Statute of Limitations on Debt Collection in Arizona

At a glance

Requirements one by one

Governing law

Arizona's contract-debt deadlines sit in Title 12, Chapter 5 of the Arizona Revised Statutes ("Limitations of Actions"): § 12-548 sets the six-year period for in-state written contracts and credit cards, § 12-543 sets the three-year period for oral debt and open accounts, § 12-544(3) sets a separate four-year period for a written instrument executed outside Arizona, § 12-508 governs revival by acknowledgment, and § 12-506 is Arizona's borrowing statute. Sections 12-544(4) and 47-2725 separately govern contracts for the sale of goods.

How long you have on a written debt

Six years, running from the date of breach, but only for "a contract in writing that is executed in this state" (§ 12-548(A)(1)). A written contract signed somewhere else doesn't qualify for this six-year period at all; instead it falls under § 12-544(3)'s four-year period for "an instrument in writing executed without the state." Separately, § 12-548(A)(2) gives credit card debt the full six years regardless of where or whether a cardholder agreement was signed.

A contract for the sale of goods is another important exception. Sections 12-544(4) and 47-2725(A) assign it a four-year period, even if the sale contract is written and executed in Arizona.

How long you have on an oral or unwritten debt

Three years. Section 12-543(1) covers "debt where the indebtedness is not evidenced by a contract in writing," and § 12-543(2) gives stated or open accounts the same three years (with an exception for ongoing merchant-to- merchant trade accounts, which run from the date dealings between the parties stop).

When the clock starts

Ordinarily, the date of breach or default. For a traditional fixed installment note, each matured but unpaid installment accrues on its due date, while future installments accrue when the creditor exercises an optional acceleration clause (Navy Federal Credit Union v. Jones, 187 Ariz. 493 (App. 1996)). Credit cards follow a different bright-line rule: the claim for the entire balance accrues at the first uncured missed minimum payment, even if the creditor never exercises an optional acceleration clause (Mertola, LLC v. Santos, 244 Ariz. 488 (2018)). For a sale of goods, § 47-2725(B) starts the period when breach occurs.

Can a payment or promise restart the clock?

Not by a bare payment alone, Arizona is stricter here than many states. Section 12-508 requires "the acknowledgment ... in writing and signed by the party to be charged" before any acknowledgment can be used to take an action out of the limitations bar. The Arizona Court of Appeals confirmed in Cheatham v. Sahuaro Collection Service, Inc. that a series of partial payments made over several years, without more, did not lift the bar of § 12-548: "part payment alone cannot evidence an acknowledgment of a debt barred by the statute of limitations." What Arizona does allow, unlike some stricter states, is using a signed writing to revive a claim that has already fully expired, not just to extend one still running, § 12-508's own text applies to an action already "barred by limitation."

Is there a special rule for consumer debt?

Yes, but it runs the opposite direction from a typical carve-out. Rather than shortening the period for consumer debt, § 12-548(A)(2) lengthens it: credit card debt gets the full six-year written-contract period even without a signed writing, instead of risking classification as an unwritten open account under the shorter three-year rule in § 12-543.

What if the debt originated in another state?

Arizona's borrowing statute, § 12-506(A), is framed around the debtor's own move to Arizona, not around where the underlying contract was made: "No action shall be maintained against a person removing to this state from another state or foreign country to recover upon an action which was barred by the law of limitations of the state or country from which he migrated." In other words, if a debt was already time-barred in the state someone moved from, a creditor can't revive it just by suing them after they relocate to Arizona.

What actually happens once the deadline passes?

The debtor must assert the limitations defense. In Cheatham, the court reversed a collection judgment because the debtors raised the § 12-548 bar and the creditor's part-payment theory failed. The current Collection Agency Act provisions, including the definition in § 32-1001 and licensee duties in § 32-1051, contain no express state-law prohibition on filing a time-barred collection suit.

What trips people up

Making a "goodwill" payment on an old debt is safer in Arizona than in many other states, it does not by itself restart the clock, so someone who pays a little on a still-running debt without signing anything hasn't extended their exposure. The flip side is a genuine trap: a signed written acknowledgment (an email admitting the debt, a signed payment plan) can revive a claim that has ALREADY expired, something several other states flatly forbid. And a written contract signed on a trip out of state, or with an out-of-state lender who had the borrower sign remotely outside Arizona, can lose two years of the deadline a reader might expect, falling to § 12-544(3)'s four years instead of § 12-548's six.

Common questions

Does the 6-year or 3-year period apply to my credit card debt? Six years, almost always. Section 12-548(A)(2) puts credit card debt in the six-year bucket by statute, regardless of whether there's a signed cardholder agreement.

I made a small payment on an old debt, did that restart the clock? No, not by itself. Arizona requires a signed written acknowledgment under § 12-508 to affect the clock at all; a bare payment, standing alone, doesn't restart or revive anything (Cheatham v. Sahuaro).

Can a debt collector still sue me after the statute of limitations runs? Arizona's surveyed statutes contain no express ban on filing the suit. The debtor must raise the expired limitations period as a defense in court.

Does the debt just disappear once the time limit passes? No. The limitations ruling concerns whether the creditor can obtain a court remedy on the stale claim; it does not itself cancel the historical account balance.

Statutes and sources

• A.R.S. § 12-548, "An action for debt shall be commenced and prosecuted within six years after the cause of action accrues ... if the indebtedness is evidenced by or founded on either of the following: 1. A contract in writing that is executed in this state. 2. A credit card...", https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00548.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. § 12-543, "There shall be commenced and prosecuted within three years after the cause of action accrues ... 1. For debt where the indebtedness is not evidenced by a contract in writing...", https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00543.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. § 12-544, "There shall be commenced and prosecuted within four years after the cause of action accrues ... 3. Upon a judgment or decree of a court rendered without the state, or upon an instrument in writing executed without the state." Subsection 4 sends sale-contract claims to § 47-2725., https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00544.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. § 12-508, "When an action is barred by limitation no acknowledgment of the justness of the claim ... shall be admitted in evidence to take the action out of the operation of the law, unless the acknowledgment is in writing and signed by the party to be charged thereby.", https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00508.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. § 12-506, "No action shall be maintained against a person removing to this state from another state or foreign country to recover upon an action which was barred by the law of limitations of the state or country from which he migrated.", https://www.azleg.gov/ars/12/00506.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. § 47-2725, four years for a sale-of-goods contract, accruing at breach., https://www.azleg.gov/ars/47/02725.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• A.R.S. §§ 32-1001 and 32-1051, collection-agency coverage and current licensee duties., https://www.azleg.gov/ars/32/01001.htm and https://www.azleg.gov/ars/32/01051.htm (accessed 2026-08-16)
• Mertola, LLC v. Santos, 244 Ariz. 488 (2018), a credit-card claim accrues at the first uncured missed minimum payment., https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Supreme/2018/CV-17-0109-PR%20Opinion.pdf (accessed 2026-08-16)
• Navy Federal Credit Union v. Jones, 187 Ariz. 493 (App. 1996), fixed installment and acceleration accrual., https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1452523/ (accessed 2026-08-16)
• Cheatham v. Sahuaro Collection Service, Inc., 118 Ariz. 452 (App. 1978), part payment alone does not supply the required acknowledgment., https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1231079/ (accessed 2026-08-16)