23 ms·

It's not surprising that people get into debts like the ones described in the article. Credit card companies want you to be terribly indebted to them. I had an

by mabbo 9y ago

It's not surprising that people get into debts like the ones described in the article. Credit card companies want you to be terribly indebted to them. I had an uncle who suffered brain damage from an aneurism that left him unable to handle money- memory issues, disorganization, etc. He was never going to be able to pay back credit cards and my mother (his PoA and lawyer) informed the credit card companies of this. They sent the cards anyways. They wanted him to go into debt, hoping that his family would bail him out. There's more profit in taking advantage of people than there is in being a decent person. Unregulated free markets cannot account for that reality. We in Canada have some regulations, but clearly not strong enough ones to prevent this kind of predatory lending.

geodel 9y ago
Marketers and Politicians have told us that we are 'worth it'. So everything including laws just follow.
sp332 9y ago
In America we have https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t Canada doesn't have something like this? Edit: I didn't realize it blocked people in other countries from even seeing it. Here's a snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20170603221522/https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t https://web.archive.org/web/20170603221522/https://www.optou...
- mabbo 9y ago
  I don't know what we have, but I know that apparently, having a lawyer and power of attorney tell a credit card company to not send credit cards wasn't enough.
- dmix 9y ago
  Visiting that site from Canada I get this message: > The OptOutPrescreen.com website is only accessible through ISP's (Internet Service Providers) located within the United States and its territories. Rarely see that on non-media sites. Can someone explain what it does?
  - rhcom2 9y ago
    That website was set up as a result of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (which also allows people in the US a free credit report once a year) which only applies to Americans.
    - jstanley 9y ago
      What's the risk of a non-American person looking at the website? Consider that they can probably do so simply by using a proxy located in the US, or while visiting the US. "Legitimate" users don't notice, casually-interested people get annoyed, and fraudsters work around it. It doesn't solve anything and I wish people would stop doing this.
      - creepydata 9y ago
        To prevent confusion. If a Canadian looked at it they may believe that it applies to Canadians.
        rhcom2 9y ago
        I had a more cynical view that it was so the credit card companies had the fewest amount of people opt out. They could have made that site apply to anyone worldwide but that would hurt themselves.
        creepydata 9y ago
        No, you're not clear on your understanding, that site isn't run by credit card companies, it's run by the three credit bureaus. Basically, credit card companies (and insurance companies) buy consumer data from the credit bureaus to send unsolicited offers. That site is for you to register with the bureaus that you don't want your credit report sold in that way. That's how come companies can still send you unsolicited credit offers when they already have your information from elsewhere, such as from your bank account or frequent flyer account. I don't know which, if any bureaus operate in Canada or how that are allowed or not allowed to sell your data. That particular site gives you specifics information about American law (FCRA), and how things work in America with credit bureaus information sharing - it's completely irrelevant for Canada.
chmod775 9y ago
In many countries, particularly European ones, knowingly giving loans to people you know will be unable to pay you back or are unable to handle money responsibly due to a medical condition, is basically handing out free money. The moment a court hears of it ALL your claims against that person will be forfeit and the blame will lie squarely with you. I'd be surprised if Canada/US doesn't have similar provisions.
- pavel_lishin 9y ago
  It might, but I would wager that making it to court isn't a cheap proposition - you'd likely need to retain an attorney, pay all sorts of fees, and even with a judgement against you, you now have to track down all of the places your debt has been sold off to, repair your credit history, etc. Not easy even if you're in full control of your mental faculties.
- geodel 9y ago
  Would courts cover Euro loans to Greece? I somehow thinks banks/lenders know It would difficult to get back but they went ahead anyway.
turc1656 9y ago
Unregulated free markets? The banking/loan industry is a heavily regulated industry in both Canada and the US. Yes, predatory lending exists and it may be immoral, but it still requires the other side to agree to it. And keep in mind that the other side frequently has no intention/ability of paying. That is at minimum acting in bad faith and is usually against the law, even if there is no misrepresentation of income, assets, etc. In many jurisdictions, merely taking out an unsecured loan without the intention of actually paying it back (regardless of what the lender says or does) is technically illegal.
- josephdviviano 9y ago
  Implying people are actually rational. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/the-irrational-consumer-why-economics-is-dead-wrong-about-how-we-make-choices/267255/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/the-irr...
  - turc1656 9y ago
    I didn't mean to imply people were rational. Not only are people frequently not rational, there is also an information asymmetry that is involved with most financial/legal/medical decisions that would make people elect choices that are not in their own best interest. I wasn't trying to say they were rational, merely that they are still required to agree to the terms of the predatory lending and they should still be considered responsible for their choices. Also, I wanted to point out that they frequently are not the innocent victims that they are made out to be. Many times they are just as bad as the lenders simply because they don't intend to pay. The lenders are just far better at inducing payment than crooked borrowers are at getting away without paying the money back. Look at student loans. Nearly half of all students think that their loans will be forgiven eventually. Maybe they are right, maybe they aren't. No one knows. But the point is that they are taking on the loans because they don't expect to be held liable for and required to pay back in full.
- mabbo 9y ago
  > keep in mind that the other side frequently has no intention/ability of paying. That is at minimum acting in bad faith and is usually against the law I see. My complaint is that a credit card company knowingly took advantage of a disabled man, and your answer is that he was the villain in the situation. The man sometimes couldn't tell what was real vs what he had imagined happened. He couldn't go too far from home alone because he would forget how to get back. He was a wonderful human being, a hilarious story teller, and happened to be disabled because of a health issue. But sure, let's blame him.

by mabbo 9y ago

geodel 9y ago

Marketers and Politicians have told us that we are 'worth it'. So everything including laws just follow.

sp332 9y ago

In America we have https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t Canada doesn't have something like this? Edit: I didn't realize it blocked people in other countries from even seeing it. Here's a snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20170603221522/https://www.optoutprescreen.com/?rf=t https://web.archive.org/web/20170603221522/https://www.optou...

mabbo 9y ago
I don't know what we have, but I know that apparently, having a lawyer and power of attorney tell a credit card company to not send credit cards wasn't enough.
dmix 9y ago
Visiting that site from Canada I get this message: > The OptOutPrescreen.com website is only accessible through ISP's (Internet Service Providers) located within the United States and its territories. Rarely see that on non-media sites. Can someone explain what it does?
- rhcom2 9y ago
  That website was set up as a result of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (which also allows people in the US a free credit report once a year) which only applies to Americans.
  - jstanley 9y ago
    What's the risk of a non-American person looking at the website? Consider that they can probably do so simply by using a proxy located in the US, or while visiting the US. "Legitimate" users don't notice, casually-interested people get annoyed, and fraudsters work around it. It doesn't solve anything and I wish people would stop doing this.
    - creepydata 9y ago
      To prevent confusion. If a Canadian looked at it they may believe that it applies to Canadians.
      - rhcom2 9y ago
        I had a more cynical view that it was so the credit card companies had the fewest amount of people opt out. They could have made that site apply to anyone worldwide but that would hurt themselves.
        creepydata 9y ago
        No, you're not clear on your understanding, that site isn't run by credit card companies, it's run by the three credit bureaus. Basically, credit card companies (and insurance companies) buy consumer data from the credit bureaus to send unsolicited offers. That site is for you to register with the bureaus that you don't want your credit report sold in that way. That's how come companies can still send you unsolicited credit offers when they already have your information from elsewhere, such as from your bank account or frequent flyer account. I don't know which, if any bureaus operate in Canada or how that are allowed or not allowed to sell your data. That particular site gives you specifics information about American law (FCRA), and how things work in America with credit bureaus information sharing - it's completely irrelevant for Canada.

chmod775 9y ago

In many countries, particularly European ones, knowingly giving loans to people you know will be unable to pay you back or are unable to handle money responsibly due to a medical condition, is basically handing out free money. The moment a court hears of it ALL your claims against that person will be forfeit and the blame will lie squarely with you. I'd be surprised if Canada/US doesn't have similar provisions.

pavel_lishin 9y ago
It might, but I would wager that making it to court isn't a cheap proposition - you'd likely need to retain an attorney, pay all sorts of fees, and even with a judgement against you, you now have to track down all of the places your debt has been sold off to, repair your credit history, etc. Not easy even if you're in full control of your mental faculties.
geodel 9y ago
Would courts cover Euro loans to Greece? I somehow thinks banks/lenders know It would difficult to get back but they went ahead anyway.

turc1656 9y ago

Unregulated free markets? The banking/loan industry is a heavily regulated industry in both Canada and the US. Yes, predatory lending exists and it may be immoral, but it still requires the other side to agree to it. And keep in mind that the other side frequently has no intention/ability of paying. That is at minimum acting in bad faith and is usually against the law, even if there is no misrepresentation of income, assets, etc. In many jurisdictions, merely taking out an unsecured loan without the intention of actually paying it back (regardless of what the lender says or does) is technically illegal.

josephdviviano 9y ago
Implying people are actually rational. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/the-irrational-consumer-why-economics-is-dead-wrong-about-how-we-make-choices/267255/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/the-irr...
- turc1656 9y ago
  I didn't mean to imply people were rational. Not only are people frequently not rational, there is also an information asymmetry that is involved with most financial/legal/medical decisions that would make people elect choices that are not in their own best interest. I wasn't trying to say they were rational, merely that they are still required to agree to the terms of the predatory lending and they should still be considered responsible for their choices. Also, I wanted to point out that they frequently are not the innocent victims that they are made out to be. Many times they are just as bad as the lenders simply because they don't intend to pay. The lenders are just far better at inducing payment than crooked borrowers are at getting away without paying the money back. Look at student loans. Nearly half of all students think that their loans will be forgiven eventually. Maybe they are right, maybe they aren't. No one knows. But the point is that they are taking on the loans because they don't expect to be held liable for and required to pay back in full.
mabbo 9y ago
> keep in mind that the other side frequently has no intention/ability of paying. That is at minimum acting in bad faith and is usually against the law I see. My complaint is that a credit card company knowingly took advantage of a disabled man, and your answer is that he was the villain in the situation. The man sometimes couldn't tell what was real vs what he had imagined happened. He couldn't go too far from home alone because he would forget how to get back. He was a wonderful human being, a hilarious story teller, and happened to be disabled because of a health issue. But sure, let's blame him.