Summary:

Plaintiffs Hank Bland, Kendell Jackson, and Luetta Innis appealed the dismissal of their lawsuit against Carolina Lease Management Group, LLC, CTH Rentals, LLC, and Old Hickory Buildings, LLC. The case involved rent-to-own purchases of storage sheds, and Plaintiffs alleged violations of the North Carolina Retail Installment Sales Act (RISA), the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act (UDTPA), and the North Carolina Debt Collection Act (DCA). The district court,  applying a  a three-year statute of limitations from RISA to dismiss all claims, including those under UDTPA and DCA,  dismissed the complaint on statute-of-limitations grounds.

On appeal, the Plaintiffs argued that their claims, aside from RISA, were subject to a four-year statute of limitations under UDTPA and DCA.  Relying on North Carolina cases,  including  Shepard v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, FSB, 638 S.E.2d 197, 200 (N.C. 2006), , Skinner v. Preferred Credit, 616 S.E.2d 676, 680–81 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005), and Jennings v. Lindsey, 318 S.E.2d 318, 322 (N.C. Ct. App. 1984), the Fourth Circuit agreed with Plaintiffs, noting that UDTPA claims are governed by a four-year statute of limitations regardless of their basis in RISA violations, and while  affirming  the dismissal of the RISA claim,   but vacated and remanded the dismissal by the district court of the UDTPA and DCA

Commentary:

This is another in a chain of great decisions that Adrian Lapas (and others) has received   regarding the pernicious rent-a-shed  schemes,  which often seek to claim  to be executory  rather that retail sales contracts,  both to avoid modification in bankruptcy,  but also to skirt recordation and affixation  requirements.

It is also worth noting that even if the statute of limitations has run to affirmatively raise claims against a creditor,  those can often be raised defensively as a counterclaim to attempts to collect by that creditor.  That can include as a basis for objecting to a Proof of Claim