[Lrevenefilm]

I am being sued by an attorney for a debt to Capital One in New York State. The original complaint (no proof of service) states that Capital One is governed by the laws of Virginia. The last transaction on the account was Sept. 2003. I have not acknowledged this debt, and have filed answer as required. Virginia has a three year Statue Of Limitation on open accounts. Since there is no NC on Capital Ones title, subjecting it to interstate regulations, can I argue that the 3 yr. SOL in Virginia is valid in NY state. Thanks

[JudyKayTee]

I am being sued by an attorney for a debt to Capital One in New York State. The original complaint (no proof of service) states that Capital One is governed by the laws of Virginia. The last transaction on the account was Sept. 2003. I have not acknowledged this debt, and have filed answer as required. Virginia has a three year Statue Of Limitation on open accounts. Since there is no NC on Capital Ones title, subjecting it to interstate regulations, can I argue that the 3 yr. SOL in Virginia is valid in NY state. Thanks

No, you cannot - they also do business in NYS, thus, NYS law regulates Capital One for debts in NYS. They are licensed to do business in NYS.

What do you mean by "no proof of service"? You weren't served?

(I'm sure you can pretty much argue anything but I don't see the argument winning.)

[Lrevenefilm]

Thanks Judy Kay Tee for your input. The original complaint was delivered to a friend's house where I was never a resident. There was no affirmation of service supplied during the discovery which is still on going. The attorney argued that there is a sixty day period in NY after serving that the serving has to be contested, The judge concurs.
My original question was since NA has to be part of the title of a company to be governed by interstate banking laws. Wouldn't that make Capitol One only subject to Va. Law. I guess I'm hoping for yes but better to get this out on this forum instead of in court.

[JudyKayTee]

Thanks Judy Kay Tee for your input. The original complaint was delivered to a friend's house where I was never a resident. There was no affirmation of service supplied during the discovery which is still on going. The attorney argued that there is a sixty day period in NY after serving that the serving has to be contested, The judge concurs.
My original question was since NA has to be part of the title of a company to be governed by interstate banking laws. wouldn't that make Capitol One only subject to Va. law. I guess I'm hoping for yes but better to get this out on this forum instead of in court.

Tnis is me thinking more or less outloud:

Where did they get your friend's address, I wonder? Unfortunately if he accepted it - or even it was nail and mail at his residence - and it eventually came to you an argument can be made that it was good service. (I own a process service company.) "Often" (never a good word when discussing ANYTHING legal) the Plaintiff has to get permission from the Court to serve another address; Plaintiff can't go door to door looking for you (tongue in cheek). Plaintiff has to present a good reason to do so. As I said it looks like it was accepted and forwarded to you so basically you were served.

And if you get service set aside they'll simply serve you again.

I know Capital One sues in NYS all the time and I know they do business in NYS as well as collect in NYS. I would think if this were a defense issue someone would have raised it before - and maybe they have. Hmm -

To be incorporated/licensed in one State and be bound by their statutes (of limitation) but do business in other States would make little/no sense.

Here is what I found and I don't know if it's at point: "NA stands for National Association. It refers to which government agency granted it its charter (the right to be a bank). Some banks are state chartered, and thus regulated by the state's banking regulations, which can often be more lax than the national regulations. State chartered banks can have a harder time crossing into other states, unless those two states have an agreement to allow it, whereas nationally chartered banks can move into different states (though some restriction do apply). Regardless of its charter the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp is an entity that insures the deposits of both state and national banks, whereas CUNA does it for credit unions."

If you pursue this would you let me know the outcome? OK to private e-mail if you are more comfortable because I am quite interested and don't know the answer (nor can I find it).

[Lrevenefilm]

Thanks Judy Kay Tee for taking time with this. I have question into the Federal Deposit Rules Commission, Help Line and am awaiting their reply will pass on to you asap.

[Lrevenefilm]

Judy Kay Tee, you were correct. The FDIC says SOL is under jurisdiction of state collection is being sought by creditor (predator) bank. Thank for your help. LR

[JudyKayTee]

Judy Kay Tee, you were correct. The FDIC says SOL is under jurisdiction of state collection is being sought by creditor (predator) bank. Thank for your help. LR

Wow - thanks for taking the time to say "thanks." Made my day! Hope all works out (and maybe it already has).