I got an unsecured loan from an aquantance in 2005 with no note or terms of agreement
Or when it had to be paid back. Just a verbal pay me when you can. A dispute came about over another matter and I felt I didn't owe the money any
Longer, dispute was that the money was to be a referral fee for something else.
Now I am being sued for the amount of $1300. I did make one payment before the dispute came about in mid 2006. The only thing the plaintiff has is the cancelled check.
Do I have any grounds for dismissel due to statue of limitation in Ca. and/or should
My defence be that the debt was wiped out by the unprovable referral fee he was going
To give me.

Any ideas??

Thanks

tradr22

It's going to be their word against yours, without any written agreement.

The check is not proof of anything other than you wrote them a check at some point in time.

It could go either way, depends on who the judge believes is telling the truth, or as close to the truth as possible.

Hello t:

Seems to me like you owe the money and just found an excuse NOT to pay it back. If he says you borrowed the money, and you say you didn't, whose lying?? His wife??

No, Dude. You owe the bread. PAY HIM.

excon

You can't just say you don't owe the money any longer due to (fill in the blank). Regardless if you are not speaking with the other person or if they promised you some sort of referral fee for the loan... it still boils down to you owe them the $1,300 minus the one payment you made. What makes you think you don't owe them the money? Because it's Tuesday? Or Wednesday? etc.