| HN Mirror

> A statute of limitations is not aimed at helping people wriggling out of paying off their debts. Depending on the debt and jurisdiction there is bankruptcy for that.

Nor is it intended to maximize your profit margin.

If you know there is a debt, and further, that it accrues interest, you should (in good faith) attempt to collect it as soon as you possibly can.

This is literally the definition of acting in good faith.

random goog:

    "Acting in good faith, or bona fide, as it is sometimes also referred to by the courts, 
    refers to the concept of being sincere in one's business dealings and 
    without a desire to defraud, deceive, take undo advantage, or in any way 
    act maliciously towards others."

If you are letting interest collect for profit and taking advantage of someone forgetting to pay (even if they are acting in bad faith and deliberately not paying), you are not being sincere and are being deceptive/taking advantage/ acting maliciously.

further there is something (IANAL) in the law about 'reasonable attempts at attempting to remedy breach of contract', which would apply in not following up with someone who is not making payments.

I'm not arguing for random debt forgiveness as others in this thread (and you're right - there is bankruptcy for that, etc), but pointing out that there is, in fact, literally and by the law 'something wrong with' letting debts accumulate on purpose for the purpose of profit maximization.

I again am not a lawyer, but wouldn't be surprised if someone could actually attempt to defend against some tort on these lines - especially if profit maximizing intent could be proved - while the debt wouldn't be stricken, the interest compounded could conceivably be since it accrued within the context of a bad-faith use of the situation.