Debt after death: Banks chase down mourners

No, I have a 765 beacon score because I take responsibility. I pay my bills on time, every time. Bills come first. If I cant eat out, so be it. If I cant go on vacation, so be it. I sat in the dark for a week many years ago so I wouldnt have to pay my credit card late. None of you would do that but I am an honorable person and I fulfill my commitments. I did without and I earned my 765 beacon score. Why dont you deadbeats do the same?

Since you have no heart and there is no Oz to send you to, you are hopeless. Good-bye.

Then I'm a deadbeat!
My mother's death does NOT make me responsible for her debts!
Here's a little tip for you...Pride goeth before a fall
Absolutely soulless.

A honorable person you're not. Sorry.

but the debt must be paid....why not step up to the plate and take responsibility?

Why must the debt be paid by a family member? The creditor took the risk on the loan. He played the odds and lost. If the debtor dies before the debt is paid, then that is the breaks of the game. Both parties of the contract knew what they were getting into. The debtor is responsible for the debt while alive, it becomes the creditor's problem after the death of the debtor.

Because, you hard-headed idiot, I NEVER co-signed!
By FEDERAL law, I have no LEGAL responsibilty to pay!

you have a MORAL responsibility pay

You "would take a day or so to grieve"? How selfish! Don't you realize children of hard working debt collectors are going hungry while you mope around the house? People are waiting and waiting months and years for THEIR money that YOUR momma or poppa took from them and you want them to wait for YOU to decide when to pay back? Suck it up and stop being a baby!

The day that person is lost you need to take whatever was going to get spent on a funeral service and take yourself to a Western Union and send every penny to settle those debts. If that's not enough, you take everything that person had and put it on the sidewalk and paint yourself a FOR SALE sign. You keep on it until you satisfy those bills and that person can finally rest in peace. That way you can't complain about how it's your money and not your debt because it won't be your money paying what is rightfully the collector's to have.

Alf and Toby: I had forgotten about that Schumer letter. The FTC did in fact respond belatedly. A policy statement was drafted in late 2010 and made official this past August.

http://www.ftc.gov/os/2011/07/110720fdcpa.pdf

Schumer is a great hawk for privacy and consumer rights but he read too much into the reach of the FDCPA, which the FTC took pains to clarify. The FTC wants collectors to treat posthumous collection contact like a skip trace, only with extra caution and some possibly unreasonable eggshell walking. Its statement goes to some length to insist that the dead have privacy rights, and all the usual rules apply about deceptive practice and revealing too many facts to the wrong people.

The only new things to be asserted are that surviving relatives are not to be pressured or fooled into paying anything from their own pockets, and that the object is to find the executor or estate manager (or whatever title is used) rather than the debtor and proceed from there. There is a deep nod to estate processes varying by state and region, and a desire for collectors not to begin a probate claim, costly and tiresome to the affected families, if one is not needed. The idea seems to be that leaving a channel open to an estate manager keeps the collector from drilling through the hard way. (Similar, perhaps, to the wise practice of avoiding a full cease-comm, and therefore a lawsuit, when a debt account is "within Statute".)

Otherwise the statement pretty much says the existing laws are fine as they are. For the most part I have trouble disagreeing. It's entirely possible for a debt collector to call without knowledge of a recent death. It is burdensome for the collector to have to guess what an "inconvenient" call means or exactly when it is "safe" to attempt collection. Either the respondent should revoke call permission or the FDCPA has to be amended to specify a number of days of suspension of collection efforts once the alleged debtor is known to be dead. Realistically, a granular "recently dead rule" would be about as difficult to enforce as the restriction on calling workplaces. We can't make a blanket rule to never call the grieving relatives or else everyone in debt will start claiming to have expired.

Granted, the close timing of the vulture calls can suggest they are inspired by updates to Social Security records and Obit columns. Therefore it is harder to claim those calls are "convenient". But again convenience is defined by the consumer in the law, not the collector. I'm not saying it's the best compromise or that abuses are unlikely, but regulation means you have to give the regulated a chance to do things the right way.

Ultimately debt collection is about location of assets. The location of people who control assets becomes a necessary function, and the treatment of those people is a large part of what the laws address. The debt industry would be pleased to cut out the people part and get straight to draining of assets .... but that may be another topic.

Wow, what a troll.So, let's tear you apart!
"If I cant eat out, so be it. If I cant go on vacation, so be it."

So, everyone who has a debt went on vacation somewhere, or eats out every night? 1 and 1 doesn't equal 5, if you have the money to go on vacation somewhere, you should be able to pay the bills. 75% of people with a debt can't pay their bills because they don't have the money, therefore, your logic is invalid.

"Why dont you deadbeats do the same?"
You do know that could be considered slander, right? Also, for somebody that apparently believes in God (judging by your user name) you sure don't act like it.

Also, from an earlier comment of yours:

"I would take a day or so to grieve and then it is time to take resposibility and start writing checks. Should the world shut down because your son just died? Creditors have to get paid. You think you are the only one to lose a loved one? They gave you money when you needed it. Now it's your turn."

So, if you die and owe someone $750, I should pull out MY checkbook and pay them? You know, DirecTV did the same thing to me, they refused service because someone that lived here before me owes them money, now I'M being held responsible for it. So, is that fair to me? Also, the last line is devoid of any logic, no, the creditors didn't give YOU the money, they gave someone else the money.

You know, I love fighting trolls, especially ones who feel that they're better than everyone else. So, where is the job you're offering me? What, I don't actually work, according to you, because I'm a "deadbeat." So, I'd like to take you up on your offer. I'm requesting $15 an hour, paid weekly.

Why must the debt be paid by a family member? The creditor took the risk on the loan. He played the odds and lost. If the debtor dies before the debt is paid, then that is the breaks of the game. Both parties of the contract knew what they were getting into. The debtor is responsible for the debt while alive, it becomes the creditor's problem after the death of the debtor.

No I don't, my morals are just fine, thank you very much.

But death is a valid excuse, if the estate does not have money so [***] off

I'll worry about paying what I owe to the mortgage company or the bank after THEY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALMOST TOTALLY RUINING OUR ECONOMY AND THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS. Seems like there are always idiots who harp on about personal responsibility, but never mention institutional responsibility,