[Michigan] ISP Service Account - Creditor Transferred My Wife's Account - Re-Aging

[Rick_49056]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan
On November 2, 2007, my wife received a past due notice for $353. 56 for internet service that never worked. Starting in August 2017 to September 28, 2017, the ISP failed to answer emails, voicemails, calls and their technicians could not fix the connection or fix the service. They lied numerous times and very incompetent. My wife signed the Account and Terms and the account was in her name. The contract indicated the company is obligated to provide the service which they never did and the contract stated, “The Customer is responsible to pay all fees up to the date of termination of the service, except where the ISP is unable to provide services under this agreement through its own negligence.”
The company showed negligence, incompetence, lied and the technicians showed no regards to my service. My wife sent them a letter on July 9, 2008 laying out the position there was no service provided.

Fast forward to May 4, 2010, I signed the contract and signed up with service with the same ISP. We had no other options for internet service so we thought we would try it again. Between July 2008 and May 4, 2010, we received no other notices for my wife's past due amount. We cancelled our service on 6/9/2012 paying our account every month. We received a final bill with my wife's old account attached with a line item of transferring her account to my account saying we owed the same $353.56 from 11/16/2007!!!

I ignored the bill because we never received service and would not be paying for service I never received. I received another bill dated 7/20/12. I sent a certified, signature return letter asking for validation this was my bill. This wasn't my alleged bill. It wasn't in my name, I didn't owe it, I wanted them to prove this was my bill. The owner emailed me and threatened to sue me. He would threaten to sue me regularly over the years.

Fast forward to October 20, 2014, I receive a collections agency letter for the same $353.56 which is now $365.56. As allowed under the FDCPA, I sent a certified, signature return letter within 30 days (signed 11/17/2014) telling the collections agency this was a time-barred debt (six years or more in Michigan) to let the original creditor this as well and if the collection agency went to legal action knowing it was time-barred I would sue them for $1,000. I received another letter from the collection agency dated 11/19/14 telling me the bill remains outstanding and I have ignored their attempts to resolve (which is a lie!). It said I should call or the collection process will proceed. I didn't do anything else.

Fast forward to 5/26/17, the ISP company emailed me another bill, which he has added an arbitrary past due charge of 60 months of $328.80 bringing the new total of $694.36!

I emailed a copy of the collection agency letter indicating the bill is from at this point nearly 10 years now! He said the bill wasn't even 5 years old (working off the premise of the amount when he transferred the balance in 2012). He is now again threatening to sue me, he has the summons and complaint filled out ready to serve me.

Does he have a case or is the bill time-barred?
Can he re-age the account without my permission? Is he allowed to transfer my wife's account under my account?
Was the collection agency allowed to send me another letter after I sent them a letter not to?
If I am sued, would my affirmative defense of the statute of limitation stand?
Would I be able to sue for punitive damages or some other damages? Harassment? Bringing me to court when they know the SOL has run out?
Can he add late charges arbitrarily?
Should I try to settle if you think he will win?

 

[FlyingRon]

Validation doesn't stop collections. The owner of the debt isn't required to "validate" anything. That's only for third party collectors.

Why do you think your threats to sue to mean anything to the low life scum that are debt collectors? They've heard it all before.

Your "permission" doesn't have anything to do with it. Alas, ordering more service may indeed have refreshed the SOL on this. You can protest that your wife is a different entity, but it's quite possible that the debt is going to be regarded as a community debt, especially with you both residing and using the service.

You're not getting punitive damages.

You don't seem to have done anything to take steps to proactively protest the debt either. Just jumping up and down and complaining your service doesn't work doesn't make the obligation to pay go away. You needed to actively protest the billing.

 

[Rick_49056]

So, what would be my best option at this point?

Validation doesn't stop collections. The owner of the debt isn't required to "validate" anything. That's only for third party collectors.

Why do you think your threats to sue to mean anything to the low life scum that are debt collectors? They've heard it all before.

Your "permission" doesn't have anything to do with it. Alas, ordering more service may indeed have refreshed the SOL on this. You can protest that your wife is a different entity, but it's quite possible that the debt is going to be regarded as a community debt, especially with you both residing and using the service.

You're not getting punitive damages.

You don't seem to have done anything to take steps to proactively protest the debt either. Just jumping up and down and complaining your service doesn't work doesn't make the obligation to pay go away. You needed to actively protest the billing.

 

[Rick_49056]

Michigan is not a community debt state. So, they would have needed to get my permission to add the balance to mine, right?

Validation doesn't stop collections. The owner of the debt isn't required to "validate" anything. That's only for third party collectors.

Why do you think your threats to sue to mean anything to the low life scum that are debt collectors? They've heard it all before.

Your "permission" doesn't have anything to do with it. Alas, ordering more service may indeed have refreshed the SOL on this. You can protest that your wife is a different entity, but it's quite possible that the debt is going to be regarded as a community debt, especially with you both residing and using the service.

You're not getting punitive damages.

You don't seem to have done anything to take steps to proactively protest the debt either. Just jumping up and down and complaining your service doesn't work doesn't make the obligation to pay go away. You needed to actively protest the billing.

 

[FlyingRon]

I didn't say community debt. I said marital debt. SHe signed up for service at a house you both resided in as a married couple and both presumably were users of.

 

[Rick_49056]

I really appreciate you responding to my post, but you literally said community debt.

"You can protest that your wife is a different entity, but it's quite possible that the debt is going to be regarded as a community debt, especially with you both residing and using the service."

For marital or community debt to apply don't we need to reside in the currently nine community debt states? I have also posted on Reddit and the advice on there is the ISP would not be able to transfer her account to my account without my permission and since Michigan is not a community debt state I would not be liable for her account.

I didn't say community debt. I said marital debt. SHe signed up for service at a house you both resided in as a married couple and both presumably were users of.

 

[justalayman]

While typically speaking you would not be liable for most debts incurred by your wife (there are a few situations where a spouse can be held liable for a spouses debt), generally you would not be liable for her debts. The concern I see as a possibility is they simply reopened the old account and restarted services. While you may be able to argue your wife's debt is separate or your debt, a court may not see it that way and find you liable.


Just the same, the old debt is older than the sol allows and there is a clear defining of the two dates of service. This is not a revolving account but a defined contract purchase on a monthly basis so each months debt establishes a hard date from which the debt clock starts.


I would say you have a reasonable chance winning this based on a statute of limitations defense.

 

[Rick_49056]

I really appreciate your thoughts and input. There was a new account opened under my name with a new account number and a new contract signed by me so it was not simply a reopened old account. Thanks again for your thoughts.

While typically speaking you would not be liable for most debts incurred by your wife (there are a few situations where a spouse can be held liable for a spouses debt), generally you would not be liable for her debts. The concern I see as a possibility is they simply reopened the old account and restarted services. While you may be able to argue your wife's debt is separate or your debt, a court may not see it that way and find you liable.


Just the same, the old debt is older than the sol allows and there is a clear defining of the two dates of service. This is not a revolving account but a defined contract purchase on a monthly basis so each months debt establishes a hard date from which the debt clock starts.


I would say you have a reasonable chance winning this based on a statute of limitations defense.