Financial Channel

asset is trying to sue me for a 7 yr old ballys account. they have yet to validate but asked if i want to settle before we go to court. i said, "no" so they said, "see me in court". should i have settled?

What is the SOL in your state?

Did you request validation in writing? If so, how did they reply?

If it's past the SOL, just show up in court and tell the judge that it's past the Statute of Limitations. End of case.

If it's not past the SOL, tell the judge that you have no recollection of this account and that Asset has provided no proof that it is yours. It's been seven years, and you really can't remember ever signing a contract with them.

so you agree that i shouldnt have accepted their settlement? sol in illinois for written agreement is 10yrs.

i asked them to validate and they havent. they have 2 accounts of mine they sent a verification for one but not for the one they are suing me for.

I wouldn't settle unless there was proof that it was my debt.

If you have proof that you requested validation, make sure you take it to court. If they come up with some proof in court, I'd say something to the judge like "Your Honor, I requested this information before, and here's my proof. If Asset had produced the proof, I wouldn't be here wasting your time."

Then try to get a settlement for a lesser amount.

Have they actually served you yet?

no they havent!!!

Since you requested validation, and they haven't yet provided it, any collection activity is against the law. Even the "Hey buddy, we're gonna sue you; are you sure that you don't want to settle before we go to court." is a violation for collection activity after a VD request.

Sorry, I mis-read the original post a little bit... Eroneous original posting is quoted below...

My sister had a similar experience to this with C1, which is probably why I mis-read the original post.

Send the validation for the second account NOW...

They don't have to validate the account unless they've received a written validation request on the exact account that they are trying to sue you on.

Is this what happened?

You got something from them or saw the tradeline for the other account, sent a validation letter to them for that account, they couldn't provide you with a validation on that account, but since you only disputed the one account said, hey lets sue for the other one.

The validation you sent is only good for the account on which the validation you mailed was for, unless you don't have an account number and specify that it is for ANY AND ALL ACCOUNTS.

Your validation letter affirmed to them that they found you, and let them begin escalating on the other account.

You need to send a validation letter on the second account immediately.

Thanks for replying....
Initially I sent a Validation request for both but they only sent validation back for one. The one they sent validation for was the ONE that they told me they were suing me for. So i was concentrated on fighting that one. I called the courthouse yesterday and she said they were suing me for the one that they didnt validate. so now of course they are going to try and say that they sent validation for both. Whenever I receive my summons I can req. validation then too right?

If Asset had produced the proof, I wouldn't be here wasting your time."
Originally posted by Hedwig
======================
If Asset had produced the proof, they wouldn't be here wasting your time."
By LB

Good point, lbrown59 ... :-)

ibqti, if it was a credit card, it's considered an "open ended account", not a "written contract" and your SOL might be different. In case you don't have it, here is the link to you state SOL (http://www.legis.state.il.us/legislation/ilcs/ch735/ch735act5articles/ch735act5Sub87.htm) (735 ILCS 5/13-205).

Unfortunately its a written contract (bally's) so 10 yrs.

....

Originally posted by ibqti
Unfortunately its a written contract

Yeppers.