If you are a judge I would love an explanation as to why judges don't make a distinction between a strategic credit card default and an involuntary credit card default. Are the two the same? According to judges, a credit card default is a credit card default.
Do you agree?
Is someone who runs up a huge credit card tab over a relatively short period of time and then defaults, the same as someone who has has made all of their payments on time for the past 10 years and only had to stop making payments because of a family emergency or a major event in their lives beyond their control?
I am NOT suggesting debt forgiveness either.
I am talking about the possibility of simply freezing a debt where it stands when the last transaction was made by someone who had an involuntary credit card default.
I am talking about the possibility of simply freezing a debt where it stands when the last transaction was made by someone who had an involuntary credit card default.
If the credit card default was strategic, then treat them the way all credit card defaulters are presently treated.
Do you agree or disagree? ALL intelligent comments are WELCOMED in the comments section.
Hi, Your comments matter greatly. If you post anonymously it helps if you briefly explain how your prior experiences relate to the comment you are leaving. Please no link ads unless you contact me first.
Involuntary defaulters should not be punished worse than they already are. Voluntary defaulters should have to prove a damn good excuse and accept penalties/restrictions.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that freezing the debt where it is for involuntary credit card defaulters so as they make payments they are actually paying down the debt is a reasonable compromise?
DeleteAn involuntary default can involve being a victim of a hurricane that destroys the defaulter's home. It could be the outsourcing of a job that leaves the person temporarily without income. It could be a family medical emergency. It could be stopping work to CareGive for a family member, which by the way actually saves society a significant amount of money versus having the state pay to CareGive for that person.
Should Involuntary defaulters be treated the same as a strategic credit card defaulter? Some business people actually strategically default on their debts then hire a lawyer to get out of the jam they have created. Are good people who have viable reasons for defaulting on a debt to be treated the same worse than those who manipulate the system to financially benefit?
According to judges, yes.