Published On: May 21, 2017

US Supreme Court

May 15, 2017: Resolving a split of circuits, the Supreme Court held 5/3 in Midland Funding LLC v. Johnson  6-348 (Sup. Ct. May 15, 2017) that a debt collector who files a stale claim that is “obviously” barred by the statute of limitations has not engaged in false, deceptive, misleading, unconscionable, or unfair conduct and thus does not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

“Writing the opinion for the majority in favor of the debt collector, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said that the conclusion on one issue — false, deceptive or misleading — was “reasonably clear.” The second issue — unfair or unconscionable — presented a “closer question,” he said.  The dissent replied that “Professional debt collectors have built a business out of buying stale debt, filing claims in bankruptcy proceedings to collect it, and hoping that no one notices that the debt is too old to be enforced by the courts. This practice is both ‘unfair’ and ‘unconscionable.'”

Despite existing laws governing collection of debts Midland now opens the door for debt buyers to purchase claims that are far outside the deadline for collection (referred to as “stale claims”) for pennies on the dollar and file a proof of claim in a bankruptcy with the hope they will collect money in the bankruptcy.  Why?  Because trustees and debtors normally do not object to this type of claims.  The Supreme Court seemed to think (wrongly in my opinion) that chapter 13 bankruptcy trustees review each and every claim in detail.

(History of Midland: In an action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act “FDCPA”, 15 U.S.C. sections 1692e and 1692f, arising out of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy case in which a creditor filed a claim asserting that debtor owed a credit-card debt and noting that the last time any charge appeared on debtor’s account was more than 10 years ago, which exceeded the 6-year statute of limitations.  The US Supreme Court’s decision reverses the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that the FDCPA applied to the case.  Finding that  the filing of a proof of claim that is obviously time barred is not a false, deceptive, misleading, unfair, or unconscionable debt collection practice within the meaning of the FDCPA.)


Arizona is going to see a flurry of debt buyers suing on “old debt” outside the six year statute of limitations because of this case:


MERTOLA, LLC, v. SANTOS, No. 1 CA-CV 16-0168 (AZ Court of Appeals, Division 1,Decided: March 02, 2017)  “We hold in this case that, absent agreement to the contrary, a cardholder’s failure to make a minimum monthly credit-card payment does not trigger the statute of limitations on a claim for the entire unpaid balance on the account. Absent contrary terms in the account agreement, the lender’s claim for the balance does not accrue, and limitations does not begin to run, until the lender accelerates the debt or otherwise demands payment in full.”

So why the hubbub about these stale debts?

If you read Midland and Mertola together it appears debt buyers can purchase and try to collect on debts that are very, very old because the creditor never accelerated the loan by calling it all due and payable (in writing).  Now the Supreme Court opened the door for debt collectors/buyers to file proof of claims for debts never accelerated (Arizona) and/or stale with the hopes of collecting in a bankruptcy.

Note – remember the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense.

stale debts

Supreme Court gives debt collectors more power.

My concern – in a non-Arizona accelerated situation, normally a debt becomes uncollectable once the applicable statute of limitations expires; only to be reborn if the borrowers make any payment on the debt.  Therefore, under Midland, if the creditor, debt collector or buyer receives just one cent from the bankruptcy claim the debt is reborn and, if the bankruptcy is dismissed (not discharged) that will give the creditor or debt collector the right to sue and collect on the original debt, plus all contractual interest and penalties.

Future business for creditors

I predict that all creditors will set up their own subsidiaries to “buy” stale debts (some have already done so).  For Arizona residents those creditors will let the debt sit for decades and then pounce on the borrower when their finances have improved.  Some of you believe that is only fair “after all they borrowed the money and should pay it back”.  Others will feel that everyone has the right to move on with their lives and not suffer for mistakes or circumstances that happened decades earlier.

By |Published On: May 21st, 2017|Last Updated: October 17th, 2022|

Share this article

About the Author: Diane Drain

Diane is a well respected Arizona bankruptcy and foreclosure attorney. As a retired law professor, she believes in offering everyone, not just her clients, advice about bankruptcy and Arizona foreclosure laws. Diane is also a mentor to hundreds of Arizona attorneys.

*Important Note from Diane: Everything on this web site is offered for educational purposes only and not intended to provide legal advice, nor create an attorney client relationship between you, me, or the author of any article. Information in this web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from an attorney familiar with your personal circumstances and licensed to practice law in your state. Make sure to check out their reviews.*

Law Office of D.L. Drain, P.A., Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyer - Google Reviews
Law Office of D.L. Drain, P.A., Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyer - Yelp Reviews
Law Office of D.L. Drain, P.A., Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyer - Avvo Reviews
Avvo - Rate your Lawyer. Get Free Legal Advice.
Law Office of D.L. Drain, P.A., Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyer - Alignable Reviews
Law Office of D.L. Drain, P.A., Arizona Bankruptcy Lawyer - Better Business Bureau

“You folks are the BEST OF THE BEST in Arizona.” M.H.

You and Jay are the best attorneys I have ever had or needed and thank God for the Honorable Robert Gottsfield in recommending you folks – I would have never made it through the entire process without you and Jay and God Bless you both always and stay in touch as well. You folks are the BEST OF THE BEST in Arizona.

“My only regret is that I didn’t find Diane sooner.” K.H.

I can’t say enough good things about Diane. The way she handled my not typical circumstances was amazing. I was very nervous to start the bankruptcy process but Diane just has a very comforting way of explaining the whole process. My only regret is that I didn’t find Diane sooner. If you find yourself in a financial situation that you can’t correct on your own, please Call Diane Drain as soon as possible.

“Filing for bankruptcy can be a stressful life event” R.A.

Filing for bankruptcy can be a stressful life event, and selecting the right attorney can add to this stress. Diane and Jay were a pleasure to work with, and it is obvious that they are passionate about helping people get their life back on track. I would highly recommend them if you need a bankruptcy attorney.

Related Posts

  • Want to avoid dishonest debt collectors?  Watch this video from FTC’s Consumer Advice By Joseph Ferrari,July 22, 2022 (reprint from FTC, Consumer Alerts) During Military Consumer Month 2022, the FTC [...]

  • Published On: January 20, 2022

    Bankruptcy Issues After January 1, 2022 Changes in Arizona Homestead Statutes Reprint from Gary Stickell’s website: January 19, 2022 The Arizona Homestead exemption increased from $150,000 to $250,000 as of [...]

  • Published On: October 25, 2021

    CFPB Confirms Effective Date for Debt Collection Final Rules (Reprint from CFPB, July 30, 2021) The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today announced two final rules under the FDCPA will [...]

  • Dirty Little Secret – medical bills are the highest they have ever been and debtor buyers are paying pennies on the dollar to purchase the debts, but then sue the [...]

My intention is to put you back in control of your life
Start with $0 down*. We provide affordable payment plans.