Is it true that debt collection SMS interrupts the limitation of action?

After the dunning message is sent, if the other party ignores it, it can be considered that the limitation of action is interrupted. Under any of the following circumstances, it shall be deemed as a "request made by one party" as stipulated in Article 140 of the General Principles of the Civil Law, which has the effect of interrupting the limitation of action: 1. One party directly sends a document claiming rights to the other party, and the other party signs or seals the document, or can prove that the document has been delivered to the other party in other ways without signing or sealing it; 2. One party claims rights by sending letters or data messages, and the letters or data messages reach or should reach the other party; 3. One party is a financial institution, and the principal and interest in arrears are deducted from the account of the other party in accordance with the law or the agreement of the parties; According to Article 140 of the General Principles of Civil Law, the reasons for interrupting the limitation of action include filing a lawsuit (prosecution), one party making a request (request) or agreeing to perform an obligation (commitment). These reasons are different from the reasons for suspending the limitation of action, and they are all based on the subjective will of the parties. The purpose of limitation of action is to urge the obligee to exercise the right of claim and eliminate the unstable state of the relationship between rights and obligations. Therefore, the condition of limitation of action is that the obligee does not exercise his rights. If the parties make the relationship between rights and obligations clear again by implementing these acts, the limitation of action has no meaning to continue to calculate, and of course it should be interrupted.