T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
535.1 | | BROKE::SHAH | Amitabh "Drink DECAF: Commit Sacrilege" | Wed Jul 21 1993 09:55 | 11 |
| Re. .0
Your nodename suggests that you are in Canada, so the laws may be
different there than in the US.
My question is that why wouldn't the govt (or for that matter any
creditor) put their claim on the money that she would get from the
sale of the house? Even if she were to pass the amount to her son
as a gift, I think there might be sufficient grounds for a tax court
to overturn the gift and let the govt. get access to the money.
|
535.2 | this deal feels all wrong to me | CADSYS::HECTOR::RICHARDSON | | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:15 | 4 |
| I wouldn't have anything to do with this deal! The poor woman needs:
1) a bankruptcy social worker, and 2) a different lawyer.
/Charlotte
|
535.3 | Not after her yet! | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:31 | 14 |
| re: .1
The government isn't after her yet...but we know it's just a matter
of time. Which is why we are trying to plan this ahead of time...
If she sold her house, declared bankruptcy, THEN if the gov't came
after her, they would have no recourse.
I doubt it would be legal for them to go after the gift she already
gave away.
and yes...I am in LA BELLE PROVINCE!
|
535.4 | Why??? | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:33 | 6 |
| re: .2
Thank you for your opinion, however it would be much more helpful
if you could explain your position!
This is exactly what i need...the pros & cons
|
535.5 | you think the govt is that stupid? | BROKE::SHAH | Amitabh "Drink DECAF: Commit Sacrilege" | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:44 | 19 |
| Re. .3
> If she sold her house, declared bankruptcy, THEN if the gov't came
> after her, they would have no recourse.
> I doubt it would be legal for them to go after the gift she already
> gave away.
As you said in .0, she has not paid the taxes in 5 years. When the
govt. does go after her, they are going to look at her financial
transactions starting with at least those 5 years, possibly even
before. If they can show that the gift was given with a mal-intent,
and I would think that they would have very good reasons for showing
that, it is possible to get the gift annulled.
But then, I'm far from being a tax lawyer.
I do recommend that you advise her to cancel all her credit cards
pronto. She deserves no "credit" for being so irresponsible.
|
535.6 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 21 1993 11:24 | 17 |
|
To go from .5 million to nothing in 10 years, not pay any taxes,
and run up credit card bills, is not just bad management, but looks
irresponsible.
I would not get any of your, or her, finances in any way tied up
together, either house, or gaurantor, or gift......nothing.
Get a lawyer who will tackle her problems, without involving putting
your name to anything.
If you make a connection, you bet your bottom dollar the tax men and
creditors will follow it - and even if you can hide some of her money
this way (which I doubt) it may cost you many $ and grey hairs to
proove it in court.
Heather
|
535.7 | Quick to judge... | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 11:21 | 13 |
| "she deserves no credit for being that irresponsible"
interesting opinion...but let's not make judgements when have no facts!
You would not be so quick to judge if you knew her background.
but regardless...
Why make it a formal 'gift'. Why say she gave the money away at
all? She could have lost it, ate it, spent it, etc...
Then surely the government couldn't go after her...go after who?
Laura
|
535.8 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 21 1993 11:37 | 21 |
|
> Then surely the government couldn't go after her...go after who?
In the UK they would.
They would trace the money she spent, they can look through bank
accounts, or anything else they want to trace, if she declares
bankruptcy.
The recievers duty is to ensure the creditors get as much of the
money as they can.
Just look what they are doing with Maxwell, tracing his private funds
through every proffessional loophole he tried, including Lichtenstein.
The Lloyds names would dearly love to put their assets in other peoples
names. ie wives, children etc., but to do that would be classed as fraud
I would also consult a criminal lawyer on whether this would
consitute fraud in Canada if/when you were discovered.
Heather
|
535.9 | Sorry... | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 11:38 | 9 |
| re: .07
I would like to aplogize to being defensive. I know she is very
irresponsible. I don't know what makes me want to defend her.
Her situation is very grave...and I really need help.
Sorry, and thank you
Laura
|
535.10 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 21 1993 11:53 | 11 |
|
Laura,
Help her by giving her moral support, helping her get a decent lawyer,
and helping her pick up the pieces.
But don't put your name to a method that looks to me as if you're
trying to defraud the creditors, you could end up in serious trouble
which will be of no help to anyone.
Heather
|
535.11 | Might also want your own lawyer... | TLE::JBISHOP | | Wed Jul 21 1993 12:00 | 66 |
| Short answer: don't do it!
Longer answer:
1. Are you willing to be a criminal?
Leaving aside the question of whether the revenue agents would
find the "gift", you'll have to ask yourself whether you are
willing to lie (probably at some point under legal compulsion
to tell the truth, e.g. on a tax return or in court). I can
assure you that governments have no sense of humor about taxes
or purjury.
2. Transfers are not likely to be sucessful
It's pretty clear that you could probably transfer small amounts
under the table (e.g. she buys you dinner at a fancy restaurant,
buys you magazine subscriptions, hands over small amounts of
cash). Any sudden wealth on your part will look suspicious. In
the US, banks and other institutions are obligated to report
transactions over a certain amount (was $10,000 and may have
changed downward recently)--but that doesn't mean that the banks
are guaranteed not to report transactions under that amount:
it might be easier for them just to send a tape with everything
on it. So any substantial transfers are possibly visible.
Just exactly how was the house to be put in your name, according
to the lawyer? Lawyers rarely advise criminal actions, so this
one may have had something in particular in mind.
3. You can't cancel the tax owed, I bet
In the US, bankruptcy does NOT cancel taxes owed--I don't know
the Canadian law, but I'd be surprised if it were different.
So bankruptcy would only cancel the credit-card dept.
4. What about the post-event situation?
With $25,000 you can't buy much of a house, unless you also
get a loan and pay interest. What kind of income does this
person have to pay support and mortgage with?
Even if you already owned a small house and she were to live
in it, in the US you'd have to charge rent or count the foregone
rent as a gift, possibly liable to gift taxes (though here there
is an exclusion). How would this work for you?
5. Bad luck may not exist, but somehow it acts as though it's
contagious when people in trouble are involved. I'd keep a
big distance between my financial affairs and those of a person
in this kind of trouble.
Conclusion:
I agree with the noter who said to get bankruptcy experts (both legal
and social) involved. You might also want to determine ahead of time
how involved you want to be (pick a dollar amount, and figure out
when you would cut your losses).
Question:
What's a "common mother-in-law"? Do you mean that this is your
father's common-law wife, but not your mother?
-John Bishop
|
535.12 | Common mother-in-law | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 12:03 | 10 |
| what's a 'common mother-in-law'?
well...it's my boyfriend's mother. We aren't married, but have been
living together for so many years that the law considers us so.
Since my boyfriend and I are 'common-law married', I consider his
mom my 'common mother-in-law'!
Although, I usually just call her Betty!
Laura
|
535.13 | | CSC32::S_MAUFE | this space for rent | Wed Jul 21 1993 12:57 | 8 |
|
In the US we have a freehold concept, basically means in bankruptcy
they can't take the primary residence, and they have to leave you with
$30k or so.
Perhaps the same applies in Canada?
Simon
|
535.14 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jul 21 1993 13:05 | 11 |
| > In the US we have a freehold concept, basically means in bankruptcy
> they can't take the primary residence, and they have to leave you with
> $30k or so.
>
> Perhaps the same applies in Canada?
In that case, there would be no reason to put the house in anyone elses
name?
Heather
|
535.15 | Clarification | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 13:03 | 11 |
| Thanks for the input everyone.
I wanted to clarify, that the lawyer did not say to buy another home
and put it in someone else's name. Rather he said to spend the
25,000.00 or so left and THEN file for bankruptcy.
But then she would have nothing. It's us that thought it would
be better to put the 25,000.00 into land or something, rather
than spending it with nothing to show.
Laura
|
535.16 | she needs expert help to unsnarl this | CADSYS::HECTOR::RICHARDSON | | Wed Jul 21 1993 13:40 | 17 |
| re .15
Good! Then I guess you do not need another lawyer after all. But she
definitely does need a professional to help unsnarl her finances, work
out repayment plans for all the money she owes, etc. As someone
already said, the first step should be for her to destroy her credit
cards - some people are just unable to handle the allure of credit and
get in way over their heads. In my opinion, it wouldn't be a good idea
for you to co-sign loans for her, or otherwise tangle your finances
with hers. You could end up not only straining the relationship you
have with her (obviously) but also being liable for some of her debts,
which could be very expensive. I think the best thing you could do to
help, since you are obviously very concerned about the situation, is to
hire a professional bankruptcy councilor for her. Your bank would be a
good place to start looking for a recommendation for someone.
/Charlotte
|
535.17 | messed up! | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 14:34 | 13 |
| Well...I suppose our goal is to get out of this mess but at the
same time paying the creditors as little as possible (like-none!)
As honesty isn't my main concern, at the same time, I don't want
to engage in any seriously criminal bahaviour either!
From all the wonderful information I've received...I've decided
a professional is the way to go. I didn't even know they are
bankruptcy councillors!!!
Please continue and give me your 2 cents worth.
Laura
|
535.18 | Discretion; common-law | TLE::JBISHOP | | Wed Jul 21 1993 15:25 | 14 |
| If honesty wasn't a concern for me, the first lie I would tell
would be one of omission--I wouldn't broadcast my lack of concern
for honesty in a forum like this. (But why do you feel that people
who sold this woman goods and services don't deserve to be paid?
How would you feel if Digital went bankrupt and stiffed you a
week's pay?)
In the US, it's my understanding that mere cohabitation does not
create a common-law marriage: you have to present yourselves as
married as well. Here you can cohabit for decades and still not
be married, if you are careful to never accept mail for Mrs. <husband's
name>, etc.
-John Bishop
|
535.19 | NOT smart! | KAOOA::LBEATTIE | | Wed Jul 21 1993 16:11 | 13 |
| It is different in Canada, unfortunately.
After living together for 1 year in the province of Quebec, you
are considered common-law. Digital recognizes this, and David
has access to all my benefits.
Honesty...you're right...probably NOT a smart thing to broadcast!
I suppose the reason (justifiable or not) that I really don't
care about whether nor not Visa and the like get their money is
that i feel wrong-done-by. I believe there is no justice in this
world, and so, why would I try to ensure it for others?
But this is highly controversial stuff. (as are most of my views!)
Laura
|
535.20 | Careful... Overnight may get you married in some states | SSDEVO::RMCLEAN | | Wed Jul 21 1993 17:45 | 7 |
| Re .18
Careful... It depends upon the state as to when you are considered married.
In some states it is overnight!!!
Re .14 I believe that the law here in the US is the Homestead act. It
does permit some value of the home to be protected from bankrupcy.
|
535.21 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Thu Jul 22 1993 05:36 | 11 |
|
I should think hard about whether you want to do things honestly or not,
there are paybacks - like court.
There are legal ways of doing things, and illegal ways of doing things.
A bankcruptcy lawyer will be able to tell you which is which.
You can then make your decision, based on the possible penalties.
Heather
|
535.22 | Innocent help can get you in big trouble | PIPE::DODGE | | Thu Jul 22 1993 15:26 | 36 |
| Laura,
Situations like this one are very sticky. I had a similar
situation with my own father. He was in desparate need of money to
pay creditors, and to avoid bankruptcy. He had large tracts of land
that he couldn't quickly sell. I agreed to buy a couple of house lots
from him as a way to get cash to him quickly, and provide something
of tangible value to me in case he went totally bankrupt.
This sounds reasonable enough doesn't it. Imagine my surprise
when 3 months later a Sheriff shows up on my doorstep with a court
summons for me and my wife. I was shocked. It seems the creditors
sued my parents, for obvious reasons, and sued my wife and I for what
they considered to be an "insider transaction at less than fair market
value". They viewed this transaction as a way to transfer assets and
avoid creditors.
It took me two years and $15,000 of bills from lawyers and real
estate consultants, and land surveyors to get out of this mess. This
for something that I thought was completely above board and legal.
My advice to you is not to involve your finances in any way with
your mother-in-laws. Offer moral support, offer to pay for a
bankruptcy lawyer. Save up some money to give her AFTER the bankruptcy
is complete. Any money given to her now goes right down the toilet,
and after bankruptcy she will still have nothing and need your help.
It is tempting to jump in and help out, but the time to do it is
after the slate is clean and she really needs your help. The most
difficult aspect of all of this may be relations with your "boyfriend".
Your logical advice may fall on deaf ears to your boyfriend and
mother-in-law. This is a very emotional situation between family
members. Try to be helpful and supportive, but hold back the money
as long as possible. A year from now you will be glad you did, and
so will your mother-in-law.
|
535.23 | | AOSG::GILLETT | But that trick never works! | Mon Jul 26 1993 10:30 | 81 |
| A sticky situation indeed...you asked for people's 2 cents worth, so
here's mine:
1. The last thing you want to do is advance money, comingle assets,
or otherwise be legally bound to this situation. In my view, the
last thing that most people in financial crisis need is more money -
especially if the first half million was "frittered away." Not
knowing all the details I'm not saying this is what happened, but
in general, diving in with cash, or other financial things can
be a very bad idea.
2. You need to understand the bankruptcy laws in your state/province.
In the US, bankruptcy laws vary widely from state-to-state. In
general, however, there are some common elements: you usually
can't be forced out of your own home, and you cannot get relief from
taxes due the Infernal Revenue Monster.
3. In the states, doing something like "spending the last $25,000 and
then going bankrupt" could be seen as fraudulent by the bankruptcy
people. When you say this, do you mean that the solicitor is
suggesting that she spend it on stuff, or that she use it to pay
down taxes and the like? Here in the US, if she were to spend that
money and then try to leave creditors high and dry the courts may
hold that the bankruptcy is an attempt to defraud - this would deny
her protection from creditors, and could possibly clear the gundecks
for various civil and criminal actions to be brought.
4. Note that in the States it is difficult, if not impossible, to seize
a dwelling in a bankruptcy action. However, the tax people seem to
have no qualms about seizing assets like this and auctioning them
off to pay off the taxes.
I'd suggest the following scnario. Of course, I'm just a software engineer,
so anything you read here should be thoroughly discussed with your lawyer:
1. The taxes must be paid. It would be far better to hire an accountant
with a sharp pencil to gronk the numbers and find out what's owed. She
can then get a tax attorney to negotiate with the revenue services to
lay out a battle plan for repayment. In the States, the IRS hates it
when you try to stiff 'em, but they can be reasonable when approached
with an intelligent plan by a taxpayer who they decide is making a good
faith effort to pay her obligations.
2. In the US, there are various types of bankruptcy filings, ranging from
various debt restructuring schemes to all out liquidation of assets.
Perhaps in Canada there is a way of filing for protection from creditors.
This affords time and protections to work out plans to pay the debts.
Note that this is not just a reprieve - protection from creditors keeps
creditors from proceeding against you for some finite period of time
during which you can work out plans to repay debts.
3. The credit cards, needless to say, should be cut up post haste.
4. Is the house owned free and clear? If so, then it seems that the
problem is pretty basic: control spending, eliminate tax obligations
as quickly as possible, and then work on debt service elimination.
If she is working, this can be a reasonably simple (though quite
painful...) thing: a good credit counseling service can help her
work out payment plans with her creditors, and some can even do things
like receive her paycheck directly and divy it up. In the meantime,
she can be taught how to manage her money more intelligently.
Money management is something that is learned and takes time to do well.
On the other hand, most situations caused by less than astute judgement
can be worked out over time.
Full-blown bankrupcty (liquidation of assets and release from debt) looks
very good when you're desperate - and money problems breed desperation.
But the downside consequences can be grave (and not just financial when
you consider issues like self-esteem and the like...). Working out a
battle plan with the IRS, and with creditors, and then finding people to
help implement the plan has a desirable effect in that it eliminates
the desperation, allows the individual to repay their debts with a certain
amount of dignity, and offers the opportunity to learn how to avoid having
it happen again.
Good luck....
./chris
|
535.24 | Money mag article | USOPS::TWELLS | Cakes useless if you can't eat it too! | Tue Jul 27 1993 05:16 | 7 |
|
There's a good article in this month's Money magazine about
bankruptcy and how it's being abused. I believe it mentions
several of the aspects you mentioned, but I only skimmed the
article. Might want to check it out though.
Tim
|
535.25 | | AIMHI::COOLE | | Tue Jul 27 1993 18:44 | 15 |
| Laura,
my 2 cents worth, in the states if you file bankruptcy the credit
card debt goes away, its considered an ensecured loan that does not
have to be paid back. Taxes have to be paid, here is were your mother-
in-law must get an attorney's help. Its your mother-in-law situation
just be supportive.
one thought on the credit cards is to have your mother-in-law ask
them to suspend the card and to set up a payment plan requesting that
the balance be paid off with no interest charges, this can be done,
the companies that issue the cards do not want her to file bankruptcy.
Dave
|
535.26 | offer to compromise | SUBWAY::DAVIDSON | On a clean disk you can seek forever | Tue Aug 03 1993 14:51 | 12 |
| Hi Laura,
I used to work summers for my dad who is a tax cpa. Here in the
states there is something called "an offer to compromise". This
allows tax payers who are unlikely to ever be able to pay their
taxes relief from their tax burden. In the past, this offer was
usually reserved for out of work, older people.
Currently, the IRS has streamlined this process and, seems to be
broadening it's application here in the US (mostly for out of work
people) Perhaps there is an analgous rule in Canada.
good luck, jeff
|
535.27 | don't get it | CSC32::K_BOUCHARD | | Thu Aug 26 1993 19:18 | 5 |
| I'm unclear as to why the basenoter thinks that the creditors don't
deserve to get re-paid. This concept should be abhorrent even to
someone who believes there is "no justice in the world"
Ken
|
535.28 | Another Financial mess | ELYSEE::ZIMAN | | Sun Oct 24 1993 15:40 | 61 |
| This note is related to this topic so put here instead of a new
note.
I just found out that my best friend (known all my life)
and her husband are saddled with large creditcard debt.
It is his 2nd marriage. It turns out that the majority of
the debt is from his first wife, who ran up creditcard
bills of over $30000) He has been paying it off for over
7 years and more than $20000 remains. He has his own
business (Sells insurance plans to corporations) and
his cashflow is uneven. MY friend teaches, partime.
They usually only pay minimum payment (around $500/month)
The debth is on 7 cards, 10000 on 3 cards at 19.8%
$6000 on 3 cards at 11.8 percent, and 4500 on 1 card ant 9.9%.
He tells me he has taken on new cards at lower rates when
possible. In addition, he is not maxed out on the debt on
these cards and uses difference from what he owes and his credit
for cash flow on his business.
I found out about this when I innocently asked her about buying
a house (which I know she has always wanted) and it all came out.
SHe didn't even know the full extent of the debt until
we added up all 7 card statements. She said that she
has considered it his debt, since it was before they were married.
but says that it hinders them in doing anything.
They have never missed a payment but they are spending what
they bring in each month (and if it is a slow month, he
borrows fromt he creditcard until next month) He tells me
that he has always been able to pay back his loans when
his clients pay.
So now the questions. What is the best way to help them out.
At this rate, they will never get out of debt as the creditcard
debt is a millstone around their neck.
I was considering helping them out with a debt consolidation loan
bringing their balance on cards to 0, with stipulation that
they both go to credit counseling, and that they keep only
the 1 card and show that it has a balance of 0 each month.
Pay off would be over 4 years.
Does anyone have opinions on this? risks? way to structure contract
etc.
2) What would be necassary for them to get a debt consolidation loan
from a bank? and what interest rates? If this wasn't too high
then I would think it would be the preferred choice in case
anything went wrong.
3)Any other suggestions on best advice I can give them to get
out of this situation?
I would really like to help her if I can.
many thanks
-lz
|
535.29 | | VMSDEV::HAMMOND | Charlie Hammond -- ZKO3-04/S23 -- dtn 381-2684 | Mon Oct 25 1993 09:34 | 35 |
| It would be interesting to know if this $30K was or wasn't
considered in this man's divorce settlement with his first wife,
and if not, why not. Interesting, but beside the point.
So far as I know there are only two ways to pay of debt more
quickly. (1) Lower the interest rate or (2) make larger payments.
Check with banks and finance companies. Expect to get more "NO"
answers than "YES", but some effort should make it possible to
beat 19.8%.
MAX OUT the 9.9 and 11.8% cards to reduce the amount on the 19.8%
cards. Will these lower rate cards increase their limits? This
could represent significant savings -- ~$80/month! Don't cut the
payment, but use the savings to pay more on the principal.
Pay more than the minimum balance, even if it means giving up or
cutting back on some discretionary expenses. (Make the old car run
another year; vacation locally; eat out less often; make do
without new clothes; etc.) Set some dollar amount in excess of the
current minimum. Pay at least that amount every month. Keep the
payment UP even as the minimum goes down.
Put the business borrowing on a separate card or cards and keep
that/those payments separate so they can know their position.
Based on the financial conditions I infer from your note, your
friend and her husband should be able to manage a $20K debt. But
making minimum payments and not even knowing the total amount of
debt is NOT management! In fact, it sounds like not knowing the
full extent of this problem is a big part of the problem. Make it
obvious and keep it clear. Set up a paper or PC spreadsheet to
track the debt and their progress in paying it off. Re-check the
balance every month. Seeing it come down each month will make them
feel better.
|
535.30 | You can do the phone search | TLE::JBISHOP | | Mon Oct 25 1993 09:45 | 16 |
| I'd suggest you limit your help to finding out how to do a
consolidation--don't co-sign or lend money. People who mix
friendship and business often lose both.
Your best input is in helping them understand what their
situation is and how to get out. I don't know whether there
are organizations to help where you are, but lots of areas have
no-fee help for people in credit trouble--a few phone calls to
the local social services might be helpful.
One other issue they'll have to work on is whether this is the
husband's problem alone, or also the wife's: she may resent paying
off the previous wife's debts. They should discuss this (privately),
but you should probably bring it up.
-John Bishop
|
535.31 | | CPDW::ROSCH | | Mon Oct 25 1993 09:49 | 3 |
| Depending on their age one option is to file for bankruptcy. I say
depending on their age because if they are young enough they can
rebuild their credit and get a house eventually.
|
535.32 | | ELYSEE::ZIMAN | | Mon Oct 25 1993 10:42 | 22 |
| Thanks for the replies. They are in Albany New York. I agree
with the previous who say that it is not management. One thing
that I will do regardless if I give a loan is to give them
a copy of quicken, and show them how to use it. The reason my friend
didn't know the debt is interesting...I think it may have to do with
the fact it is from the previous marriage and so there may be some
resentment.
I also like having the suggestion of a card just for the business to keep
track of expenses. Does anyone know someone who has done a debt
consolidation loan, and what the banks looked for.
It is hard for me to imagine owing this on credit cards. I've read
stories about this in the paper...it is a dirty little secret for many.
To make matters worse, they are constantly sent more and more
applications for cards. I also worry about losing the friendship
but if I gave a loan would have to be prepared to look at it
as I do investing in the stock market..be prepared to lose it.
They have 2 little kids 1 year and 2.5 so the problem will only get
worse as the kids get older and expenses increase.
|
535.33 | Consolidate! | KOALA::BOUCHARD | The enemy is wise | Mon Oct 25 1993 11:21 | 14 |
| I had a SO in a similar problem; even though she worked for a bank we
weren't able to get her a debt consolidation loan at below 15% or so --
and this is for somebody with a spotless credit history, despite 10K or
so in debts.
Beyond requiring 15% interest they only required that they be permitted
to pay off the credit cards themselves; i.e. rather than give her 10K
she brought in 10K in credit card bills which the bank payed with the
loan proceeds.
It was a very good step to consolidate all of this into one loan,
however. Not only did it hammer home just how much was owed, but it
provided a means to actually see progress as each payment lowered the
outstanding debt.
|
535.34 | Raise revenue, lower expenses | AMCUCS::HALEY | eschew obfuscation | Tue Dec 07 1993 21:23 | 26 |
| I know this is an old note, but...
According to a recent articleout here, this is more common than I thought.
It had some interesting points.
Most people in a shape like this break their current spending into 3 areas,
discretionary, variable and fixed and then focus on the variable (food,
gas, clothes...) and discretionary ( vacations, eating out, parties, ...).
The article pointed out that there are actually no fixed costs and that
most of the money is spent on rent, taxes, utilities, food, and the like.
Have they considered moving into a very small apartment? Eating like
students a few nights a week? Not dining out more than once a month?
Budgeting all expenses and then staying within it? There should be
penalties and rewards built in, but the totals in the budget need to be
very small.
Since he seems to be in a business where more work can lead to more pay
then looking at increasing his effectiveness can increase revenue. Do
either of them have a second job? He is making the necessary 50-75 cold
calls a week to build the business?
I would look at getting them in touch with a very experience credit
councilor more than throwing more money at the problem.
matt
|
535.35 | Be careful if you lend to a friend | MARVA2::BUCHMAN | UNIX refugee in a VMS world | Mon Dec 20 1993 18:06 | 16 |
| If your friends need a SMALL loan (< $100) to buy necessities, you
might spring for that. But be very hesitant to lend a significant
amount to a friend with debts. I loaned about $1000 to a younger friend
not long after he graduated, when he had already accumulated a couple
thousand in credit card debts, to help him meet some bills which were
behind. He assured me that his job (a decent sales job) would pay
enough for him to pay me back over the course of a year. Five years
later, I'm still waiting, and have since learned that he has similar
loans from his brother and father in addition to his more public debt.
Rescuing someone in that situation might just teach them that they will
be rescued, instead of teaching them to be fiscally responsible.
That's an exception: most of the time, friends I lend to (or borrow
from) repay/are repaid promptly.
|