10 ms·

Title is borderline a little clickbaity. There's not a ton of information but from what I gather it seems like the following happened: She had a PayPal credit

by astura 8y ago

Title is borderline a little clickbaity. There's not a ton of information but from what I gather it seems like the following happened: She had a PayPal credit card or some other form of revolving account with PayPal (the letter references to "PayPal Credit" agreement) with a balance of just over £3,000. Dead people can't legally hold credit cards so she "breached" her credit card agreement by dying - that is, an action on her part made the agreement no longer valid. This caused PayPal to close the revolving credit line and the balance to be due in full. As I understand it her estate would be legally required to pay the balance if it had the funds to do so. (99.9% sure - correct me if I'm wrong) The letter was sent informing her of the above. So seems like the letter was "technically correct" (the best kind of correct!) but horribly insensitive to the point of basically being straight up cruel. The other mistake is it should have been addressed to the executor of her estate instead of her personally. EDIT: Here's the UK version of "PayPal Credit": https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/paypal-virtual-credit https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/paypal-virtual-credit Looks like it's a revolving account without a physical card.

chrisseaton 8y ago
> Title is borderline a little clickbaity What? It's literally what the letter they sent to the dead customer says. > PayPal told customer her death breached its rules > You are breach in [rule] because ... you are deceased
- astura 8y ago
  To me it makes it seem much more outrageous than it is. The letter is absolutely terrible, horribly insensitive, cruel, and should have never been sent. However, like I said, it seems "technically correct" with the information we are given.
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    > Dead people can't legally hold credit cards so she "breached" her credit card agreement by dying No it is not technically correct. Death is not a breach of contract in UK law. It causes the contract to end.
    - y4mi 8y ago
      I thought that's what happened? Or is debt not part of the inheritance in this case and only the savings/property given to the family?
      - tankenmate 8y ago
        In the UK debt can not be inherited. A debt that is shared (severally or collectively) with a dead person is different. The main reason for this is that under common law you can't be held liable for other people's actions or inaction (unless you specifically agree to it; i.e. being guarantor for someone else's debt). Any assets left after debt has been settled by the estate can be inherited. If the estate has more debt than assets then the estate is effectively bankrupted but it would normally be handled by the Probate Court (the court that handles cases of death estates amongst other things) rather than the Court of Chancery (Bankruptcy court). In days of yore both the Probate Court and the Court of Chancery were a part of the Court of Equity (in effect a court of common law) and so the Probate Court had very similar powers to the Court of Chancery and hence the Probate Court would handle a bankrupted estate rather than turning it over to the Court of Chancery. EDIT: added explanatory clause
        detaro 8y ago
        But that's pretty much what the parent asks about in this context: the existing debt is part of the estate, and relevant to the heirs. I think you misunderstood the intent of their question by focusing on the "inherited" too much.
        manicdee 8y ago
        The debt is not relevant to the heirs. Any debt that can’t be settled by the estate is facing a bankrupt debtor. What matters to the heirs of the estate is whether there is an inheritance or not. That happens after debts are settled and contracts terminated. It is relevant to the executor of the estate, who may not be an heir (and in many jurisdictions, is prohibited from being an heir).
      - 8y ago
  - chris_wot 8y ago
    What is “technically correct” about addressing a letter to a dead person?
    - coryfklein 8y ago
      I believe he was referring to the content of the letter, not the mistake in addressee.
chris_wot 8y ago
Uh, it’s definitely not click bait. They literally sent a letter to a person to tell them that her death breached their rules. Part of the letter informed the dead person they would restrict her ability to use the service. One wonders how they intend to implement restrictions more effective than death!
- astura 8y ago
  Clickbait is not defined as "a headline that is false," its defined as "a headline that makes you want to click." "PayPal told customer her death breached its rules" is much much "clickable" than "PayPal sent insensitive letter to a dead customer." It makes it sound much more outrageous. That's why it's borderline clickbaity to me. Added to that it didn't define 15.4 (c) of the Paypal Credit agreement. Feel free to disagree, there's no absolutes here, only opinions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait >Clickbait is a website link designed to entice users to go to a certain web-page or video.[1] [2] ... Click-bait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers of news websites curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[3][4][5]
buckminster 8y ago
The estate is liable but the lender may not pursue it. When my Dad died with a couple of similar credit card debts they were immediately written off. Maybe because chasing elderly widows isn't a good look. Though comments elsewhere in the thread suggest that American lenders don't have these scruples.
- gammateam 8y ago
  They also probably had purchased a life insurance policy on him anyway and got paid out already, or had earned a satisfactory amount in interest payments.
atlantic 8y ago
Sounds like you should be working for Paypal. You apparently find it normal that a) dying violates the company's terms and conditions b) a notice of violation should be addressed to a dead person.

by astura 8y ago

chrisseaton 8y ago

> Title is borderline a little clickbaity What? It's literally what the letter they sent to the dead customer says. > PayPal told customer her death breached its rules > You are breach in [rule] because ... you are deceased

astura 8y ago
To me it makes it seem much more outrageous than it is. The letter is absolutely terrible, horribly insensitive, cruel, and should have never been sent. However, like I said, it seems "technically correct" with the information we are given.
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  > Dead people can't legally hold credit cards so she "breached" her credit card agreement by dying No it is not technically correct. Death is not a breach of contract in UK law. It causes the contract to end.
  - y4mi 8y ago
    I thought that's what happened? Or is debt not part of the inheritance in this case and only the savings/property given to the family?
    - tankenmate 8y ago
      In the UK debt can not be inherited. A debt that is shared (severally or collectively) with a dead person is different. The main reason for this is that under common law you can't be held liable for other people's actions or inaction (unless you specifically agree to it; i.e. being guarantor for someone else's debt). Any assets left after debt has been settled by the estate can be inherited. If the estate has more debt than assets then the estate is effectively bankrupted but it would normally be handled by the Probate Court (the court that handles cases of death estates amongst other things) rather than the Court of Chancery (Bankruptcy court). In days of yore both the Probate Court and the Court of Chancery were a part of the Court of Equity (in effect a court of common law) and so the Probate Court had very similar powers to the Court of Chancery and hence the Probate Court would handle a bankrupted estate rather than turning it over to the Court of Chancery. EDIT: added explanatory clause
      - detaro 8y ago
        But that's pretty much what the parent asks about in this context: the existing debt is part of the estate, and relevant to the heirs. I think you misunderstood the intent of their question by focusing on the "inherited" too much.
        manicdee 8y ago
        The debt is not relevant to the heirs. Any debt that can’t be settled by the estate is facing a bankrupt debtor. What matters to the heirs of the estate is whether there is an inheritance or not. That happens after debts are settled and contracts terminated. It is relevant to the executor of the estate, who may not be an heir (and in many jurisdictions, is prohibited from being an heir).
    - 8y ago
- chris_wot 8y ago
  What is “technically correct” about addressing a letter to a dead person?
  - coryfklein 8y ago
    I believe he was referring to the content of the letter, not the mistake in addressee.

chris_wot 8y ago

Uh, it’s definitely not click bait. They literally sent a letter to a person to tell them that her death breached their rules. Part of the letter informed the dead person they would restrict her ability to use the service. One wonders how they intend to implement restrictions more effective than death!

astura 8y ago
Clickbait is not defined as "a headline that is false," its defined as "a headline that makes you want to click." "PayPal told customer her death breached its rules" is much much "clickable" than "PayPal sent insensitive letter to a dead customer." It makes it sound much more outrageous. That's why it's borderline clickbaity to me. Added to that it didn't define 15.4 (c) of the Paypal Credit agreement. Feel free to disagree, there's no absolutes here, only opinions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait >Clickbait is a website link designed to entice users to go to a certain web-page or video.[1] [2] ... Click-bait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers of news websites curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[3][4][5]

buckminster 8y ago

The estate is liable but the lender may not pursue it. When my Dad died with a couple of similar credit card debts they were immediately written off. Maybe because chasing elderly widows isn't a good look. Though comments elsewhere in the thread suggest that American lenders don't have these scruples.

gammateam 8y ago
They also probably had purchased a life insurance policy on him anyway and got paid out already, or had earned a satisfactory amount in interest payments.

atlantic 8y ago

Sounds like you should be working for Paypal. You apparently find it normal that a) dying violates the company's terms and conditions b) a notice of violation should be addressed to a dead person.