My husband open a credit card in 98' and put about 2 or 3,000 on it. He never paid the card and just stopped using it. He told me that after 7 years the card falls off his credit, that he doesn't have to pay anything. So has a few of his friends and family, but my mother tells me no you still owe.

About two years ago he started getting collection letters and told me not to worry and just throw them away. Well, it's been a lil' over 10 years and we got a letter from a law firm stating that if he did not respond and resolve the problem we would be taken to court and they would garnish our wages. We called and they are willing to settle for only a fraction on the bill. My husband doesn't want to pay anything, and stills says it will fall off. If it's been over 10 years, then how is that right..

Can they take us to court and garnish our wages?
And does it really just go bye bye after the seven year mark?

Your husband is incorrect and a deadbeat. Unfortunately, its possible he MIGHT get away with it. When you borrow money (which is what using a credit card is) your obligation to pay NEVER expires. What your husband refers to is the rule that after 7 years a delinquent entry is dropped from your credit report. But that doesn't mean you are no longer obligated to pay.

However, where he may get off is under the Statute of Limitations (SOL). The SOL sets a time limit under which a creditor can take legal action to collect the debt. In most states the SOL is usually 4-6 years. So if no legal action was taken against him within that time, the creditor may just be blowing smoke by threatening legal action. If, however, for some reason the SOL hasn't expired, then they can sue and garnish his salary.

But there is another factor here. At the begiining of this response, I called your husband a deadbeat. Actually I think he's worse than that. I think he's a thief. Based on what you told us, your husband got this card and used it without any intention of paying it back. At best that is fraud and at worse its theft. If the creditor can prove that, they might be able to prosecute him for theft or fraud.

I would show this to your husband (I'm sure others will agree with me) and ask him does he want you to think of him as a criminal?

Hello Jess08

ScottGem is so right! Your husband's obligation to pay NEVER GOES AWAY! The sol may come in to play but it is dead wrong for some one like your husband to get a card with no intention of paying it back. In my book that is stealing!

First off, don't call my husband a deadbeat, that's not only rude but uncalled for. He's not. He learned all this from his family, because they were brought up with this idea for some reason. I've been trying to teach him it's wrong by trying to find facts on the matter.

First of all, he was 17 when he got the card, which I know is not allowed unless 18, but his mother did nothing to stop it. He did make payments at first, but once he stopped using it he never paid anything else. And all I wanted was a way to prove to him that it's not true, he still owes money and it won't go away. I've already settled and taken action, but he still thinks the way his family was taught.

I want a offiacl site on the matter so I can teach him the truth, not what un educated people have told him.

Also, thank you for the useful part of your responses. I just wanted info to not only educate myself, but for him since his family has told him wrong for years. The debt is no longer owed because I had to take action. Before I married my husband I never used credit cards, so this has been a big learning experience.

I am offended by your remarks Scott, it is unnecessary to call people you do not know, or fully know the story to say such cruel words. To say stealing is fine, understand that, but don't call someone a deadbeat because they are not properly educated.

Sorry Jess, but I was dealing with what YOU told us. You said; "He never paid the card". Now you are changing your story. Is that because of what we said?

If he, in fact did make payments on the card, then I take back referring to him as a thief. But I'm sorry, he's still a deadbeat, let me explain why. Even if he did believe that the debt would go away, he still reneged on his agreement to pay. He borrowed money and then didn't pay it back, that's a definition of a deadbeat. Maybe he's a deadbeat because he was taught to be one. But please don't tell he thought it was OK to not pay back what he borrowed. That's stretching my creduilty.

And lets look at your calling us rude. Giving you the facts is not rude. The truth may hurt, but based on what you have told us you've been given the truth. If you want to look at rudeness, referring to us as uneducated when you have nothing to back up that remark, that's rude!

Just go into any store and get a credit card application and read it. You will see that it requires the debt to be paid with no conditions. Its basic contract law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jess08

My husband open a credit card in 98' and put about 2 or 3,000 on it. He never paid the card and just stopped using it. He told me that after 7 years the card falls off his credit, that he doesn't have to pay anything. So has a few of his friends and family, but my mother tells me no you still owe. Can they take us to court and garnish our wages? And does it really just go bye bye after the seven year mark?

---

What usually happens is, the original card company... after being unable to collect, will sell the account to a collection company. This company can bug you forever.

They may be able to take you to court, and I'm surprised they've waited so long. Your only recourse is to either settle with them, or talk to a bankruptcy lawyer.

Or do nothing... and eventually you'll get a summons to appear in court etc.

Or... they may just bug the crap out of you via the phone, mail etc... hopeing you'll tire of being pestered and pay up.

I did not change my story... I stated he didn't pay (didn't pay off is what I ment) and stopped using the card, which means it's still owed. No he didn't make all his payments like he should and he was being stupid to think that way.

I didn't call you uneducated, I called his family and him that due to their way of dealing with it, they are uneducated, I stated that clearly.

And no it is rude to start a name calling game like a child. It's unacceptable by all means. He made a mistake, he paid for it even if it took me trying to prove it by making him pay it. Once that letter stated court, he opened his eyes, but still believes the 7 year rule. Everything else to due with money he seems to understand and do fine, but this one thing he can't seem to understand, so I'm trying to not only teach him it's the same as taken out a loan for a car or home, but his family and friends as well who have buried this information in his head, the proper thing to call him is ignorant, no a deadbeat.

Thank you Ferghus, that was helpful. I appreciate it.

Look Jess, I don't want to get into a fight with you. But you need to read what you are saying. First you said "He NEVER paid", then you said he did make payments. That is changing your story.

I also need to read a little more carefully, in review, I can see you meant his family was uneducated. Sorry about that misunderstanding.

But you are not understanding me. Yes name-calling is rude, but describing someone's actions is not. The following is from Merriam Webster's online dictionary (deadbeat - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

Main Entry: 1dead·beat http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif Function: noun 1 : loafer
2 : one who persistently fails to pay personal debts or expenses

Again, that's what your husband did. And I wll say again, whether he belidved the debt would expire someday or not. He had to know that he was responsible for that debt. Being taught that a debt expires doesn't mean he was taught to ignore it. I can't accept that he became a grown man without somehow getting some sense of responsibility.

And again I told you I meant he never paid it off, money was still owed, bottom line. So sorry if my typing skills aren't very clear for you, it never changed, I had to explain in more detail just for you.

The purpose of this whole site is to ask a question and for someone to answer it. I just gave extra info to explain why I'm confused and why all his family is so ignorant to the problem. You're only required to answer the question, not inquire anything else. So pleases leave mine alone, I have enough people who have given me proper response to the question, not any other unneeded input. I'm not part of a discussion board.

Terms of Service (TOS) and Rules, rev. 12.7.07

I. Posting Rules

1. Post only questions or answers to questions. Miscellaneous statements and general conversations belong in the Member Discussions board.


On that note, Please do not respond. There is no "P.S. Please post a response to let us know whether our answer helped or not." On my post. You answered the main question, enough... bother someone else. Please.

Sorry again, but you misunderstand how sites like these work. When you post a question you open yourself up to answers that you might not like. My responses have not been "Miscellaneous statements and general conversations". They have been directly on point to what YOU have posted. I don't apologize for giving factual information which is all I have done.

And, as long as my responses are on point, you have no right to tell me where I can or can't post. If I choose to respond to your posts, I will. If you think I am violating the rules, feel free to report the post. If you choose to ignore my responses that is your right.

But what this comes down to, is I gave you the right information based on what you posted. I suspect I touched a nerve in doing so, You didn't like hearing the truth so you struck out at me.