Florida Statute of Limitations on Debt: 5 Years for Written Contracts, 4 for Oral/Open Accounts

A time-barred debt is a debt too old for a creditor to successfully sue you over — because the legal deadline for filing a lawsuit, the statute of limitations (SOL), has passed. If the SOL has run, that can be a complete defense to the lawsuit. But there is a critical catch: you have to raise it yourself, in your written Answer. A Florida court will not apply the statute of limitations for you. Miss it, and you waive it.

Florida's two SOL periods for debt (Fla. Stat. § 95.11)

• 5 years — written contracts. Under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(2)(b), a lawsuit on a contract, obligation, or liability founded on a written instrument must be filed within 5 years. Most credit card agreements, signed loan documents, and retail installment contracts fall here.
• 4 years — oral contracts and open accounts. Under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(j), a contract, obligation, or liability not founded on a written instrument — including many open-account and "account stated" claims — has a 4-year period.
• Which one applies to a credit card is fact-specific. Debt buyers often plead credit card debt as an unwritten "open account" to reach for the shorter period, but if there is a signed cardholder agreement, a court may treat it as written and apply the 5-year period instead. The complaint's own wording, and what evidence the plaintiff actually produces, matters here — a licensed attorney can help you evaluate which period a specific debt falls under.

When does the clock start?

The limitations period generally runs from the date of default — typically the date of the last payment or the first missed payment that was never cured, not the date the account was later sold to a debt buyer. Collectors sometimes reference a charge-off date as a stand-in, but the actual default date controls for SOL purposes and can differ. Pinning down the correct date is fact-specific — consult a licensed Florida attorney if it is unclear from your own records.

SOL is an affirmative defense — you must raise it

This is the single most important thing to understand. The statute of limitations does not automatically kill a stale lawsuit. A debt buyer can still file suit after the SOL has run, and if you ignore the case or default, a Florida court can still enter a judgment against you. The SOL is an affirmative defense that must be pled in your Answer. Raise it, and the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show the debt is not time-barred. Skip your Answer, and you lose the defense along with the case.

What 'time-barred' does — and does not — mean

• It does mean: if you raise the SOL in your Answer and the court agrees the period has run, the lawsuit should be dismissed — regardless of whether the underlying debt was real.
• It does NOT mean the debt disappears. The debt still exists and the collector can still claim you owe it — they just cannot win a court judgment to enforce it.
• It does NOT stop collection calls. Contact about time-barred debt is generally still permitted under the FDCPA, though certain communications — like threatening a lawsuit the collector knows is time-barred — can themselves violate the law.
• It does NOT control your credit report. Negative information generally drops off a credit report 7 years from the first date of delinquency under the Fair Credit Reporting Act — a separate clock from the SOL.

Careful: a payment can restart the clock

Under Florida common law, making a payment or a clear written acknowledgment of a debt can restart the limitations clock, even on very old debt. Unlike some states, Florida has no broad statutory bar on reviving a stale debt this way. This is why consumer advocates warn against making even a small "goodwill" payment on an old account before you understand whether the SOL has already run — doing so can hand a debt buyer a fresh 4- or 5-year window to sue. If you are unsure whether an old debt is still enforceable, get that answered before you pay anything toward it.

The FDCPA and time-barred debt

The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act adds a layer of protection on top of Florida's own SOL. In Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, 581 U.S. ___ (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed a narrow, fact-specific question about filing a proof of claim on time-barred debt in bankruptcy — it did not broadly bless suing on time-barred debt everywhere. Separately, a collector who threatens to sue on a debt it knows is time-barred, or who misrepresents its legal right to sue, may be violating the FDCPA regardless of what Florida's own SOL says. Whether a specific call or letter crosses that line is fact-specific — consult a licensed attorney if you believe a collector has made an unlawful threat.