Live data from Hacker News

Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

pewtrusts.org

51–60 of 182 posts

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If student loans were suddenly unavailable then universities would have to rein in out of control costs and Maybe get rid of sports and bs admin staff. The only reason they change that much is due to the ability of loans.

Correlation isn’t causation, but the dramatic rise in college costs began when student loans became easy to get.

They became easy to get because lenders knew their loans were non-dischargeable. That completely changes the risk equation and to act like it doesn't is an exercise in bad-faith.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#52
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothetically, what would the world look like if we made all debts dischargeable by bankruptcy, and bankrupcy a process so simple you could just text a number and be done in 15 minutes? A bankruptcy would simply automatically put all your assets up for a same-day auction. Any unlisted items would be auctioned as a lump, for anyone willing to research what you actually owned to play 'Storage Wars' with. Anyone could…

We'd have less debt, which is bad for the economy, but good for individuals.

Then, "the economy" is bad for individuals, and we need to make some changes.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#53
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in America, you can demand that all correspondence goes through certified mail, with big fines if they don't.

Not precisely "certified mail," but just "mail." They can choose to use certified mail if they want, but it's not required. You should always use certified mail to communicate with a debt collector, no matter if the debt is legitimate or not.

I have done that twice for family members, along with asking for proof of the debt, and that they are authorized to collect it. Both times, never, ever heard from the collector again.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we all agree you should be able to collect on a debt. (if you can't it's not a debt) And I imagine most of us agree collection should be pursuant to due process. I don't really see any other options.

> I think we all agree you should be able to collect on a debt. (if you can't it's not a debt) Nah, not really. Depends on the debt, honestly.

In what since is a debt that I am unable to try pursue or collect on a debt?

Maybe a concrete example would help.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#55
post #14

There have been journalists & researchers who covered these debt collectors at court. When defendants showed up, organised, they usually won. The debt collectors' lawyers didn't arrive prepared to win, because most people didn't show up. If you can win 85% of cases just by showing up, why bother. A court system that allows these dynamics to dominate isn't serving well.

Or is this because those who don't show up know they have no defense? While I agree there is a problem you're not proving it here.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#56
post #44
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a narrow understanding. Rich individuals are setup to benefit from the programs for the poor. Such that what you say is both true and irrelevant. Poor individuals are not benefited.

Rich individuals are setup to benefit from the programs for the poor. Can you give an example how the rich benefit from programs like social security, Medicaid, food stamps?

Food stamps allow wealthy people to hire help for less than it costs to feed their children.

Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying letting their children starve is a valid solution.

But anti-poverty programs unquestionably allow illegal immigrants to work for wages less than it would take to support their families lifestyle, which encourages them to come to the US.

Upper middle class and wealthy people benefit from that.

The other issue with food stamps is that it's pretty common for poor people with drug problems to turn them into cash by buying steaks / meat and selling to restaurants.

So the hallmarks of the wealthy Cali lifestyle end up indirectly subsidized by food stamps.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#57
post #3

Imagine working for a company that buys up poor people’s debt in order to sue them.

Is there good money in it? There's actually a good startup opportunity here. Many of these debt collectors are unethical. You could buy these bad debts for pennies on the dollar, settle them for a very modest margin, and help the poor people fix their credit without filing for bankruptcy.

Context: I worked for 16 years for a company that did, among other things, debt collection. It was a small but profitable part of their business. We’re talking relatively low dollar bills - cell phone, cable, power, etc - rather than student loans, medical, or credit card.

There are different levels of debt collection. The first level is generally done by the guarantor. Someone falls behind on a bill, service is shut off, and the company tries to get the consumer to pay the bill. The next level is when a company sends the bill to an outside collection agency to attempt to collect on it. The collection agency will get some commission on that if they manage to collect. The debt is maybe 6-12 months old at this time. If the first agency fails, sometimes it will get sent to a second or third agency to see if they have more luck. At some point in time the company will decide that the debt is unlikely to be collected and they will write it off. It’s at this point that debt may get sold. The debt is likely years old at this point. The company that buys it will buy for pennies on the dollar (it’s like any market, sometimes it’s more, sometimes it’s less). They are then the owner of the debt and any money they collect they get to keep. They’re able to settle for much lower amounts. If you have a $1000 debt that was bought for $50, you can settle for $250 and still make a profit. The consumer is able to clear the debt from their credit report for a fraction of what they owed (though it still shows they paid it to a collection agency and that still hurts their credit, but not as much as an unpaid debt).

Long answer to your question, but yes there can be good money in it, and there is probably an opportunity here to do some good.

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not surprising when you think about it, but it's still an important problem to think about. It has the potential to cause some problems if state courts become seen as a vehicle for debt collectors more than an authority for righting wrongs.

I think we all agree you should be able to collect on a debt. (if you can't it's not a debt) And I imagine most of us agree collection should be pursuant to due process. I don't really see any other options.

I actually don't agree. Many debts in the US are effectively non-collectible, because all the property from which they could be collected is exempted. (This is especially true in Texas, where wages can't be garnished for most debts.)

Re: Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts

#60
post #34
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "receive the least"? Pretty much all the social programs we have target the poor, not the rich. The poor are the ones that receive the most.

Programs that benefit richer people aren't framed as "social programs" and generally aren't saddled by Kafkaesque bureaucracy and scrutiny. Compare the sheer toil of using food stamps vs using the mortgage tax deduction.

Forget mortgage interest deductions. Take a look at cash back rewards cards. Cash-using households ultimately end up transferring money to card-using households this way, because merchants don't usually set higher prices for card users to compensate for fees. See https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/public-policy-discuss...

I get an average of 1-2% off of almost everything I buy simply because I can use a cash back rewards card to do it. It's sickening.

Post reply on HN