Active Users:776 Time:13/12/2025 02:11:17 PM
Yeah, I guess we are. Tim Send a noteboard - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM
Cause they can go after as many of their customers as they want.

Or did I wander into a conversation where I misunderstood the context?


I was straying a bit into other areas of law, and rather forgetting the original issue. Also I've just learned about election so it was fresh in my mind :P. It applies when you enter into a contract with someone's agent, but he doesn't tell you he's an agent so you think you're contracting with him instead of with his principal (the person he's an agent for). If things go wrong, you can pick which one to sue, but not both. Now that I think about it, this would never arise if the bank was suing the customer (although it could conceivably arise if the customer was suing the bank). Sorry for the digression.
Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt.

—Nous disons en allemand : le guerre, le mort, le lune, alors que 'soleil' et 'amour' sont du sexe féminin : la soleil, la amour. La vie est neutre.

—La vie ? Neutre ? C'est très joli, et surtout très logique.
Reply to message
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral? - 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM 1535 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street - - 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM 1021 Views
do we have a moral obligation to society? - 12/10/2010 06:00:17 PM 1005 Views
It's a good question - 14/10/2010 02:41:21 AM 911 Views
Sort of have to disagree... - 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM 983 Views
That's not true actually - 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM 910 Views
Of course it's immoral. - 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM 985 Views
But does one sided morality work? - 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM 1102 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you? - 12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM 933 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again - 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM 923 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again - 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM 1429 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system - 15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM 1120 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM* - 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM 461 Views
Which is why contracts have to be pages and pages long and combed over by bloodsucking lawyers. - 12/10/2010 06:39:18 PM 965 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them. - 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM 813 Views
Hrm. - 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM 1036 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract. - 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM 1078 Views
I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. - 12/10/2010 08:37:52 PM 989 Views
Re: I don't see that as the flaw in my logic. - 12/10/2010 09:00:00 PM 1069 Views
also - 12/10/2010 09:37:38 PM 928 Views
That makes no sense whatsoever. - 13/10/2010 11:38:06 PM 1066 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note *NM* - 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM 481 Views
Exactly *NM* - 12/10/2010 07:58:25 PM 448 Views
So, you think bankruptcy laws are immoral? - 13/10/2010 12:18:43 AM 958 Views
I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach. - 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM 1066 Views
I thought the answer might be something like that. *NM* - 12/10/2010 05:35:35 PM 431 Views
that is close to the way I see it - 12/10/2010 05:45:25 PM 913 Views
It's both legal and immoral. - 12/10/2010 06:37:49 PM 993 Views
You didn't mention the third party - 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM 842 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society - 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM 992 Views
Thus the edit - 12/10/2010 09:10:53 PM 1014 Views
either way I think you made a good point *NM* - 12/10/2010 09:38:58 PM 423 Views
will those neighbors... - 14/10/2010 04:52:26 AM 1155 Views
All depends where you get your morals from, really. - 12/10/2010 08:28:41 PM 984 Views
I guess what i was trying to ask, at least in part - 12/10/2010 09:48:24 PM 985 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective? - 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM 1012 Views
do you think they would if they had a legal way to do it? - 12/10/2010 10:04:57 PM 967 Views
Good point. *NM* - 12/10/2010 11:10:26 PM 447 Views
Sure, you could do that. - 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM 1005 Views
Much like the concept of morality itself. - 12/10/2010 11:47:23 PM 911 Views
I find this line particularly interesting. - 13/10/2010 12:13:18 AM 944 Views
Dunno. - 13/10/2010 12:56:56 AM 1037 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not. - 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM 947 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way - 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM 952 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though? - 13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM 935 Views
yes but the bank has a limited ability to collect - 13/10/2010 02:47:34 PM 853 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM* - 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM 434 Views
I'm curious how you reconcile that - 13/10/2010 09:47:59 PM 964 Views
Collateral - 19/10/2010 07:21:14 PM 1462 Views
I agree, what do you think is different? - 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM 961 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway. - 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM 1045 Views
OK what if you take it a step further - 13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM 1047 Views
Good question - 14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM 1010 Views
I have some questions about this issue. - 13/10/2010 08:14:37 AM 968 Views
how do those questions affect the morality of the situation? - 13/10/2010 03:20:14 PM 913 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay. - 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM 937 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank? - 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM 990 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do. - 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM 933 Views
it is the home fault that the banks have to be bailed out - 13/10/2010 03:49:37 PM 978 Views
I believe it immoral to do harm. - 13/10/2010 04:38:28 PM 1001 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage. - 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM 944 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here. - 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM 963 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM* - 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM 495 Views
You can garnish their wages. - 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM 944 Views
With parsley? - 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM 1020 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM* - 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM 481 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM* - 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM 559 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM* - 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM 429 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM* - 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM 450 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies. - 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM 915 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money? - 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM 967 Views
Yeah, I guess we are. - 14/10/2010 10:28:40 PM 996 Views
Re: - 14/10/2010 03:09:18 AM 967 Views
I am currently in that situation... - 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM 1070 Views
Re: I am currently in that situation... - 14/10/2010 05:49:24 PM 1280 Views
it is easy for me and others to be glib when it is just a theory *NM* - 14/10/2010 08:19:16 PM 435 Views

Reply to Message