|
I hope some attorney out there can give me an answer.
I have got myself in over $10,000 in credit card debt and have lost my job.
I can't declare bankruptcy because I had one 4 years ago. I want to take a
job in China teaching English but there is no way I could continue making
payments on my debt. If I just went and defaulted is that a criminal fraud
offense?
|
| |
| |
In article <u00n409aol3khl9eqo9beio1qa08v48b5k@4ax.com>, RAS
<me@me.com> wrote:
I have got myself in over $10,000 in credit card debt and have lost my job.
I can't declare bankruptcy because I had one 4 years ago. I want to take a
job in China teaching English but there is no way I could continue making
payments on my debt. If I just went and defaulted is that a criminal fraud
offense?
If you ran up the debt with the intent of paying if off, then this
would remain a civil matter. The companies would try to collect,
then likely give up once they relized that you have skipped the
country. They most likely would not come after you in China.
If you ran up the debt with the intent of doing this and screwing
the companies, then this could be a criminal matter. If you skip
the country, a warrant could be issued for you. If you ever try
to reenter the US, you could be picked up. Again, they most
likely would not go after you in China, but if someone knew that
you were in a more friendly country, such as a vacation in France
or the UK, it is possible that they could bring you back to face
prosecution.
It sounds like you fit the former case, and intended to pay the debt.
-john-
--
====================================================================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708 john@johnweeks.com
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
====================================================================
|
| |
| |
I have got myself in over $10,000 in credit card debt and have lost my job.
I can't declare bankruptcy because I had one 4 years ago.
Are you sure about that? You might want to check to see if this is a correct
assumption or not.
Just for laughs, let's assume that in fact you cannot declare bankruptcy.
If you have $10,000 in credit card debt, than your interest is somewhere in the
vicinity of $2500. If you can scrounge up at least that much money every year
(or more if possible) than you might be able to simply continue carrying the
debt. The job might pay enough to make this possible.
You could also cut a deal to pay off part of the debt in exchange for having
your cards cancelled. You would have less leverage than the average debtor in
your position if you are indeed unable to file for bankruptcy BUT you would
still have SOME. The credit card issuer does not want you to default. Period.
They don't want you in prison. At least, financially they lose if you get
thrown in prison and are therefore unable to pay off the debt.
*****
Tim Horrigan <horrigan@aol.com>
*****
|
| |
| |
I have got myself in over $10,000 in credit card debt and have lost my job.
I can't declare bankruptcy because I had one 4 years ago. I want to take a
job in China teaching English but there is no way I could continue making
payments on my debt. If I just went and defaulted is that a criminal fraud
offense?
On the bare facts as given, there is no criminal fraud. Molving to
China may toll (postpone) the running of the statute of limitations,
but will have no other implications. You will just still owe the money
when you get back.
Your assumption that you "can't declare bankruptcy" is incorrect. You
can, if you have a "regular income", file a Chapter 13 petition.
"While you can only file Chapter 7 every 7 years, you can file a
Chapter 13 bankruptcy even if you got a Chapter 7 discharge less than
7 years ago."
http://www.moranlaw.net/-chapter13-eligibility.htm
Both of the above statements assume you did not make a material
misrepresentation to the lender. The credit card issuer(s) normally
would have been aware of your prior bankruptcy, and very likely you
are paying a high rate of interest. Whether or not you move to China,
but especially if you do, you may be in a good position to negotiate
better terms for repayment, perhaps seettling for a fraction of the
amount owed.
|
| |
| |
Horrigan wrote:
They don't want you in prison. At least, financially they lose if you get
thrown in prison and are therefore unable to pay off the debt.
I didn't think we had debtor's prisons here any more.
--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.
|
| |
| |
In article <6tr0509h2knakgoflm1kf35eavn4a0572c@4ax.com>,
Arthur L. Rubin <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote:
Horrigan wrote:
I didn't think we had debtor's prisons here any more.
We do for child support, at least.
Seth
|
| |
| |
sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
Arthur L. Rubin <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote:
We do for child support, at least.
I've never heard of someone being thrown in jail for failure to pay
child support. I have, however, heard of someone sent to jail for
contempt of court when he could pay support but has refused.
Stu
|
| |
| |
In article <npk95091iufrfte6o759pgg0dklr79f3ua@4ax.com>,
Stuart Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote:
sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
I've never heard of someone being thrown in jail for failure to pay
child support. I have, however, heard of someone sent to jail for
contempt of court when he could pay support but has refused.
The "imputed income" doctrine blurs the distinction between the
categories. The judge only has to say "you could have made more
money" before sending the man to jail.
--
John Carr (jfc@mit.edu)
|
| |
| |
On 19/3/04 15:19, in article rk3m505c6uv5k0k30e7jsasekb9n897vk4@4ax.com,
"John F. Carr" <jfc@mit.edu> wrote:
The "imputed income" doctrine blurs the distinction between the
categories. The judge only has to say "you could have made more
money" before sending the man to jail.
The judge can issue a "find work" order. S/he can also issue a "non exeat
republica" order. It's even easier than that just to get your passport
revoked administratively; but if you're a dual national revoking a passport
isn't enough.
|
| |
| |
I've never heard of someone being thrown in jail for failure to pay
child support. I have, however, heard of someone sent to jail for
contempt of court when he could pay support but has refused.
Do I parse that right that you are distinguishing between being
sent to jail for not doing foo, and being sent to jail for
disobeying the order to do foo?
In any case, see
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/03/18/two_teachers_receive_excellence_awards/
(the URL is correct, the teachers are the first story in the
regional roundup for March 18.)
The man who is number one on the state's list of deadbeat
dads has been arrested in Kansas and will probably be
brought
back to Massachusetts to face criminal charges, authorities
said. Robert C. Payne Jr., who allegedly owes $195,000 in
unpaid child support payments to his two children in Salem,
was
arrested Friday in Carbondale, Kan., south of Topeka. Payne,
47, formerly of Salem and Andover, was being held at the
Osage
County Jail in lieu of $15,000 bail and was scheduled to
appear
in court for an extradition hearing today. He has allegedly
failed to support his two children, now 15 and 13, since his
divorce from Linda Payne-Violet in 1997. (AP)
Note "criminal charges". Also note that this works out to about
$2300 per month or more than $27500 per year after-tax cash.
--
- David Chesler <chesler@post.harvard.edu>
Iacta alea est
|
| |
| |
chesler@post.harvard.edu (David S Chesler) wrote:
Stuart Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote
I've never heard of someone being thrown in jail for failure to
pay child support. I have, however, heard of someone sent to
jail for contempt of court when he could pay support but has
refused.
Do I parse that right that you are distinguishing between being
sent to jail for not doing foo, and being sent to jail for
disobeying the order to do foo?
Basically, yes. The distinction would be one of intent versus
status. If a person simply cannot afford to make a payment, he
shouldn't be sent to jail. And for contempt of court I'd imagine
there'd have to be an element of intent necessary to convict.
On the other hand the courts in this country have been very
reluctant to send someone to jail simply based on his status. It's
been held unconstitutional to send someone to jail simply for being
a drug addict (as opposed to proving the use of drugs).
Stu
|
| |
| |
|
