Governor Mark Sanford inexplicably vetoed the exemption bill that I discussed here, that received wide and bipartisan support in both houses of the General Assembly.
Call your representatives today, please, and express your support for this law, asking them to override the governor’s veto. This is urgent.
And remember this, when you make your decision about who should next hold the governor’s position.
Here’s a great piece on how to save some money on your family’s weekly grocery bills.
With rising prices and supply issues — prompting food warehouse stores like Costco to ration rice purchases per customer — people need to do whatever they can to keep food costs down. This article follows a Conway woman (Horry County, SC) in her grocery shopping excursion. The bottom line for this mother of nine (yes, nine!) children? Seventy-two bucks and change.
And that’s twelve dollars more than she usually spends!
Some suggestions from the article and from my own personal experience:
Check the article for the full list!
It’s do or die time.
That’s what it looks like at the SC General Assembly this week, as the payday industry gears up for a Thursday hearing before a House subcommittee on a Senate bill that would come very close to putting a stop to the payday industry’s free ride thus far.
The bill (which, in my opinion, fails only in the fact that it stopped short of banning this industry) would limit the number of loans a South Carolinian could have outstanding at one time, put the onus on the lender to enforce that rule, and requires a seven-day “cooling off” period between loans.
As my law school buddy and co-teaching assistant (Professor Haggard’s ‘95-’96 Legal Writing class shout-out!) Senator Vincent Sheheen (D-Kershaw) recognized last year when he and Senator John Hawkins filed a class action suit against Advance America, these lenders know full well that their products are insidiously addictive. That’s why they aim those loans at low-income and minority citizens. They set up shop, not in the tony shopping centers that cater to nearby gated communities, but in the traditionally low-income portions of our nation’s cities and towns.
They wormed their way into utility offices, offering easy money to those who were desperate to keep the power on in their homes, and next to cable companies and grocery stores for similar reasons: everyone uses them, and usually it’s the low-income, lower middle class neighbors who struggle with these basic bills (a fact which may, interestingly, be changing rapidly in this day and age of $3.99 gas and rice rationing at the local Sam’s club).
When customers predictably can’t keep up with the crushing avalanche of bank drafts, they let loose collection tactics that include threats of imminent arrest and criminal prosecution, disclosure of the customer’s “status” as a “deadbeat” to his or her employers, family, and friends, and other clearly unlawful activity.
Side note: In South Carolina, such tactics are and remain unlawful thanks to a provision in the state’s Consumer Protection Code which extends similar protections to those offered in the federal FDCPA legislation, which only applies to third party collectors, to original creditors as well. But many states don’t have that kind of protection. And even though we do have the benefit of that rule, it doesn’t stop the overreaching and the harassment — it just gives citizens a means of recourse. However, most citizens who are impacted by this kind of behavior will never seek redress.
So what’s the solution? Senator Sheheen and his colleagues in the Senate have proffered a decent first step. The industry must not be allowed to intimidate the House committee members now with accusations of “conflict of interest.” There is no conflict of interest; the allegations are misleading and play to the public’s general misunderstanding of the role of a lawyer in a legal action — the lawyer is NOT a party to the suit he brings, though some would like to blame the legal profession for the fact that cases get brought. It’s a little like blaming the doctor who treats the patient for the fact of the car accident that brought the patient to the ER in the first place.
Contact your House representatives to express your support for this bill, which you can read in full here.
To get more information on how to contact your reps (and to find out who they are), visit this page from the General Assembly’s website.
Believe it or not, the IRS loses $37 million each year on private debt collectors paid to dun citizens for tax debt.
Appallingly, these aren’t even the very wealthy tax scofflaws being hunted by the expensive collection agencies:
After years of lobbying by the private collection industry, the Republican-controlled Congress created the program in 2004. The goal was to use collection agencies to close the relatively easy cases the IRS said it did not have the staff to handle: instances in which the taxpayer is not disputing the debt and in which the amount owed is relatively modest.
The article goes on to state the program’s supporters expect it to break even by 2010.
How nice for them.
I don’t know about you, but when I read something like this, the irony is too thick to permit genuine laughter.
The following email press release just came across my desk. I’m printing it in its entirety because I think it’s important everyone hears about this, without delay or commentary from me:
p>Washington, DC - More than 15 national organizations (listed below) issued the following joint statement in response to the Foreclosure Prevention Act and its failure to include bankruptcy measures:
“The Senate Housing package misses the single most significant step needed to help the 20,000 American families with subprime loans that are losing their homes each week through foreclosure: the bankruptcy amendment.
We are left with a bill loaded with special considerations for mortgage companies and builders that does very little for homeowners who were sold predatory loans by mortgage lenders.
Any final bill hammered out between the U.S. House and Senate that is a serious effort to stem the foreclosure crisis must include meaningful relief to families to modify their mortgage in bankruptcy. Bankruptcy relief will stabilize communities, keep more than half a million families in their homes and provide lenders at least as much income as they would receive through foreclosure.
As the Senate bill stands, we will continue to see foreclosures tear down communities and wipe out the most important source of financial security that most Americans have.
We are encouraged that there is recognition that the bill under consideration by the U.S. Senate today is only part of the solution. Without bankruptcy relief, Congress will be condemning hundreds of thousands of American families this year to losing their homes.
The signatories to the above press release were identified as:
This post at Bankruptcy Law Network by Kent Anderson, Oregon bankruptcy attorney, is of special import today. Briefly:
April 1, 2008, is the last day for citizen comment on an important regulation! The date may be full of irony but this deadline is no joke. The US Trustee has submitted a proposed rule that includes specific requirements for the credit counseling “briefing” required of all individual debtors by 11 USC §109(h)(1). … The public comment period ends April 1, 2008. The proposed regulation created by the US Trustee can be found in a PDF on their web site. The US Trustee description of the briefing required by Congress is set forth in the definition in §58.12(a)(12).
Among other “liberties” taken by the US Trustee in drafting this regulation is the time period required for the credit counseling briefing. By UST definition, the briefing on average is to take “at least 60 minutes”. Where is that requirement found in the statute?
To comment, just visit the website set up for receipt of comments on proposed regulations. Reference “Docket No. EOUST 102″ when you submit your comment.
Commenting on regulations, like jury service, is your civic duty as well as a right!
From Fortune comes this short but fascinating video, featuring a former Ameriquest worker talking about just how his coworkers and he were instructed to talk borrowers into loans they couldn’t afford.
Every time I hear someone blame the borrowers in this subprime scandal, I have to chuckle a little. I have no doubt that some borrowers were, in fact, less than diligent in their “due diligence” — some, no doubt, even went so far as to become bad actors themselves.
But I do remain convinced that’s not the main story to tell in this mess. Case in point: this article from CNNMoney that asserts “More troubled borrowers getting left behind.” These borrowers were misled by brokers and other players, and when they try to renegotiate now, they’re facing failure in large numbers.
Where’s the help for these borrowers? Most can only save their homes through filing bankruptcy. Appropriate legislation is now more important than ever.
This is another post in our ongoing series “Back to Basics: Bankruptcy.” This post examines credit issues in the context of bankruptcy.
I hear many objections to bankruptcy from people who really ought to be considering it as an option, but by far one of the most frequently cited objections is this: “I don’t want my credit to be ruined.”
Let’s look at the facts, and try to separate them from the myths:
Fact: An entire subspecialty of the credit industry exists solely to extend credit to bankruptcy debtors. In fact, even for non-subprime lenders you may be a more attractive credit risk after filing bankruptcy (especially Chapter 7, which is a quicker process than Chapter 13 plans)
Fact: Credit scores do generally take an initial hit upon filing. However, an interesting thing then happens: typically, within a year, filers find that their credit scores have actually risen. (See this report from SmartMoney, “Declaring Bankruptcy Can Improve Your Credit Score.”)
Fact: This one’s a bit more complex to address. Generally speaking, folks who should be considering filing for bankruptcy have a skewed sense of the real state of their credit — typically overstating their credit score as much as 100 points. (Obviously, this is only true for folks who haven’t checked their actual scores — and those in distress who have checked their scores are generally very surprised.) The real hit to credit, then, could well be “continuing to do what hasn’t been working” — i.e., delaying the inevitable.
Bottom line: By all means negotiate with your creditors if you haven’t already, and if you have sufficient income to sustain some sort of payment plan. Then, if it doesn’t work, don’t hesitate to take the next step.
Law Office of Sheryl Schelin
730 Main Street, #358
North Myrtle Beach, SC 29582
Telephone: 843.283.4840
Fax: 866.641.2930
.... Read More »
Filed In: 
RSS Feed
Valid XHTML
Design by: