Jump to content

A New Angle?


retmar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Recent comment was made to me that got me scratching my head. I've always been under the impression that an OC and/or CA would always go after the Husband, or both Husband and Wife, when attempting to collect a debt that involved both names. An example would be both names are displayed on a Vehicle Registration and the collector is trying to collect on something regarding a vehicle. The Husband's name is first on the registration, so all would assume he is primarily responsible. Not always true, as I have found out. A particular CA, in another State, reported an account in the Wife's name only, noting as an individual account, with full knowledge of the Husband's name being on the registration as they have it in their files. Remember, neither one signed any type of contract, work order, or any other piece of paper. My question to all is the following:

When was it determined that a CA can conduct collection activity on anyone they choose?

Especially if they decide on the Wife over the Husband. To me, this looks like they intend to try and take advantage of a Female as they feel she is the weaker of the two in a marraige. Boy, are they in for a surprise. Give me your thoughts and, if you have proof this is not legal, please refer me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wish i had proof to give you, but i dont.

i too am/was under the impression the CA would 'go' the husband first, altho these days women are often working too, making them a target.

maybe the CA in this case is hoping the husband will step forward and claim the debt to 'save' his wife. if that happened, then the CA would have their 'proof' of the debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your comment about the Husband "stepping up" would appear to be a good reason, but, it still causes me to wonder what they are thinking and if this is a legal tactic. The truth is these people do not own the vehicle anymore. They sold it over 6 years ago to someone in New Mexico.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You picked a winner. I would say the answer is yes and that it is gender discrimination and exactly the kind of class-action law suit that would drop Asset's or any other JDB's stock to about $0.03 per share.

The incidence is probably much higher when 2 co-signors divorce. The CAs/JDBs know that by looking at the CRs and seeing different addresses or last names. Sure they would go after the woman first or if they aren't living in the same state or nearby probably both to collect double.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The discrimination angle is one I had asked myself, but, could not come up with a reasonable answer. This is why I created this thread. I wanted all of you to help find the answer. You did bring up a good point as to a separation/divorce being involved, but, as to this couple, it does not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recent comment was made to me that got me scratching my head. I've always been under the impression that an OC and/or CA would always go after the Husband, or both Husband and Wife, when attempting to collect a debt that involved both names.

This is exactly the question I was wondering about. If my wife gets a credit card in her name only (I'm not listed as a user), am I liable as well for that debt? I posted a longer version of this in another in this same section. retmar brings up a good point. THe CA has made my wife cry on more than one occasion and they seem to single her out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now is it that both their names just appear on the registration or are they also on the loan contract. My wife and I have a vehicle that is registred in both are names but only hers shows up on the loan because she was the one to get it financed (they didn't want any of my info, figured it would hurt more then help). This may be why they are only targeting the wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

money_man, check your post. I just responded before I came back here.

dloran, the vehicle had a clear title for years as they paid cash for it. Both names were on the title and registration as "OR". As to the other part of your question, when a vehicle is impounded for any reason, the registered owner is the one liable. This is what a friend of mine told me who has a very busy garage in Long Beach. The couple I was referring to also got the same answer from DMV. In case I didnt mention it, DMV already took care of the problem and proved they weren't liable. It is just the way it has been reported and handled is why I started this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.