Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Credit card debt collection

bitsaboutmoney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 568 posts

Re: Credit card debt collection

#411

Post by danans »

elteto wrote: post #349
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s not a problem of capitalism, it’s a problem of reality. I'm really not sure about that. > Of course it requires debt relief, things go _wrong_ all the time, that’s just life and how the world works. Yet funnily enough the people on top of all these vast structures sail away from their sinking ships on parachutes of gold (if they're even sinking: a lot of times they just sit and collect vast sums of unearned we…

I think you mistook my comment as a defense of capitalism. Although I do believe a system based on private property and individual freedom is superior to the alternative, I wasn’t making that statement. I was just pointing out something at a much lower level: we need debt relief because we don’t live in a perfect world, things go south and we need for people to be able to move on. That’s it. We could talk about the i…

> we need debt relief because we don’t live in a perfect world, things go south and we need for people to be able to move on. That’s it.

We need debt relief (AKA bankruptcy) to avoid actual debt-slavery, which is what preceded bankruptcy laws.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#412

Post by rcxdude »

mrguyorama wrote: post #384
rcxdude wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is because debt collection is a terrible deal: debt like this sells for a very steep discount, because debt collectors generally have a low rate of success of collecting. They essentially rely on apathy, ignorance, or compliance from the debtor, and if there's any resistance put up they essentially just write it off as it's no longer worth the effort (especially because debt collectors often don't have any actua…

> if there's any resistance put up they essentially just write it off as it's no longer worth the effort That's rarely the case. Debt collection agencies will absolutely hound you and your relatives, damn the laws, to try and milk value from you, for quite some time. They will then go to conferences and brag about how they have tricked people into claiming debts, the ways they have harassed people, and other atrociou…

I mean resistance in the sense of actually knowing your rights and pursuing them with the legal system

Re: Credit card debt collection

#413

Post by lodovic »

beaviskhan wrote: post #306
Aardwolf wrote: post #218

> you, reader, use credit cards in preference to debit cards as a payment instrument Reader from Europe here. I use debit cards for daily payments, that's just the most standard expected payment method in Europe (with mobile payments now replacing it. Is a mobile payment app more like a debit or like a credit card? I have no idea actually!). But credit cards for online payments on the internet because (despite some d…

There is zero chance that I, a US resident, will ever use debit cards for anything. The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge (which still happens surprisingly often, given that chips were supposed to put an end to that): - With a debit card, I am out $X of my own money, until the bank can be bothered to agree that the charge is fraudulent and refund my money, which can take weeks or months, if at all. G…

If I use a credit card, I pay up to 20% on the outstanding amount. If I use my debit card, I get interest on the money that I don't spend. I also cannot spend more than what is in my account. If there is a charge I disagree with, I can easily reverse it without any cost. And I have never met anyone who had a fraudulent charge (without being dumb). To me, I cannot understand why anyone would use a credit card unless debit isn't accepted. I use that card maybe once a year for paying toll on the highway.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#414

Post by Workaccount2 »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #370
Workaccount2 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making the argument that cars shouldn't exist because some people die because of them. Like I said, debt is overwhelmingly useful to the vast majority of people who use it. We're not gonna ban cars because a handful of highly emotional road tragedies. We're not gonna abolish debt because of a handful of deranged debt collector stories.

If you want to make an argument make one. "Some people like it" isn't a strong one but if that's all you got I guess. "We're not going to" presupposed the outcome. I don't agree and won't contend it, since you're not willing to say anything that can be refuted. I'm not the author of the future I can't say what we're gonna. But then neither are you.

"Some people like it" isn't a strong one because it's a straw man of my argument.

"The overwhelming majority bear tangible benefit from it" is the actual argument.

Debt is a core instrument of modern first world society. Just think about how many people would own a car, much less a home, if you had to pay for it all up front.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#415

Post by Terr_ »

Interloper2 wrote: post #363
alexis2b wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also in the Bible the notion of a 50 years periodic Jubilee[1] when all debts would be canceled and the system effectively resets. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical)

ha! It may be in the Bible, but Jubilee was never celebrated, not even once.

Whether or not it happened exactly as described within the Torah/Bible, we have plenty of records to indicate ancient societies regularly overturned debts.

... Unless you're making a joke that it happened but was not "celebrated" because most people didn't like it.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#416

Post by supernewton »

Aardwolf wrote: post #316
beaviskhan wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is zero chance that I, a US resident, will ever use debit cards for anything. The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge (which still happens surprisingly often, given that chips were supposed to put an end to that): - With a debit card, I am out $X of my own money, until the bank can be bothered to agree that the charge is fraudulent and refund my money, which can take weeks or months, if at all. G…

> The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge Not sure if a fraudulent charge of a debit card is a thing I ever heard of in Europe. These cards have also been using chips for over 20 years. Maybe they work differently here. To me credit cards sound less secure than debit cards: debit cards have chips and pin codes. With credit cards, knowing the number is in theory enough (they have digital verification no…

The U.S. has legislation limiting consumer liability of credit card fraud to $50, and many cards will further waive that to $0. It's just simply not the consumer's problem if someone copies their credit card number and uses it for fraud. They just have to call the bank to report the fraud, and then the bank will cancel the old card, issue a new one, and then it's the bank's problem on how to get the money back.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#417

Post by gnopgnip »

wizerdrobe wrote: post #336
elteto wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like pedantry on the USAA part. They should add some small fraction of a point to your rate and move on. I understand you probably get extra benefits with USAA but this would be an automatic disqualification for me and I’d move kn to a different servicer. However, that is _painful_ in the middle of a closing.

Truth be told - we’re looking at ditching them but with banking, home, and auto we are likely stuck with them for the fact of inertia. Our mortgage was immediately sold to another firm, so there’s no nicety on the part of having a consistent firm there. The process was painful, our processor was impossible to get in touch with, often a 48 hour lag for a reply. Shortly before moving I was side-swiped by a man sufferin…

If you are in CA statewide it is illegal to increase your rates for a not at fault crash.

In most other states insurers will increase your rate even if you are not at fault and you only made a claim with the at fault party or your insurer is successful subrogating

Re: Credit card debt collection

#418

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #235
nologic01 wrote: post #159

It is in this domain, of broken promises and broken people that you can establish what a society is really made of. Graeber's Debt is obligatory reading (alas not easy to read) if you want to dig into the painful history of debt relations between humans. The post provides excellent insights into the odious side of consumer finance. It feels like a follow up with ideas about reform would not be wasted effort: Once thi…

It's worse than that. Some credit card companies - in the UK at least - specifically target people with poor credit scores with rates up to 99.9%(!) And it's normal practice - but utterly perverse logic - to increase the rate of anyone who starts missing payments. Debt collectors can get a court order to put a lien on property, and then get another court order to force sale of that property and repayment of the debt.…

> force sale of that property

At least in the US, this is state dependent. Liens are allowed, but many states will not allow a forced sale of your primary residence.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#419

Post by rthomas6 »

PopePompus wrote: post #407
alexis2b wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also in the Bible the notion of a 50 years periodic Jubilee[1] when all debts would be canceled and the system effectively resets. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical)

Wouldn't that kinda make it difficult for anyone to get a mortgage during year 49?

Oh no!

Re: Credit card debt collection

#420

Post by bequanna »

303uru wrote: post #393
hiatus wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like that might not be possible these days. > On June 25, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a plaintiff must suffer a concrete injury resulting from a defendant’s statutory violation to have Article III standing to pursue damages from that defendant in federal court. The Court also held that plaintiffs in a class action must prove that every class member has standing for each claim asserted…

Meanwhile, a "website designer" who's never deployed a website, was never hired to create one and who suffered zero injury gets a ruling. This SCOTUS is invalid.

Both political parties have endeavored to pack the courts with sympathetic judges. The conservatives got the Supreme Court majority by pure luck.

The Democrats would have done the exact same if given the opportunity and then you’d have the Right crying about how the court is “invalid”.

To change this, we should require some kind of supermajority to confirm judicial appointments at all levels.

Post reply on HN