<p>" medical bills and unemployment can leave you in a position where paying off your student loans is just not a thing you can make happen.</p>
<p>Theoretically, thats where bankruptcy comes in. Reality, however, doesnt follow the theory. As the New York Times reports, there is an agency out there pushing back on bankruptcy to make sure that student debt is as permanent as possible."</p>
<p>What? People are making you honor your debts? </p>
<p>The horror. </p>
<p>I wish this company would be more concerned about the fact that we’re about the only developed nation in the world where you can go into bankruptcy for getting cancer. THAT is a much bigger issue than student loans!</p>
<p>The company is a debt collector, following the law. If they weren’t strict, eveyone would claim they have undue hardship.</p>
<p>People complain about the terms of student loans, but no where else can you get a unsecured loan with a single digit loan rate, with repayment periods of 10-15 years. Private bankers weren’t interested in making student loans without guarantees that they couldn’t be discharged in bankruptcy. Even with the non-dischargeable condition, only a few banks are making the private student loans.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with student loans not being dischargeable. What I would like to see is repayment terms of 40 - 60 years. I think fewer would default if you could spread the repayment thinner.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many bankers may have enough issues with having outstanding loans lasting 4 or more decades on their balance books. Especially if they cannot gain some other financial benefits for stretching the loan repayment period out so long in light of increased potential risks such as death of the borrower before debt is mostly/fully repaid.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One could make the same argument about credit card debts…and they ARE dischargable in bankruptcy. Incidentally, this very fact is one reason why so many take issue with the non-dischargability of educational loans in bankruptcy…along with the factor this policy excessively insulates the education loan lenders from the natural risks one assumes when making loans or other risky financial investments.</p>
<p>But the banks set the terms for credit card debt, can cut them off or not issue them at all. the student loans are given to all students, and the qualifications for parents have only been tightened recently.</p>
<p>Most borrowers would not pass the bank’s requirements for a loan if it weren’t guaranteed.</p>
<p>The problem is a legal one. If you do have undue hardship you are entitled under the law to discharge that debt. Thats the point of bankruptcy law. </p>
<p>But people in that situation usually cant get a lawyer to represent them. They dont have money and most legal aid doesnt handle these type of cases. So discharge isnt likely to happen if if you are entitled to it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At 60 years most people would be dead before they ever paid them back. At 40 people are at or near retirement age. 15 years already seems too long.</p>
<p>If you can’t pay your student loans back within 15 years you’re doing it wrong.</p>
<p>Parent Plus loans are not discharged in bankruptcy either.</p>
<p>I read the article. Apparently someone was being charged to pay loans they had already paid (still think they’re just a good, honest company trying to get their money back?) and another who was trying to discharge the loans because they had cancer, something she could not have anticipated when taking out the loans, and obviously a serious situation. These aren’t just lazy, irresponsible people who just “don’t feel like” paying their debt.</p>
<p>^^^ Thank you, Glamorous Girl., for stating the obvious point of the article. </p>
<p>I wonder what happened to compassion and mercy in our society. Something is terribly wrong if we continue to punish decent folks because they weren’t born with a silver spoon.</p>
<p>I don’t see a problem with forcing people to pay what they owe. I see a problem with college being this expensive.</p>
<p>I see a problem with someone going broke because they had the misfortune to get cancer!</p>
<p>I get that you are expected to pay back what you owe, but as GlamorousGirl pointed out, this company is hounding people who already paid back their loans, which is pretty sketchy. Personally, I’d probably never even borrow from them with their history. Who wants to worry about being attacked later on in life when you do everything you’re supposed to? </p>
<p>Also, if someone has cancer, the last thing they’re worried about is paying off loans. People are fighting for their LIVES, and it’s a shame how money has morphed people into not caring about that.</p>
<p>As long as we’re giving our opinions with exaggerated authority and self-importance:</p>
<p>I see a problem with forcing people to pay what they owe. Forcing people to do anything because they don’t have money is problematic. See slavery for more examples.</p>
<p>I see a problem with forcing people to take out loans they can’t repay.</p>
<p>I see a problem with debt collectors trying to circumvent the law on bankruptcy and succeeding because they have more power than their victims.</p>
<p>I see a problem with people in this thread lacking both basic legal knowledge and basic human decency.</p>
<p>Since when is a college degree an unalienable right? Not everyone who isn’t paying their college loan has cancer? Racking up large college debt is a choice not a consequence. Why don’t the universities dip into their tax free endowments and pony up some cash so students don’t need to borrow from banks.</p>
<p>^^yeah, but no one is “forced” to take out a loan, ghost!</p>
<p>In any event, the contents of that blog post was stupid. </p>
<p>When Congress setup the loan (ponzu scheme), they purposely made it extremely difficult to wipe the debt off in bk. It was a bipartisan decision, including the late liberal icon, Ted Kennedy as a major sponsor.</p>
<p>The company is just doing what the law requires and the Feds contracted them to do. Like much in the educ world, if you don’t like the answer, take it up with your local Congressperson/Senator.</p>
<p>(yes, the company made a mistake trying to collect from someone who had paid, but perhaps its not all the Company’s fault. When the feds took over fed loans a few years ago, thousands of loans were in limbo for a transition time. Personally, I tried to pay off a few loans for my kids, and neither the Educ Dept or the processor could tell me how much was due. Finally, my credit score came out and the EducDept had triple booked the loan accounts. According to the feds, I had three Parent loans at 3x. It took months to resolve. Meanwhile, the loan processor could do nothing until the feds corrected there records.</p>
<p>yes, getting ill it a difficult period, but it happens to us all, and unfortunately has become much more common. Many of us have undergone serious illness, but we continue paying our bills. If and only if the illness creates such a hardship that the person cannot work and has no income, then they can seek relief from the loan debt. But it should be last resort, not first. The taxpayers should not be left holding the bag.)</p>
<p>The original ‘article’ which reads more like an editiorial piece is published by a group that is part of the Consumer’s report operation. Often times, it makes sense to see who is writing the article and why before getting too upset about what they are actually saying.</p>
<p>^^^ I agree, no more student loans at all. Then only those who have saved for college or are rich can go. Some poor kids who have perfect scores and GPAs will get full grants, but other average kids are SOL.</p>
<p>Oh wait, wasn’t this the system we had in the 50’s?</p>
<p>A massive amount of debt has been created that has no reasonable basis for existing in the first place.</p>
<p>Debt that has no business existing in the first place is going to cause problems.</p>
<p>It always causes problems.</p>
<p>This is just one example of the problems that it causes.</p>
<p>See all of financial history for further details.</p>