Menace and trwi7: At the very least, I need to explore your theory Menace because as an attorney I have been involved with defending clients in lawsuits who are being sued by credit card companies and tried to contest them in whatever manner I can and even while sitting in the judges chambers talking about the issues of the case the judge simply asks me if my client is denying that he or she had the credit card in question because as far as the judge sees it, these are open and shut cases. In fact, I dont know any attorney that currently uses this tactic in defense of credit card default. HYPOTHETICAL: What if you have a credit card with a $15,000.00 balance and stop paying the monthly payments today. Then the credit card sends it to a law firm 9 months later, the law firm writes you a letter saying you are in default and have X amount of days to cure the default (i.e. pay all the payments you have missed, in this case lets say it is $1,500.00) or suit will be started against you. You then tell them to stick it, and the law firm sues you for breach of contract just 18 months after you stopped paying on the debt?? Are you saying that in defense of the law suit in court that you just need to say that they cant sue you because it is an unsecured debt and that the case is over? Because when you sign up for a credit card you do sign paperwork in the application and that amounts to a written contract. The contract is an exchange of a line of credit for a promise to repay. If you get the line of credit and you dont pay it back based on the terms of the contract you are in breach of the contract. If you are talking about being sued after the SOL has run, then yes, you are correct the SOL bars any suit after the SOL. THe SOL is usually 6 years - after your last payment. In the above example, they can, will and do sue you. Debt collection firms are subject to different rules than law firms that specialize in debt collection. You are correct when you say that debt collection firms cant say they will sue...because they cant actually sue you and they cant threaten you with things they cannot do. However, a law firm CAN threaten you with litigation, because they actually CAN sue you. In fact, I am in receipt of a complaint in a civil action right now. It alleges: 1. That the defendant(s) applied for a credit card and thereby entered into a contract, and that pursuant thereto the defendants were issued a credt card which is the subject of this action. 2. That the plaintiff is the current holder of said credit card account, the plaintiff has performed all its duties and obligations under the contract, but the defendant has defaulted by failing to make the payments due thereon. 3. That any required notice to cure default was given to the defendants and that the defendants failed to cure the same and are therefore in default of the above-mentioned contract. That is the basis of any and all complaint in a credit card action.