Share post
member profile picture
Posts: 2
Credits: 0

Worldwide Asset Purchasing has had a summons issued in VA court regarding a credit card debt with an SOL of 06/07/08. The summons is dated 8/19/08. Is there a defense here?
Also, they filed against me last Jan. 08 but the claim was dismissed because they could not validate. Now, on the new summons (also a new filing) there is an affidavit from a Worldwide Assets Attorney Relationship Manager from GA stating the debt is valid and that she can testify to it. Although, I dont know how. One of the documents attached shows the SOL as 6/7/08. I dont get whats going on.

File your answer with the court stating that the SOL has expired and ask that it be dismissed. Send a copy of the WAP
document showing the SOL has expired.

Sub: #1 posted on Wed, 08/27/2008 - 15:24


Also the affidavit is probably worthless unless the manager can prove that he was there when the agreement was made. Also ask the court to require this person's pressence at the hearing so that he can testify to how he knows the debt is yours. It is highly unlikely that he will show up and it is extremely unlikely, if he does, that he will commit perjury and subject himself to criminal charges.

Sub: #2 posted on Wed, 08/27/2008 - 15:28


Would they actually include a noterised affidavit with no intention of backing it up? Is this some kind of scare tactic?
Thanks for the answers BTW.
Is it possible for a judge to disregard the SOL if they filed suit against me back in Jan of this year and the case was nonsuited?

Sub: #3 posted on Wed, 08/27/2008 - 15:45

funnelmastering funnelmastering

(Posts: 2 | Credits: )

They use it as a scare tactic and if it comes to actually going to court the person won't show up or they will ask for a dismissal.

The other case was dismissed so they had to start anew so the judge should not disregard the SOL.

Sub: #4 posted on Wed, 08/27/2008 - 20:37


Those affidavits are not worth it as toilet paper let alone something that can actually stand up in court. For one, it is hearsay and like stated before this person can't possibly testify to personal knowledge 9without commiting perjury).

It doesn't matter if they attempted to sue you before, it is still out of SOL...though this time be sure to motion to dismiss with prejudice, so they can't sue you again. You honestly should have done this the first time around since they had no proof the debt was yours....

Sub: #5 posted on Thu, 08/28/2008 - 09:41

goldenbast goldenbast
Moderators Cum Industry Expert
(Posts: 2885 | Credits: )

More information
  • Files must be less than 500 MB.
  • Allowed file types: txt pdf jpg jpeg png.

Page loaded in 0.800 seconds.