend the suit against you is a given, but your most pressing dilemma right now is deciding whether it will be sooner or the later. To go for the " later" option will mean making what is called a "Special Appearance" back in P.A. court to dismiss the case for defective service of process on account of you being an out of state defendant. In which case the plaintiff will have to re-attempt service of process in the state where you are now using P.A.'s Long Arm Statutes.

If the plaintiff is way too eager to prosecute his claims against you because of the dollar amount owed, then this move may buy you another couple of months or so before you have to show up in court in Pennsylvania. But if the amount in controversy is not that high and considering the large expense involved in having to locate you out of state and then have you served, they may just sit back let this one go.

Or, you show up at this first time of asking and get the case dismissed for being time barred, get your court and attorneys fees and go back to your life.

fredrikklaw

 

[tpajet]

Yes, the judge can put a judgment for the whole amount, and you're right that the creditor is under no obligation to accept payment terms, however if she is simply not able to pay in full, she can't pay. The same will happen in court. And yes, the judge could order wage garnishments, etc, but, I would still bring the documents that she tried to make arrangements with them. She is at least showing a willingness to pay. It's not the same as if she had just refused to pay at all.