Connect with us

News

Divorced Americans Are Indebted To Their “Happily Ever After”

Published

on

Debt.com/MoneyWise.com surveyed nearly 800 divorcees to find that most are $5,000 or more in debt as a result of their divorce.

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla., Feb. 5, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Everyone knows divorce is costly, but a new survey reveals that debt follows divorce long after it’s final.

It’s the season for love, but Debt.com and Moneywise.com partnered to ask Americans how divorce and money mix. After surveying nearly 800 divorcees, we’ve determined that debt and financial disagreements certainly lead to unhappiness in marriage – and adds to divorce rates, credit scores drop and money debt is added to everyone’s bottom line.

Debt.com and MoneyWise.com surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans and 800 of those surveyed identified as either divorced or remarried. All of those respondents stated that their finances took a hit after their split.

“What this survey shows is what financial experts have long believed, but had trouble proving,” says Debt.com chairman Howard Dvorkin, CPA. “Divorce isn’t just a cost that ends when the final decree is signed, we now know the debt-related effects linger for years, too.”

Survey highlights: 

  • 39% indicated debt and financial difficulties played a role in their divorce
  • 40% reported incurring more than $5,000 of debt because of their divorce
  • 43% said they’re now responsible for joint debt from their marriage
  • 38% said their credit score dropped by 50 points or more
  • 88% did not consider a separation as a way to avoid incurring debt

“When a couple divorces, often it’s not just a matter of who gets the house and who gets the car,” says Doug Whiteman, editor-in-chief of MoneyWise.com. “A very important and potentially costly question to consider is: Who will get stuck with the debt?”

When examining post-divorce credit scores, the survey revealed that the majority of respondents saw a “more than 50 point” drop in their credit scores. This type of drop easily recategorize a person’s credit and makes it hard for them to apply for loans, buy a house, or get a new credit card. 

A whopping 88% of respondents did not consider a separation as a way to avoid incurring debt. Although the majority of respondents reported big financial losses due to divorce, they did not see separation as a way to save money and avoid debt.

“Divorce is so costly in so many ways,” Dvorkin says. “That’s one reason Debt.com recommend couples have blunt conversations about how they spend, how much debt they have, and what their financial goals are. That doesn’t ensure a long and successful marriage, of course, but it does improve the odds.” 

About: Debt.com is the consumer website where people can find help with credit card debt, student loan debt, tax debt, credit repair, bankruptcy, and more. Debt.com works with vetted and certified providers that give the best advice and solutions for consumers ‘when life happens’.  

MoneyWise.com provides trustworthy personal finance information, news and tools to help consumers save money, choose bank accounts and credit cards, get the best mortgage rates, and navigate many other money matters. The overriding goal is to help readers make smart financial decisions and get ahead.

Debt.com is the consumer website where people from all walks of life can find help with credit card debt, student loan assistance, credit monitoring, tax debt, identity theft, credit repair, bankruptcy, debt collector harassment and more. Debt.com works with only vetted and certified providers that give the best advice and solutions for consumers ‘when life happens.

View original content to download multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/debtcom-survey-divorced-americans-are-indebted-to-their-happily-ever-after-300999291.html

SOURCE Debt.com

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

California’s vague new financial regulation law

Published

on

California Capitol. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

In summary

California has a new financial regulation law but its reach is vague and awaits more definition.

Assembly Bill 1864 didn’t get much media or public attention as it zipped through both houses of the Legislature on the last day of the 2020 session.

Superficially, it appeared merely to reconfigure the state’s financial regulatory agencies into a new entity called the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

However, those in California’s vast financial industry were paying lots of attention because the bill creates an entirely new regulatory regime with broad powers, including fines of up to $1 million a day, to police financial players that hitherto have had little oversight.

The official rationale for the legislation is that President Donald Trump’s administration neutered the federal Dodd-Frank Wall Street Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, so the state must step in with an equivalent to guard against predatory financial practices that harm consumers.

The new California Consumer Financial Protection Law gives the reconstituted agency authority to go after “abusive practices” whose definition in the law is fairly vague. Thus, the agency itself will define the term as it also decides which businesses will face its scrutiny.

It appears that the new law will affect firms involved in debt settlement, credit repair, check cashing, rent-to-own contracts, payday lending, student loan servicing and financing for retail sales. However, its primary target seems to be financial services offered by non-banks, particularly what are called “fintech companies” that offer bank-like services via the Internet without maintaining physical offices.

Fintechs, many of them based in the San Francisco Bay Area, have blossomed in recent years as part of the digital economy, competing with traditional brick-and-mortar banks. Their disruptive nature is not unlike the challenge that technology-based ride services such as Uber and Lyft pose to taxicabs and buses.

Late-blooming changes in AB 1864 exempted traditional financial firms that are already regulated, such as banks and credit unions, from the new consumer protection law, leading some analysts to conclude that its unstated aim is to help them stave off competition from new kids on the financial block.

The vagueness of the new law was encapsulated in what Gov. Gavin Newsom said during a signing ceremony. The new law and the new department, he said, will “create conditions for innovation to flourish in a way where we can steward that and we can just work against its excesses. So we support risk-taking, not recklessness.”

Newsom also signed two other financial protection measures, one that requires debt collectors to be licensed beginning in 2022 and the other creating a Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights.

Although the new state law is said to mirror the Dodd-Frank law, it contains at least one significant difference. When federal regulators levy fines for what they consider to be bad conduct, the money goes into the federal treasury. When state regulators impose their fines of up to $1 million a day, the money will be retained by the new agency to finance more activity.

Will that give the new agency a financial incentive to skip over minor consumer issues and go after big companies? It’s a question that only time will answer.

Significantly too, the new investigative and regulatory mechanism contained in AB 1864 specifically does not usurp the authority of the attorney general to also target companies under the state’s equally vague “unfair competition” law.

From its inception a decade ago, Dodd-Frank has attracted criticism from business executives for regulatory overkill. Will California’s new version be less controversial? We won’t know until the new agency puts some definitional meat on its bones.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

California’s vague new financial regulation law – Whittier Daily News

Published

on

Assembly Bill 1864 didn’t get much media or public attention as it zipped through both houses of the Legislature on the last day of the 2020 session.

Superficially, it appeared merely to reconfigure the state’s financial regulatory agencies into a new entity called the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

However, those in California’s vast financial industry were paying lots of attention because the bill creates an entirely new regulatory regime with broad powers, including fines of up to $1 million a day, to police financial players that hitherto have had little oversight.

The official rationale for the legislation is that President Donald Trump’s administration neutered the federal Dodd-Frank Wall Street Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, so the state must step in with an equivalent to guard against predatory financial practices that harm consumers.

The new California Consumer Financial Protection Law gives the reconstituted agency authority to go after “abusive practices” whose definition in the law is fairly vague. Thus, the agency itself will define the term as it also decides which businesses will face its scrutiny.

It appears that the new law will affect firms involved in debt settlement, credit repair, check cashing, rent-to-own contracts, payday lending, student loan servicing and financing for retail sales. However, its primary target seems to be financial services offered by non-banks, particularly what are called “fintech companies” that offer bank-like services via the Internet without maintaining physical offices.

Fintechs, many of them based in the San Francisco Bay Area, have blossomed in recent years as part of the digital economy, competing with traditional brick-and-mortar banks. Their disruptive nature is not unlike the challenge that technology-based ride services such as Uber and Lyft pose to taxicabs and buses.

Late-blooming changes in AB 1864 exempted traditional financial firms that are already regulated, such as banks and credit unions, from the new consumer protection law, leading some analysts to conclude that its unstated aim is to help them stave off competition from new kids on the financial block.

The vagueness of the new law was encapsulated in what Gov. Gavin Newsom said during a signing ceremony. The new law and the new department, he said, will “create conditions for innovation to flourish in a way where we can steward that and we can just work against its excesses. So we support risk-taking, not recklessness.”

Newsom also signed two other financial protection measures, one that requires debt collectors to be licensed beginning in 2022 and the other creating a Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

397 people register to vote on deadline day at Duval Supervisor of Elections – 104.5 WOKV

Published

on

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Monday, Oct. 5 at midnight, is the deadline to register to vote in Duval County.

But the Supervisor of Elections helped hundreds of people get registered today.

Robert Phillips, the chief elections officer of the Duval Supervisor of Elections, told Action News Jax’s Courtney Cole that 397 people came down to the Supervisor of Elections in downtown Jacksonville to get registered.

Supervisor of Elections staff assembled tents outside to allow people to register to vote without having to go through the COVID-19 prescreening necessary to enter the building.

“Again, 2020 has thrown us some challenges,” Phillips said.

There was even a little rain thrown into the mix today, but it didn’t stop folks from coming out.

“Out here, we have a lot of activity. We’ve been going since first thing this morning,” Phillips told Action News Jax.

There were people of all ages from all walks of life — some even registered for the very first time like Lemark Jamison.

Monday, Oct. 5, is a day he will always remember.

“It feels awesome, you know? It feels awesome,” Jamison told Cole.

Today, Jamison had the opportunity to register to vote for the first time in Florida.

“I’ve worked for voter registration companies. I’ve done advocating for Amendment 4, but I was never able to vote because of my prior background. But now I can,” Jamison said.

Jamison, the owner of a tax and credit repair business, told Cole his prior felony conviction held him back in the past.

In November 2018, more than 60% of Floridians voted to restore voting rights to more than 1 million people who completed their sentences.

But several months later, legislation was passed that required them to pay all financial penalties, which means thousands lost the right as quickly as they gained it.

“I’ve been contributing to society. I’ve been able to have several businesses. And I pay taxes. But I haven’t been able to, when it comes to voting, whether in a local level or any type of legislature — I haven’t been able to vote,” Jamison said.

The 35-year-old told Cole even though his wife helped him fill out his voter registration form — to which he exclaimed, “Thank God for wives, right?” — he told Cole it was pretty easy.

Now, he has this advice to share with other people who may be in his shoes:

“Get out and vote. Take advantage of this opportunity, regardless of who you plan on voting for.”

Here’s a breakdown from the Supervisor of Elections of how the 397 people registered today:

-56% registered as Democrats.

-21% registered as Republicans.

-22% registered as nonparty affiliates.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending