Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

Unfortunately, probably. Has the mother died? If he was making a payment on his own behave but his mother's estate had no yet closed, he could try to argue that a voluntary payment by someone not obligated to pay the loan is not a reinstatement by the debtor, as they have not made a payment themselves so they did not reinstate their debt. Otherwise, the collect agency could make a payment on the loan and claim it reinstated the loan. He could argue that he had no authority to act on behave of his mother so the payments can not be ascribed to her/her estate. This, however, is not a great argument.

If the assets of the estate have been officially distributed, the loan is not inherited. The estate is obligated to pay it, but if the estate assets were worth less than $100,000, not all of the loan would be repaid but the obligation would practically disappear. If the estate had been probated and that creditor properly notified and they did not file a claim, they would be barred. Another very weak argument would be that if he did not know it would cause the loan to be reinstated and the creditor's representative hid that and stated flat out that he legally had to pay the loan, perhaps he could argue some type of deception to bar the loan and get back the payments made.

But whether the loan is re-instated or not, he has no obligation to pay anything above the amount of the loan or the total assets of the estate. If he tells them he will give them half of the assets, they might accept it.

The lender or its collection agency will not listen to his defenses so it would be the cheapest solution to hire an attorney to research the law to be sure the above is correct [I think it is but I am not an expert in that area] and write and call the lender. That might take 2-3 hours, and only cost a few hundred dollars if he finds a lawyer with very low rates.

Good luck.

We answered this question. If you didn't like our answers, you should not have reposted this question.