Originally posted by kia027
View Post
And this is one of the reasons why.........
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Originally posted by WitchyOoman View PostHonestly, while I feel for her loss, the law states that she is, in fact, responsible for the repayment for the loan. Furthermore, it stated this in the loan papers she supposedly READ before SIGNING. "Fairness" doesn't enter into this at all; this is strictly law... Justice is what it's all about, and justice demands that the woman repay the money that she and her son together borrowed. I really hate to put it so harshly... but that's the legality of the situation.If you don't fight for what you deserve, you deserve what you get.
We are > Fossil Fuels --- Bill McKibben 350.org
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by kia027 View PostI feel the same way. That is why I had suggested that if a percentage of the 197,103 people who signed the petition gave a dollar, it would be repaid.
The problem is that it's easy to get people to click on (or sign) a petition. Two seconds and done.
But get them each to give up a dollar??? Never gonna happen! People don't care that much. smh :-x
Comment
-
-
thanks for the explanation Witchy. I'd only ever heard the term 'co-sign' as it relates to Americans, and while the word may be self explanatory, mi neva badda fi go look it up. I did think it was similar to being a 'guarantor', which is the term used in Canada when you're putting on paper that you will assume liability for a loan.
I have been a guarantor. I have had someone be a guarantor for me. I do agree that it's not a position to enter lightly, but I will say it for the third and last time - I would be a guarantor for my son especially as it relates to his education. Still can't see the problem with doing that...
Comment
-
ads
Collapse
Comment