Money Chandlers sued for debt megathread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
If Barb and Chris have direct deposit, and someone in the family has made arrangements with the bank to allow them to take over the house in return for no more mortgage payments, perhaps the tugboats have been building up in the bank with no one paying attention to it. Once the SS check has been cashed and deposited, it can probably be garnished. The defendant would have to prove that it's social security money to prevent them from doing that. With no one at the wheel, the credit card companies might end up recouping some money.
 
I know this has been repeated before, but man is Chris dumb with money. As much as he gets from the tugboat and weens, he could've solved his debt problems years ago. I know Bob tried to teach Chris some financial solvency, but he just didn't try hard enough. I know Chris won't learn it, but he will die penniless.
 
perhaps the tugboats have been building up in the bank with no one paying attention to it.
This was covered in the FAQ thread, when Chris first went to jail, his tugboat stops the second he was put in custody.

Government payouts don’t apply to you when you’re in jail, it’s designed to stop people from just going to jail to live for free for a few months while they allow government payouts to stackup in there bank account which could be accessed by 3rd parities like gangsters or loan sharks.
 
It’s also been covered that he continues to get SSDI payments until he’s convicted.
That seems like an amazingly exploitable system considering you could sit in jail for 8 years before being convicted (or not convicted)

If that's the case he'll actually be better off than he has in his life when he comes out, ain't that something. Getting some pussy literally solved all his problems, he was right the whole time
 
And Barb's? She's in a situation where her assets can be attached too.
Nah barbs still gets her state pension and any other SSDI she’s entitled too, getting your bussy breached by Chris isn’t gonna stop that.

But Chris brings in 0 dollars and it doesn’t stack up, as in, he won’t get any back pay from SSDI when out of jail.
 
That seems like an amazingly exploitable system considering you could sit in jail for 8 years before being convicted (or not convicted)

If that's the case he'll actually be better off than he has in his life when he comes out, ain't that something. Getting some pussy literally solved all his problems, he was right the whole time
Well his life would be much better if he wasn't gonna lose all unspent money to debt collectors and/or Barb expanding the hoard. It's pretty unlikely he was smart enough to lock out both parties (as in put it in an account exclusively for SSDI that Barb can't touch), so at least one of them will claim most if not all of the built up cash.
 
Nah barbs still gets her state pension and any other SSDI she’s entitled too, getting your bussy breached by Chris isn’t gonna stop that.
You missed my point...

Could credit lawsuits attach Barb's bank account if her caretakers have allowed tugboat checks to build up there for several months? The credit card company would just see a bank account with money in it. They wouldn't have any way of knowing that the money came from a tugboat.
 
It's no secret that Chris was stealing from his parents wallet and purse for years. Also, Chris has an exceptional view on money. He spends a lot and expects his parents to "foot the bill" one way or another because Chris thinks they should be obligated to do. Even by other manchildren standards, that very irresponsible (then again, responsibility/accountability has never been one of Chris' strong suits). It's one of the reasons why Chris is in the financial hole that he's in, and Barb's own money "management" didn't help either.

There was a kid I was in school with who accedentially got assigned an adult bank account, he had the same name as his dad and lived at the same address and where loaded, he got a credit card and was able to spend 20k before his dad caught on and was getting dept payment demands from accounts he didn't know he had - he was that rich he paid it off grounded his kid for a month and made them do more housework.

That kid grew up and knew his dad would cover his debts or at least thought he would until his dad ended up having his assets seased for fraud, in under 6 months he whent from driving a leased Porsh dining out and picking up the tab for people he wanted to show off too to going to the job center and signing on and having a credit score nearing zero and getting a minium wage job and housing credits and trying to become a Instagram influencer.

I just looked him up an he's showing off watches he's trying on at various jewellers and posing with cars that he's badly cropping out the sales signs on, that's what a rich kid ended up like - Chris wasn't rich or more than moderately comfortable and is carrying more debt than that in reality.

I know this has been repeated before, but man is Chris dumb with money. As much as he gets from the tugboat and weens, he could've solved his debt problems years ago. I know Bob tried to teach Chris some financial solvency, but he just didn't try hard enough. I know Chris won't learn it, but he will die penniless.

No Bob didn't he cared for Chris and knew he couldnt attain much so much like the fucker I mentioned above paid his debts for him and only gave him a minor punishment - If Bob was my dad (or me) I'd pay it off just to prevent damage to my kids financial record but I would recoup every penny and force Chris to get a job.

The kind of money Chris was starting to rack up in the early days indicated a bigger problem with money than just being lowly paid, I moved out with a GF at 17 and was working full time and studying - when I was 18 I fucked up my car and in my family we're good with gifts i.e. if I give you £500 I don't expect it back but if I borrow it I will pay it back kinda thing - I borrowed £500 off my dad for the parts to fix my Car and sacrificed every bit of expendable income I had to pay him back.

Chris didn't learn that a gift is one thing, but a loan is another he just thinks money happens to other people and he doesn't get enough of that luck or have a mental association between work and reward. I worked out in my first job what I was paid a hour after tax and every hour I made my phone play a alarm of the sound of £3.47 in coins being put into a savings jar and I always kept track of my spending and at the end of a day totted up how much I've spent to how much I've earned and saved. I did that very early on in my working life and it's payed for it's self and there has been a few experiments doing something simmilar that have proved that works.

If Bob told Chris up front, Son I will pay off this debt but you are going to pay me back as fast as you can and your going to get a job and keep it one way or another you are paying it off even if you have to sell off your toys an games we're getting that money back from you it would have had a serious impact on chris, especially if he was cut off from creature comforts till he paid it back.

And Barb's? She's in a situation where her assets can be attached too.

Barb get's a Private pension, a Widows pension and some other stuff, and Bob had a WW2 vet pension benifits (he was korea post WW2 occupation force but prior to the Korean war) and I think there is a lot of protection surrounding those kind of benifits my guess is from evidence about Chris just being able to help himself Barbs not as tight financially (not good certainly but not as bad as chris thought) as thought.

My personal guess from someone I know who is the widow of a WW2 vet with a POW enhancement, her own pension, and benifits she is getting around 2 - 3k a month, I'm in the UK but that number is based off a guy and his wife who are regulars on a forum I post on who declined all offers of support when the husband passed and she broke down why she was OK finanically and didn't need donations and asked for them to be given to a local charity her husband was a big member of. We bought them a mini digger tractor and planted a cherry orchard in his name and funded a lot of other works, and she loves sitting in Jacobs Grove.

This person lives in the same area as Barb, so the only reason I bring it up is her COL should be close if not identical.

Barb has a lot of things going on financially and always has, my guess is she was a Consumer darlin of the mide 80's going forward and thats someone who takes a lot of debt out and buys assets with the BIG loans that can be reposessed, and the bare minimums paid back each month on everything else meaning they pay far far far more than they borrowed. They are also whats called Tac on's i.e. here is this product insurance for £0.99 a month so if your toaster, CD player etc goes bang we fix it or replace it is sold as a forgotten money earner for the company.

They dont expect you to recall what 99p a month is for and it's on it's own an innocuous value so you wont try and cancel it, but will happily charge you forever for a toaster you bought for £10 in 2002, and I am guessing that is a small but significant drain on Barbs account (BTW Kiwi's audit your boomer;s accounts if you can, they all get ripped off with this crap in some way, my dad shit canned AOL in 97 but still had a service fee getting charged for 15 years until I told him to call them an get it back).
 
I guess I'm not explaining this clearly...

Attaching a regularly arriving check is different than attaching a bank account full of money. It's my understanding that if Chris cashed the tugboat check and kept the funds out of the bank account he was safe, but if he had the checks deposited into a bank account, the creditors could attach the money and the burden of proof would be on him to prove it came from an unattachable tugboat. In other words, the credit card companies could take the money and ask questions later.

If Barb (and maybe Chris) have checks coming in and no one is attending to keeping them away from being attached, a bank account full of the past several month's tugboats could be confiscated by the credit card company and they'd have to prove it was from tugboat checks to get it back.
 
I guess I'm not explaining this clearly...

Attaching a regularly arriving check is different than attaching a bank account full of money. It's my understanding that if Chris cashed the tugboat check and kept the funds out of the bank account he was safe, but if he had the checks deposited into a bank account, the creditors could attach the money and the burden of proof would be on him to prove it came from an unattachable tugboat. In other words, the credit card companies could take the money and ask questions later.

If Barb (and maybe Chris) have checks coming in and no one is attending to keeping them away from being attached, a bank account full of the past several month's tugboats could be confiscated by the credit card company and they'd have to prove it was from tugboat checks to get it back.
It is specifically Chris who is getting sued, so unless he and Barb have a shared bank account (which they obviously don't), her assets won't be touched. The other part was also discussed, and people much more qualified said that if the tugboat money is going into Chris' normal account and not a tugboat only one, it can be seized and it'd be up to Chris to say that it's SSDI and can't be taken.
 
The other part was also discussed, and people much more qualified said that if the tugboat money is going into Chris' normal account and not a tugboat only one, it can be seized and it'd be up to Chris to say that it's SSDI and can't be taken.
In theory debt collectors who know the funds they're levying on are SS are supposed to not do it. In practice, this is Portfolio Recovery Associates, one of the scummiest operations in the biz that is huge. Unlike some of the shittier tiny debt racketeers who just change names and resurface under another corporation when they get caught, PRA stays just within the boundaries that don't get them fined (too much) or shut down.

I have no doubts they'd "accidentally" levy on tard bucks then play innocent if they got called out on it.
 
You missed my point...

Could credit lawsuits attach Barb's bank account if her caretakers have allowed tugboat checks to build up there for several months? The credit card company would just see a bank account with money in it. They wouldn't have any way of knowing that the money came from a tugboat.
One speculation is, in order to get these other lines of credit, both Barb and Chris resorted to credit fraud by misrepresenting their incomes. Chris or Barb could easily put down "Oh yeah, I bring in $1300 from my job" on the applications. If they did that, then naturally the credit companies would be trying to get their money. I highly doubt if they put down their only sources of income being income that can't be garnished would have gotten them even more credit after their history.
 
Back
Top Bottom