Personal Finance

Ask me about Credit Scores

  • Last Updated:
  • Mar 26th, 2024 1:13 pm
Deal Addict
May 16, 2017
2809 posts
3663 upvotes
peterpan783 wrote: "any negative information is retained for different periods of time at each bureau, 6 years from date of last activity on equifax [THIS IS ILLEGAL!] and 6 years from date of first delinquency at transunion"

This information and this discrepancy are not accurate. If this is true, then one of the Credit bureaus (Equifax) is breaking the law.

It is not up to the credit bureaus to freely and unilaterally decide for how long negative information gets reported, and to pick whichever dates they feel like. That falls on the LAW of the province of residence, and what the law says about credit reporting.

From the statement above, in British Columbia, only Transunion is complying with the Law and applying it properly.

Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act [SBC 2004] CHAPTER 2

Contents of reports
109 (1) A reporting agency must not include in a report given under section 108 (1) (a) [to whom reports may be given] any of the following:

(o) any other information adverse to the individual's interest 6 years after the event that gave rise to the information;

The event that gave rise to the (negative) information is the date of first default, the date when the account first became delinquent, the date when a payment was due and expected and did not happen. It is because of that event that the negative information got reported to the credit bureau. This is the date that matters, and the 6 years start counting from that date onward, non-stop. That date does not get "reset" by (partial) payments. Once an account gets reported as delinquent, that delinquency will stay reported for the next 6 years, whether the account is paid or not. It cannot be removed, unless it was reported in error.

...
First off - I don't know where that first line about Equifax comes from as it isn't verbatim from Equifax.ca itself.

In any case, your assertion that "first delinquency" is meaningful isn't convincing to me on a revolving account. On a revolving account I believe it could be argued that each month that the NEW balance isn't paid becomes a new event. I'm no lawyer, but I suspect Equifax has plenty and they apparently believe they comply with the law. If you have an example where someone has successfully argued your point that would be informative.
Deal Fanatic
Apr 16, 2007
8134 posts
3485 upvotes
Financial District B…
I quickly made a simple graph identifying tradeline reporting policy that dictates the DOLA/DOFD protocol rules.

Image

A client can be as tardy as he/she wants throughout the entire time he/she has had the credit card. Credit reporting protocol dictates the start date begins prior to charge off of the account.
For TU it will be the date of the Green R2 (the first default that followed all the way to R9 charge-off)
For EQ it will be the date of the Blue R1 (the last time the client actually made a payment on the account)

The difference bewteen the two credit reporting agencies is only 30 days or one reporting cycle.




.add*
The graph above is not normal default behaviour. Debtors do not normally go directly from R1 to R9. It was created that way just for simple understanding.
Normal default behaviour usually resembles this: R1 R1 R2 R1 R2 R3 R3 R3 R2 R2 R3 R4 R4 R4 R5 R5 R5 R5 R9
----------------------------Licensed Credit Bureau member, S1, FI Automotive, CCP forums most banned = x 13 and counting, guess who that is?... stomped to the curb once again
Sr. Member
Dec 8, 2017
676 posts
330 upvotes
jeff1970 wrote: At the score, why does it matter? Absolutely no one knows how to get your credit score super high. It's all proprietor information that even Equifax and Transunion would have a hard time explaining.

So you have your mortgage paid off, you car loan paid off, and you keep paying off your credit cards, you'd expect a perfect score, right? Yet that doesn't happen.

So my research but probably not super accurate.

Keep number of credit cards down to a minimal -- like 3.
Keep the oldest credit card always if ditching some cards.
Minimize credit checks (though eliminate them? I don't know).
Have more than one type of credit (so revolving credit (HELOC, credit cards) and instalments (car loan, deferred loan) and possible others (mortgage?, "other"?).
Keep balances low. Though it might be OK to have a small balance if you don't have a lot of cards to show that you actually use your credit - payment history is important, and I am not sure if zero balance is a positive or not, except when getting a mortgage or car loan -- and these use different scoring models.
Thanks, I appreciate your serious response to my request.
Newbie
Dec 14, 2010
20 posts
17 upvotes
Winnipeg
Our mortgage renewal is coming up in July. Both my wife and I have excellent credit (high 800s). How concerned should we be about opening new accounts in the lead-up to our renewal? E.g. opening a new credit card, financing a new car, anything that comes with a hard inquiry, etc.
Thanks!
Newbie
Apr 1, 2017
5 posts
6 upvotes
mikeymike1 wrote: It's important to keep in mind that SOL reporting and SOL legal action are two very different things.

Read this: https://www.credit-collections.ca/2012/ ... ada-debts/
Pay attention to what is written in red.
Mikey...

Again I have to clarify few things...

There is no such thing as an "SOL reporting", or an "SOL legal action". There is only ONE SOL (statute of limitations) and it applies to legal action. There is no SOL for anything else.

statute of limitations = a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of certain kinds of legal action.

There may be different limitation periods for other legal actions in other Acts and legislation, but none of those are considered "SOLs". There is only one SOL.

The time prescribed to report credit information is not a limitation period to bring any legal actions. It doesn't fit the definition of an SOL.

On the link you provided, there are multiple errors. I'm surprised a page meant to "inform" the public may be so misleading. I did read the sections in red.

"If an unsecured debt is not collected, or payments are not made on the unsecured debt within these time limits, then legal action cannot be taken by the creditor or a collection agency. Only admitting to the debt in writing OR making payments of a debt [WITHIN THE LIMITATIONS PERIOD] resets the statute of limitations."

They should have put the quoted portion but they didn't. They didn't do it because they are wrong and didn't know about that.

Further, a "clock" can only be "reset" while it's running. Once it stops, that is no resetting. That is restarting. It's not mere semantics. These words have different meanings, and the differences are legally relevant. A limitations clock can be reset, under conditions set above, while it is still running. A limitations clock can NEVER be restarted once it stops. Once the clock stops, it's over! It stopped forever.

"British Columbia – Section 3 (5) of the BC Limitation Act sets 6 years as the limit for debt."

Outdated information. Since the new Limitations Act came into effect in 2013, the limit in British Columbia is 2 years.

Nanavut – Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.N.W.T. 1988, c.L-8, s. 2(e). sets 6 years as the limit for debt.

There is no "Nanavut" in Canada. It's called Nunavut.

And this is the most incorrect and misleading part of that website:

If you have been contacted by a collector and the debt is past the statute of limitations for your province, a collector cannot legally collect the debt unless:

1) you admit in writing that the debt is yours.
2) you start making payments.


This is legally and technically wrong. Yes they can collect. They can collect forever, past the expiration of the SOL, until the day you die and afterwards. What they cannot do is sue to collect. They can still try to collect by soliciting payment, by sending you letters, by asking you to pay voluntarily.

Assuming they meant "sue to collect", then it is still wrong information. Unless nothing! There is no "unless".

If the debt is past the statute of limitations, it is statute barred and the collector cannot legally sue to collect it, period. No action or admission made AFTER the SOL expired has any legal effect on the SOL. The SOL ended and it ended forever.

An admission in writing of a debt or a payment while the SOL is still running will have the effect of resetting it.

An admission in writing of a debt or a payment after the SOL is expired has no legal effect whatsoever. That would be free money given to the creditor. They cannot sue you for the full amount after this. The debt remains statute barred.

Read carefully the applicable section of the ACT (the "clock reset" section):

Limitation periods extended if liability acknowledged

24 (1) If, before the expiry of either of the limitation periods that, under this Act, apply to a claim, a person acknowledges liability in respect of the claim,

(a) the claim must not be considered to have been discovered on any day earlier than the day on which the acknowledgement is made, and

(b) the act or omission on which the claim is based is deemed to have taken place on the day on which the acknowledgement is made.

The clock resetting specifies it can only happen before the expiry of either of the limitation periods (basic or ultimate). It cannot happen after.

The limitation period applicable to collect defaulted debt is the basic limitation period.

Conclusion:

If the debt is admitted in writing or a payment is made within the limitations period, the clock gets 'reset' and starts counting from zero again, from that date forward.

If the debt is admitted in writing or a payment is made AFTER the SOL expired, it's just wasted money. This does NOT make the debt legally enforceable again. The debt remains statute barred, though not noncollectable. It can still be pursued, but not in court.

https://www.sands-trustee.com/blog/over ... ions-debt/

Can the two-year Statute of Limitations Period on Debt Restart?

People need to be aware that the limitation period is extended if the debt is acknowledged.

There are two types of acknowledgements:
If a payment is made on the debt (even if it’s only $1!); and
If there is a written confirmation of liability
Includes e-communications.

Either of these acknowledgements will reset the limitation periods. It should also be noted that if a person makes a payment or a written acknowledgement of the debt outside the limitation period, this does NOT restart the limitation period…so timing is crucial.
Deal Fanatic
Apr 16, 2007
8134 posts
3485 upvotes
Financial District B…
peterpan783 wrote: Mikey...

Again I have to clarify few things...

There is no such thing as an "SOL reporting", or an "SOL legal action". There is only ONE SOL (statute of limitations) and it applies to legal action. There is no SOL for anything else.

statute of limitations = a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of certain kinds of legal action.

There may be different limitation periods for other legal actions in other Acts and legislation, but none of those are considered "SOLs". There is only one SOL.

The time prescribed to report credit information is not a limitation period to bring any legal actions. It doesn't fit the definition of an SOL.
You are so wrong and have been so mislead.
The SOL, Statute of Limitations for consumer credit reporting is 7 years as per the Consumer Reporting Act Ontario
The SOL, Statutue of Limitations for litigation of damages/claims is 2 years(basic) as per The Limitations Act Ontario.

There are many different Limitation Periods known as SOL's. Some are as short as 30 days(claims against a city/municipality) and as long as almost forever such as Judgments that can be renewed and renewed. Then there's Ultimate Limitation periods that are as long as 15 years.

While the above mainly refers to the Statute of Limitations for lititation of claims, the Legal actions of the term Statute of Limitaions also refers to the reporting of negative/derogatory and collection of bad/defaulted debts by the two credit agencies of Canada.
Technically, the tradeline reporting of the 7 years via the Credit Bureaus of Canada is actually a claim. A claim that is 'statued' by the Law of 7 years.
Even though a creditor on can truly only legally ligitate a claim for two years from Date of Last Activity (Eq) the 7 year reporting is nonetheless.
To sum this up, the 7 year reporting Limitation is a Law therefore it is a Statute.

Lastly....if we really want to get technical about it in your regards to stating there's only one SOL .... fact of the matter is there is none.
Statute of Limitations or SOL is nothing more than a phrase/acronymn to refer to the actual Law which are Limitation Acts.

Go search the Limitaions Acts of all provinces. The word 'statute' does not exist in any of them
Here's the BC one for you: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws ... 0_12013_01



Definitions: Statute - A written Law passed by a Legistative body
Statute of Limitations - means a time limit confined by Law



The SOL (Statute of Limitions) refers to an action that is limited by time.
This action can be defined as a litigation and can also be defined as the action of reporting of default tradeline like a Bankruptcy.

Do me a favour, go to your Bankruptcy and Insolvency court in your area and sit in on any of the hearings. The BK judge and BK lawyers or the LIT will no doubtedly mention tradeline(when the neg trades will purge off their credit files) SOL's as these dates are usually important to the bankrupt person.
All legal personel including the judge will use the actual terminology 'Statute of Limitations' in their verbiage.


peterpan783 wrote: A limitations clock can NEVER be restarted once it stops. Once the clock stops, it's over! It stopped forever.
You have been misled here again.
You may want to look up 'tolling agreements'
Limitations clocks can indeed be stopped and restarted
----------------------------Licensed Credit Bureau member, S1, FI Automotive, CCP forums most banned = x 13 and counting, guess who that is?... stomped to the curb once again
Newbie
Sep 9, 2019
71 posts
44 upvotes
TatiLovesFinance wrote: I applied for a CIBC dividend VISA and was instantly approved for $12,500.00. They said I can go pick up the card at a branch with 2 pieces of IDs.

Now, my credit score is fairly low (670s before the credit application), and I want to apply for an unsecured Line of Credit as well. My question is this... if I apply for that Line of Credit, will CIBC do another hard pull or will they just do a soft check?

If it is another hard pull, will doing them close together lessen the impact on my score?

Thank you in advance for your help! :)
Anyone...
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 19, 2013
2779 posts
1134 upvotes
Winnipeg
TatiLovesFinance wrote: I applied for a CIBC dividend VISA and was instantly approved for $12,500.00. They said I can go pick up the card at a branch with 2 pieces of IDs.

Now, my credit score is fairly low (670s before the credit application), and I want to apply for an unsecured Line of Credit as well. My question is this... if I apply for that Line of Credit, will CIBC do another hard pull or will they just do a soft check?

If it is another hard pull, will doing them close together lessen the impact on my score?

Thank you in advance for your help! :)
It'll be a hard pull.

Regarding unsecured LOC, I dont know if they stack close pulls as 1 or not. I think they do, but unsure.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams
Newbie
Sep 9, 2019
71 posts
44 upvotes
Mr Bean wrote: It'll be a hard pull.

Regarding unsecured LOC, I dont know if they stack close pulls as 1 or not. I think they do, but unsure.
Thank you for the reply. I’m trying to avoi Have to many hard pulls as I’m trying to keep credit clean fir possible mortgage.

I called the bank, they didn’t know. They told me to check with equifax. Oh well!! I guess I’ll call equifax.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 19, 2013
2779 posts
1134 upvotes
Winnipeg
TatiLovesFinance wrote: Thank you for the reply. I’m trying to avoi Have to many hard pulls as I’m trying to keep credit clean fir possible mortgage.

I called the bank, they didn’t know. They told me to check with equifax. Oh well!! I guess I’ll call equifax.
If your mortgage application is 6m+ away, then dont worry about the effect of hard pull. The score will come back again.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams
Newbie
Sep 9, 2019
71 posts
44 upvotes
Mr Bean wrote: If your mortgage application is 6m+ away, then dont worry about the effect of hard pull. The score will come back again.
I did it earlier today and got instant approval. I’ll just check my credit tomorrow to see how much it was affected. After my credit card approval earlier this week, I lost 5 point. Went from 676 to 671. I’m thinking I’ll lose another 5-10points.

Anyway, thanks again for answering.
Deal Fanatic
Apr 16, 2007
8134 posts
3485 upvotes
Financial District B…
TatiLovesFinance wrote: Anyone...
When you apply for a credit product the system (manually or automatically) is supposed to indicate what kind of credit product you are applying for.
It's kinda like how you apply for auto insurance. You submit an application and your insurer is supposed to indicate if your app is for a 2 door, 4 door, minivan, suv etc. so as to properly underwrite the insurance premiums.

A revolving credit product is not the same credit category as a LOC so you would be subject to two different hard inquiries.
If you apply for a mortgage at ABC bank then do same at DEF bank the system will know you are not wanting to buy two homes and are rate shopping so the system treats it as one inquiry (subject the inquiries are performed with a 45 day window).
Same policy works for LOC's and auto loans but does not apply for revolving.
*Note, if the FI is not using the latest credit bureau scoring model (namely latest Beacon model or latest TU model) the inquiry time frame may be greatly reduced.
----------------------------Licensed Credit Bureau member, S1, FI Automotive, CCP forums most banned = x 13 and counting, guess who that is?... stomped to the curb once again
Sr. Member
Sep 28, 2011
818 posts
1481 upvotes
Winnipeg
bubaglobalj wrote: I currently have a credit score of 820, what can I do to get it higher than that?
jeff1970 wrote: At the score, why does it matter? Absolutely no one knows how to get your credit score super high. It's all proprietor information that even Equifax and Transunion would have a hard time explaining.

So you have your mortgage paid off, you car loan paid off, and you keep paying off your credit cards, you'd expect a perfect score, right? Yet that doesn't happen.

So my research but probably not super accurate.

Keep number of credit cards down to a minimal -- like 3.
Keep the oldest credit card always if ditching some cards.
Minimize credit checks (though eliminate them? I don't know).
Have more than one type of credit (so revolving credit (HELOC, credit cards) and instalments (car loan, deferred loan) and possible others (mortgage?, "other"?).
Keep balances low. Though it might be OK to have a small balance if you don't have a lot of cards to show that you actually use your credit - payment history is important, and I am not sure if zero balance is a positive or not, except when getting a mortgage or car loan -- and these use different scoring models.


Along those lines, my credit score is currently at 840, is there any benefit to working on getting it higher? Or have I pretty well reached the point of diminishing returns in terms of any benefits from having a higher score?
Last edited by bigblue1ca on Nov 22nd, 2019 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 6, 2018
1876 posts
2285 upvotes
Halifax, Nova Scotia
bigblue1ca wrote: Although those lines, my credit score is currently at 840, is there any benefit to working on getting it higher? Or have I pretty well reached the point of diminishing returns in terms of any benefits from having a higher score?
You've got it. In Canada it really doesn't matter at/above your "score" and it all comes down to each bank's assessment of your financial situation and ability to repay. They can still refuse for whatever reason.
Newbie
Apr 1, 2017
5 posts
6 upvotes
mikeymike1 wrote: You are so wrong and have been so mislead.
The SOL, Statute of Limitations for consumer credit reporting is 7 years as per the Consumer Reporting Act Ontario
The SOL, Statutue of Limitations for litigation of damages/claims is 2 years(basic) as per The Limitations Act Ontario.

There are many different Limitation Periods known as SOL's. Some are as short as 30 days(claims against a city/municipality) and as long as almost forever such as Judgments that can be renewed and renewed. Then there's Ultimate Limitation periods that are as long as 15 years.

While the above mainly refers to the Statute of Limitations for lititation of claims, the Legal actions of the term Statute of Limitaions also refers to the reporting of negative/derogatory and collection of bad/defaulted debts by the two credit agencies of Canada.
Technically, the tradeline reporting of the 7 years via the Credit Bureaus of Canada is actually a claim. A claim that is 'statued' by the Law of 7 years.
Even though a creditor on can truly only legally ligitate a claim for two years from Date of Last Activity (Eq) the 7 year reporting is nonetheless.
To sum this up, the 7 year reporting Limitation is a Law therefore it is a Statute.

Lastly....if we really want to get technical about it in your regards to stating there's only one SOL .... fact of the matter is there is none.
Statute of Limitations or SOL is nothing more than a phrase/acronymn to refer to the actual Law which are Limitation Acts.

Go search the Limitaions Acts of all provinces. The word 'statute' does not exist in any of them
Here's the BC one for you: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws ... 0_12013_01



Definitions: Statute - A written Law passed by a Legistative body
Statute of Limitations - means a time limit confined by Law



The SOL (Statute of Limitions) refers to an action that is limited by time.
This action can be defined as a litigation and can also be defined as the action of reporting of default tradeline like a Bankruptcy.

Do me a favour, go to your Bankruptcy and Insolvency court in your area and sit in on any of the hearings. The BK judge and BK lawyers or the LIT will no doubtedly mention tradeline(when the neg trades will purge off their credit files) SOL's as these dates are usually important to the bankrupt person.
All legal personel including the judge will use the actual terminology 'Statute of Limitations' in their verbiage.




You have been misled here again.
You may want to look up 'tolling agreements'
Limitations clocks can indeed be stopped and restarted
This is getting a bit boring.. so this will be the last posting.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a "limitation period" and a "statute of limitations".

A limitation period is a set range of time to take LEGAL ACTION IN COURT, the time frame to bring an action in court.

A Statute of Limitations, as the definition I provided clearly explains, is a STATUTE (a single LAW) that defines limitation periods for various legal actions. It is usually the most comprehensive but it does not contain ALL limitation periods for ALL legal actions, which may be in other Acts. Those other Acts will certainly contain other limitation periods but they are NOT SOLs themselves. Simply because any given act contains limitation periods, that doesn't make the act an SOL.

ALL the time frames mentioned in the SOL are time frames to take legal actions.

Just because a given act or statute sets a specified amount of time to do or not do something, that does not make the time frame a "limitation period". If the time frame is not for taking legal action, then it's not a "limitation period". A limitation period implies legal action of some sort.

This is the definition in the BC Limitations Act (I don't know about Ontario. I don't live there).

"limitation period", in relation to a claim, means the period after which a court proceeding must not be brought with respect to the claim;

This clearly explains a limitation period is in relation to a legal claim. The time allowed to report certain information is not a limitation period. That is simply a "reporting period". No legal action is involved in reporting information to someone for a certain amount of time.

The LAW (the Statute) that defines the default limitation period for most actions is what is called the SOL (Statute of Limitations) and there is only ONE per jurisdiction. It is called SOL because it is a STATUTE that generally defines the default LIMITATION PERIODS to bring claims in Court. That's why it's named like that.

The Consumer Reporting Act Ontario is not a limitations statute. It is a statute to regulate consumer reporting. There is nothing in that statute (act) that deals or mentions any limitation periods because that act doesn't deal with legal actions in court.

If the Consumer Reporting Act ON had a clause specifically saying, "if the adverse information has been reported beyond the 7 years stipulated in this Act, the consumer has 2 years to bring a claim in court", then THAT would be a limitation period. I'm not aware that the Act contains anything like that (just read it). It could, like many Acts do, but it doesn't. Even if it contained a clause like that with a limitation period, that would still not make the Act an SOL. It remains just a statute with a limitation period in it.

The time that certain information should stay in a report has nothing to do with taking legal action in court. The 7 years that are mentioned in the Consumer Reporting Act is not a limitation period. Not all time frames within legislation are "limitation periods". For it to be a "limitation period", it must be a period to take LEGAL ACTION in Court. The seven years to report information is no legal action. That is simply a reporting period.

Many other acts may contain other limitation periods to take other LEGAL ACTIONS, where the SOL (the main act for limitation periods) does not apply.

"There are many different Limitation Periods known as SOL's"

NO! That is your confusion. These are not the same thing. As explained above, a period is a period (of limitations or any other thing), and a Statute is a LAW.

I don't really know why it is so hard for you to understand that a period of time (measured in months, years, etc) and a STATUTE (a written law passed by a legislative body) are totally different concepts. A period of time is 7 years. A Statute is The Whatever Act. How can you keep thinking these are the same?

The SOL is a STATUTE (a Law, an Act) that establishes multiple limitation periods (time frames to take legal actions).

A thing that contains another obviously cannot be the same thing. I will try to use an analogy and maybe you understand it that way:

If a bag contains groceries, can you say that a bag and groceries are the same thing?

What you are trying to tell me is that groceries (what is contained within) and the bag (the container) are the same.
Obviously not.

I won't dispute maybe many people (including lawyers and judges who should know better) refer to multiple limitation periods as SOLs, but it would be a very incorrect use of the term. An SOL is a STATUTE, an ACT, not a time frame.

I've just explained why it is incorrect, both logically and semantically.

"While the above mainly refers to the Statute of Limitations for lititation of claims, the Legal actions of the term Statute of Limitaions also refers to the reporting of negative/derogatory and collection of bad/defaulted debts by the two credit agencies of Canada.
Technically, the tradeline reporting of the 7 years via the Credit Bureaus of Canada is actually a claim. A claim that is 'statued' by the Law of 7 years.
Even though a creditor on can truly only legally ligitate a claim for two years from Date of Last Activity (Eq) the 7 year reporting is nonetheless.
To sum this up, the 7 year reporting Limitation is a Law therefore it is a Statute."


No idea what any of this means. So poorly written it makes no sense. Not even correcting the typos and spelling mistakes.

"Technically, the tradeline reporting of the 7 years via the Credit Bureaus of Canada is actually a claim."

If by this you mean the 7 year reporting period, NO, that's just a period of time, not a claim. Where's the legal action?
There will be a claim when the creditor files a lawsuit in Court.

"To sum this up, the 7 year reporting Limitation is a Law therefore it is a Statute."

No dispute that the Credit Reporting Act is a Statute, a Law. But what it is NOT is an SOL.

peterpan783 wrote: ↑
A limitations clock can NEVER be restarted once it stops. Once the clock stops, it's over! It stopped forever.

You have been misled here again.

No, I haven't.

You may want to look up 'tolling agreements'
Limitations clocks can indeed be stopped and restarted


Again, it is you who is confused. Tolling means SUSPENDING (pausing) the clock from running, not stopping it. To pause and to stop are not the same. When a limitation period gets tolled or suspended, it is simply temporarily paused to be resumed later. The time in between is not counted, but the total valid limitation period will remain the same.

Tolling agreements don't stop the limitation periods. They suspend the limitation period by consent of the parties. That means both parties agree they will pause the clock because they need more time and the other party will not try to use a limitations defence if the tolling goes beyond the limitation period. Whenever the tolling gets resumed, the clock keeps running. It never "stopped". It was paused.

A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CLOCK CANNOT BE RESTARTED ONCE IT HAS RUN TO ITS END.

It may be reset (puts the counter back to zero and keeps running), paused and resumed (tolling, extending) while it is still running, but it can never be restarted once it came to an end.

Under certain circumstances, a Court may toll or suspend the limitation period if the party can prove a valid reason why the limitation period should have been suspended (the person was temporarily disabled). Whenever a Court allows this, it is not that the clock stopped and the Court started it again. It is that the Court determines the clock was "paused" during the tolling period and considers the clock never stopped in the first place and keeps running.

Part 5 — Suspension of Limitation Periods
Limitation periods suspended if claimant becomes person under disability

25 (1) Subject to section 26, if a person with a claim becomes a person under a disability, the basic limitation period and ultimate limitation period applicable to the claim do not run while the person continues to be a person under a disability.
Deal Addict
May 16, 2017
2809 posts
3663 upvotes
aweawea wrote: You've got it. In Canada it really doesn't matter at/above your "score" and it all comes down to each bank's assessment of your financial situation and ability to repay. They can still refuse for whatever reason.
I'd agree. Credit Score is simply one "flag" on a credit report that lenders use to assess the credit risk of a borrower. People with a long credit history with no negative entries typically have a high probability of approval - and will be by the very nature of that solid history have either very good or excellent scores. A weaker score may matter for automated credit app's but generally it is more of a tip to check out the specifics of WHY the score is lower - and, in manual app reviews and for large loans/mortgages they are more interested in income, total debt and any past negative credit events rather than the whether the score is 780 or 840+.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 23, 2017
1510 posts
1076 upvotes
Toronto, ON
Q: How does cancelling my pre-paid KOHO Visa Card affect my credit score? I've only had the card for about 2 years.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 6, 2018
7988 posts
11548 upvotes
905P4N6 wrote: Q: How does cancelling my pre-paid KOHO Visa Card affect my credit score? I've only had the card for about 2 years.
It is absolutely no effect on your credit report.
Member
Sep 17, 2019
454 posts
488 upvotes
45°N 63.5°W
zookeeperme wrote: Our mortgage renewal is coming up in July. Both my wife and I have excellent credit (high 800s). How concerned should we be about opening new accounts in the lead-up to our renewal? E.g. opening a new credit card, financing a new car, anything that comes with a hard inquiry, etc.
Thanks!
Credit cards are OK, but I wouldn't finance a new car. If you apply at a competitor, a car loan will factor into your debt service ratios, possibly limiting your flexibility to refinance at renewal time.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)