Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When a credit card company lends you money, they basically make a deal that says you pay back the money (with interest) or they will wreck your credit for a while. Some people act like the OP stole the money. OP paid a price for the unpaid debt (low credit score, difficulty getting any additional loans, possibly some trouble getting some jobs/insurance, etc.) that was the original deal. His obligation is done.

That's a perspective that I hadn't even considered. If the low credit score, difficulty in getting loans/jobs didn't impact the borrower, did he still fulfill his obligation? Isn't stealing taking something and not giving it back under the terms agreed to?

Read up on how the credit card industry works. They make money off of EVERY cardholder, even the ones who default. Between sky-high interest and late fees while the debtor is still paying, plus swipe fees.

If card-issuers actually lost money when cardholders defaulted, then they might stop issuing cards with high credit limits to oeople with no reasonable ability to repay. The reason they will issue a card to anyone with a pulse is that the house always wins.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw if your debt actually ends up forgiven you will get a 1099c. And owe taxes on it.

The old debt is not forgiven - it is just no longer enforceable (creditor cannot sue you). It still exists, arguably (although it is probably more reasonable to argue that non-collectible debt, in fact, has "disappeared" since a debt is a legal obligation to repay a good or service, so there the debt does not exist without the repayment obligation).

The debt does eventually get forgiven. There are several distinct trifpggers for forgiven debt. The irs makes the rules. Not the creditors.

Anonymous wrote:When a credit card company lends you money, they basically make a deal that says you pay back the money (with interest) or they will wreck your credit for a while. Some people act like the OP stole the money. OP paid a price for the unpaid debt (low credit score, difficulty getting any additional loans, possibly some trouble getting some jobs/insurance, etc.) that was the original deal. His obligation is done.

That's a perspective that I hadn't even considered. If the low credit score, difficulty in getting loans/jobs didn't impact the borrower, did he still fulfill his obligation? Isn't stealing taking something and not giving it back under the terms agreed to?