Posts by Carol Jones10

Chloe Murphy3 said:The big question is whether filing an enforcement motion in court actually resets the statute of limitations. Look, I get what Rebecca White4 is saying—if a court shuts down an enforcement action because the creditor messed up, all those previous steps basically vanish and it's like the clock never even started ticking. But... if the creditor kicks off a whole new enforcement process at the same time using a certified document, and that gets pushed into a full lawsuit after an objection, then yeah, rules against double jeopardy/litigation would pretty much block them from resetting the clock.

Anyway, regardless of all that, the more I chew on it, the more I’m leaning toward option 1)

But wait, has the debtor been fighting this debt in court the entire time, or did they actually admit at some point that they owe it? Like, have they made any payments at all?

The existence of the debt isn't really the issue here. It exists—it’s just this tiny 2% slice of the purchase price left over because of some defects in the item sold. So, the creditor filed for enforcement specifically for that remaining balance.

During both the enforcement process and the lawsuit, the debtor didn't make any payments. Not one cent. And the creditor hasn't managed to seize anything either. Everything stopped when the court issued a ruling declaring the enforcement invalid, basically deciding that the sales contract doesn't qualify as an enforceable instrument.

Rebecca White4 said:I honestly don't get how a court could possibly issue an enforcement order based solely on a purchase agreement!

Generally speaking, when a lawsuit gets tossed out or a claim is denied, it’s like the statute of limitations was never interrupted—it just keeps ticking away. I bet you could apply that same logic here; if that were the case, the clock would have been running the whole time without any pause...

So, in your view, we're looking at variant number one.

Personally, I’m leaning toward that version too, although I think Chloe Murphy3’s fourth suggestion makes a decent amount of sense as well.

The sales contract was drafted by a notary, but they didn't follow the standard legal requirements for notaries, so they failed to produce a valid instrument that qualifies as an enforceable document. The court issued the enforcement order, but then during the litigation to declare the enforcement invalid, the court actually ruled that the sales contract wasn't a valid instrument—and the appellate court backed them up. So, yeah, weird things happen.

Chloe Murphy3 said:I’m betting on 4), right when he filed the motion for garnishment.

So why the hell was it thrown out?

Because the court decided that specific sales contract doesn't qualify as an enforceable instrument.

The foreclosure was ruled invalid
When does the statute of limitations actually start running on a claim based on a purchase agreement once a court finally rules that the foreclosure is inadmissible?

1. Right from the jump? Like, the initial attempt at foreclosure didn't actually pause the clock?
2. From the moment that ruling becomes final?
3. Or maybe from the day the stay on the foreclosure—based on that ruling—officially kicks in?