Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
old hippy
Groupie
Joined: 20/August/2005
Location: Canada
Points: 198
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22/June/2009 at 1:56pm |
(I meant that the education we borrowed the student loans to pay for is "intangible" as far as not having measurable worth like houses, cars, furniture etc. - maybe I grabbed the wrong word)
And also with respect, because I know that we all have different backgrounds and life experiences - I'm sure you have your back covered Paul. I'm sure that you haven't been slaving to pay off your student loan without a secure job, benefits, pension and years of earning power ahead of you. So, it's easier for you to be "honourable" and defend the blood-sucking establishment. And another "hypothetical" that isn't covered under the current framework - how about anyone with a student loan that's not in good standing? Whether common-law or not...they're screwed, or boinked if you prefer.
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22/June/2009 at 4:38pm |
Just to return to the main issue here, I'd suggest that the root of this discussion is whether qualification for the repayment assistance program should involve consideration of the debtor's spouse's income. I know that sometimes phraseology such as the 'blood-sucking establishment' is used to illustrate a point, but I don't think it's useful in this context.
My point is simply that there is nothing wrong with considering a debtor's spouse's income, when deciding whether the debtor spouse qualifies for repayment assistance. There must be accountability when public dollars are lent. Accountability has a lot more to do with responsible government than any misplaced notion of "the establishment".
I wish I had the pension and benefits to which you speculate I have access, but that is another story!
|
|
old hippy
Groupie
Joined: 20/August/2005
Location: Canada
Points: 198
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/June/2009 at 12:54am |
"There must be accountability when public dollars are lent" - are you kidding me? Are you working for the gov't? From what I understand, they're making a fairly good profit from student loan debtors.
You're just a little too good to be true Paul, and ever since you've been on this site you've been a staunch defender of the gov't and their student loan policies. I think Syne has suggested it comes down to the "honour system" as far as considering a common-law spouse goes and maybe we should just leave it at that.
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/June/2009 at 1:21am |
Quite the opposite - the government works for me, which is my point. Again, I see little controversy in stressing accountability with respect to public dollars and the recovery of those funds. Change the context from student loans to, say, providing funding for private colleges to retrain laid-off auto workers, and we see that there must always be accountability at the governmental level.
But no. I don't work for government.
|
|
old hippy
Groupie
Joined: 20/August/2005
Location: Canada
Points: 198
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/June/2009 at 2:06am |
Big Brother?
Just kidding...
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23/June/2009 at 5:20pm |
My personal view is that there should be an amnesty on student debt, you know. People should not be driven into submission by debts they took on, only in the hopes of bettering themselves.
I want accountability where public dollars are concerned. I also want the government to throw in the towel and recognize that the value of the lives being ruined by crushing debt outweigh the value of defaulted student loans.
I want fiscal responsible AND socially progressive government. Why can't we have both?
|
|
Mersan
Groupie
Joined: 27/May/2004
Points: 0
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29/June/2009 at 1:35pm |
paulaffleck wrote:
It is true that people are, and should be, free to have whatever relationships they desire, and the parameters of those relationships can vary greatly. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with this, and I, being a very socially liberal person, pass absolutely no judgment on whatever relationship two people choose to have with one another.
Completely separate and apart from this social issue, is the issue of the means at the disposal of a debtor, and the consequent ability to pay the loan, and the evaluation of his or her ability to pay. If that debtor is in a relationship that meets the definition of "common law", then the debtor's real ability to pay should be evaluated. It is the debtor's ability to pay the loan, within the context of his or her real economic situation, that is the real issue. This is regardless how the debtor and the person with whom the debtor is in a relationship, choose to categorize that relationship.
[Bear in mind that the living situation that you describe may not meet the definition of "conjugal", however that term has been interpreted. My guess is that it has been interpreted to be largely "fact dependent", which may be somewhat less than helpful.]
The unfortunate bottom line is, in my view: If state dollars were lent to obtain an education, the state is entitled to establish a framework to evaluate each debtor's ability to repay those dollars. These are, after all, tax dollars. I don't think there is anything particularly controversial about that. The nature of the framework will always be disputed by somebody, and perhaps for good reason. But the need for this type of framework is well-justified. |
Paul "debtor" is an industry specific term. People who are borrowers of whatever accord do not describe themselves as "debtors." "Debtor" is a pejorative and highly prejudicial term that the collection industry inherited from the debt peonage era. "Debtor" is thus a term almost exclusively used by the collection industry. Your whole premise on familial financial obligation seems affected by this negative view that student loan borrowers are “debtors.” One can easily apply any of your arguments here to indentureship or collective debt enslavement.
From a plantation owner’s perspective, a loan system where the responsibility of the debt is expanded would be totally logical and well justified and make sound economic sense. It is when we view this barbaric system from the bottom up that we get a very different view of the unjust logic of a system that in its naked reality is nothing more than debt peonage.
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29/June/2009 at 2:16pm |
Dictionary definitions of "debtor" all define it as a person who owes another (creditor) a financial debt. Your observation is academically interesting but nothing more. Dictionary definitions are relevant because they define a term according to its actual usage. It's just not true that people generally regard "debtor" as perjorative. Nobody wants to be one, but that's because nobody likes to owe anybody money.
AGAIN, when deciding whether a debtor has ability to repay a debt, his or her true financial picture is the relevant concept.
The plantation owner's perspective is, again, merely academically interesting.
If Billy owes Sally $5, Sally is the creditor and Billy is the debtor. It's just a fact.
|
|
Mersan
Groupie
Joined: 27/May/2004
Points: 0
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29/June/2009 at 2:32pm |
paulaffleck wrote:
Dictionary definitions of "debtor" all define it as a person who owes another (creditor) a financial debt. Your observation is academically interesting but nothing more. Dictionary definitions are relevant because they define a term according to its actual usage. It's just not true that people generally regard "debtor" as perjorative. Nobody wants to be one, but that's because nobody likes to owe anybody money.
AGAIN, when deciding whether a debtor has ability to repay a debt, his or her true financial picture is the relevant concept.
The plantation owner's perspective is, again, merely academically interesting.
If Billy owes Sally $5, Sally is the creditor and Billy is the debtor. It's just a fact. |
It's a sociological definition and as I said your usage of “debtor is industry specific. None of this has anything to do with a dictionary. You can put the book away. We are talking about real life here.
And here is another observation for you to ponder. I don’t believe someone whose common-law girlfriend helped them pay off a $55,000 student loan would hang out on a website like this. That is my opinion.
I notice that you did not deny being in the industry. I find that has enormous academic significance.
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29/June/2009 at 4:12pm |
Non-academics think that a "debtor" is a person who owes another person a debt. The sociological definition you marshall has great relevance within academe but bears zero relation to the non-academic understanding of the word. It bears zero relation to "real life", if you understand "real life" to be life outside of academe. (Personally, I believe that "real life" includes academe, but it is definitely a peculiar type of life, even though a lot of that depends on the particular field in which you may work, and the particular institution at which you do that work.)
On your second point, anybody who pays off debt, while in a marriage or common-law relationship, must acknowledge that his or her spouse indirectly helped him or her pay the debt. The point is that this is simply a function of healthy relationships in general. No long-term relationship can survive without a good financial plan, and acknowledging each spouse's debt load and dealing with it as a couple are core skills in relationships. (I recommend "Till Debt Do Us Part", for a whole host of examples of this aspect of relationships.)
I'm not the type to join the sheep in a herd. The fact is that I actually don't work in the collection industry. Am I going to go along with others and say that the entire collection agency is abusive? No. I'm not. Am I going to claim that there is nothing wrong with particular collection agencies? No. I'm not.
|
|
old hippy
Groupie
Joined: 20/August/2005
Location: Canada
Points: 198
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30/June/2009 at 6:39am |
Hi Mersan - Welcome back! You've been gone for years!
And looks like we'd better stop picking on Paul...
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 08/July/2009 at 2:07am |
My skin is thickened from years of abuse, the nature of which, I'll not disclose.
I have the markings to prove it....
|
|
beaglebc
Newbie
Joined: 04/December/2010
Location: BC,Canada
Points: 2
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04/December/2010 at 6:11pm |
From the BC Student Loan Definition of Common Law on the on-line Interest relief form:
"Common-law means a student who has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship for at least 12 consecutive months before the first day of classes. "
My partner and I can now be considered common law and when our baby is born most definitely. This change was after the loan was incurred. The question comes down to is timing, when the loan was incurred, she was legally single.
The form says the following:
Spouse’s gross Income (if applicable) |
Is my income applicable?
Thank you,
Larry
|
|
SolveStudentDebt
Moderator Group
Joined: 05/November/2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5996
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07/December/2010 at 6:39am |
Hey Larry,
Unfortunately, the system likes to attach anyone it can in order to get money out people. THere are arguments I can give you that will definitely make their heads spin though. Call if you want to become a client and I will hook you up.
|
Solve Student Debt specializes in solutions for students and graduates in student loan default, and those at risk of defaulting. solvestudentdebt.com
|
|
bichoo
Newbie
Joined: 10/January/2011
Points: 4
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28/January/2011 at 3:38am |
Hi all,
I am in somewhat of a similar predicament. I am married to my wife who owes about $31k to CRA for student loans. She now has to fill out a "financial questionnaire" to figure out what the monthly instalments will be since we cant repay in full. We are aiming for a $500/month proposal to CRA but I have a feeling if my income (which is double my wife's) is taken into account, they won't comply to this. We both have large credit cards debts which we are currently putting more money towards paying off due to the higher interest rates.
I'm just upset about this whole issue because once the CRA sees my salary, my guess is they will take some insane amount per month. Is there is a maximum allowable monthly payment? I feel like not even divulging my financial information, why should I anyways..i'm not obligated to since its not my loan. But if my wife doesnt write my financial info, I am worried it will just stir up more issues around her being uncooperative and not disclosing all household income.
I guess whatever the instalments would be, it still wouldnt be higher than a 30% wage garnishment if we decided to ignore the issue..so maybe I'm just worried for nothing.
John, I tried to call you yesterday but the phone kept ringing, I will try again today, I would love to get some advice on how to proceed with this.
|
|
SolveStudentDebt
Moderator Group
Joined: 05/November/2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5996
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30/January/2011 at 10:35am |
Hey bichoo - call me tomorrow at 866-239-7889. The voice mail system over here got all buggered up when we became two companies (CFW Group Corporate Services - and CFWG Consumer Services).
|
Solve Student Debt specializes in solutions for students and graduates in student loan default, and those at risk of defaulting. solvestudentdebt.com
|
|
bichoo
Newbie
Joined: 10/January/2011
Points: 4
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30/January/2011 at 11:31am |
Thank you Johnny! I'll call you tomorrow, look forward to speaking with you.
|
|
paulaffleck
Groupie
Joined: 26/September/2007
Location: Canada
Points: 156
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31/January/2011 at 12:51am |
For what is worth, I owed a significant amount of student loan money, and the collection agency demanded I complete the questionnaire. At that time, the "guideline" was that, in the absence of the questionnaire, 3% of the debt be paid per month. I kindly informed the agency that I would not fill out the questionnaire, but pay at the 3% per month.
Now, I was able to aggressively pay the loan off, usually the payment was well in excess of the 3%. But my point is that, for a while they kept asking me to complete the questionnaire, and as my payments went on, they eventually stopped trying. If you can afford to fork over the approximately $950 per month, just bite your lip and do it.
My 2 cents.
|
|
SolveStudentDebt
Moderator Group
Joined: 05/November/2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5996
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31/January/2011 at 2:55am |
Hey P - haven't seen you in while! The old measurement of repayment was 3% of the amount owed. Now though it is based on an amortization term, which is much more agressive. Borrowers in default are being hit with 5 to 7-year amortization demands by the government. That is how they are doing it. Before, as long as you paid the government's minimum requirement you did not have to complete those financial questionaires.
|
Solve Student Debt specializes in solutions for students and graduates in student loan default, and those at risk of defaulting. solvestudentdebt.com
|
|
beaglebc
Newbie
Joined: 04/December/2010
Location: BC,Canada
Points: 2
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31/January/2011 at 3:08pm |
On the smaller loan we decided to be 100% honest when applying for the BC Student loan relief for the common law wife is on pregnancy leave. She is so far able to defer the loan. She was never in default, so they are probably friendlier to her.
I am sure I will be back for did not expect this to be easy. Next will the Canada Loan.
|
|