The balance on my credit card is a debt, no?
Can I force the credit card company to accept cash as repayment for that debt, in spite of the cardmember agreement saying no cash is accepted? Has a court ever ruled on whether or not its within public policy to contract away such a thing?
I know you’re not a lawyer, you’re not my lawyer, I’m not a lawyer, the cat’s not a lawyer and Cecil is not a lawyer. This is purely hypothetical and I plan on continuing to pay off my card via EFT
At least in the United States, yes, all creditors must accept U.S. currency as payment for a debt, if so offered in payment. Of course, if paying in cash is a violation of the cardmember agreement, they might decide to cancel your card if you start doing that, but that’s pretty much up to them.
31 U.S.C. § 5103: “United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.”
Is there a contractual override? Sure, cash might be a valid means of paying any debt in general but if two parties make a contractual agreement that they’re only to going to do business in baseball cards, then they both agreed to the terms and are bound to them.
This does not seem to be true, at least according to the US Treasury.
They say that “legal tender” means that all US money is a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. But there is no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept cash and that private businesses, individuals, or organizations are free to make their own policies regarding whether or not to accept cash, unless there is a State law that says otherwise.
Bottom line it seems to me is that unless your state requires the credit card company to accept cash, they can refuse it (and leave you still owing the debt).
ETA: I forgot to add the details of the law:
That Treasury FAQ is making a distinction between payment of a debt and payment for goods and/or services, not payment of a public debt and payment of a private debt. Thus, if you’re buying a bottle of water at the gas station and you try to pay with a $100 bill, they can turn you down. But if you borrow money to buy a car, and then try to repay your debt in singles, they have to accept that.
You appear to be confusing “debt” with “goods.” This distinction is the crux of my inquiry. Everything I read seems to indicate that the card issuer must accept cash as payment for the debt. But that flies in the face of the cardmember agreement, and Google is about a notch above useless when researching this.
Per your own cite:
I don’t think so, read it again (bolding and underlining mine)
The credit card company is a private business offering a service, any debt to them would fall under this. Or is the debt to the credit card not related to the service they provided?
But the key distinction is that the credit card company is lending you money, thus creating a debt, which can always be repaid by legal tender. You can feel free to turn down legal tender if there’s no debt involved, like the gas station bottle of water, or the driver’s license fee at the DMV.
True they are lending you money, but under the guise of a service- at least that is how I always understood it. That’s what makes a credit card different than a loan.
And as I think was already mentioned, you likely agreed to their re-payment policies as part of the request for the services (lending of money) so trying now to go against them as a matter of law or any other reasoning, and in the absence of state laws to the contrary, they are within their rights to refuse the payment, leave you owing the debt and refusing future service (canceling the card).
I don’t think they can get around a obligation mandated by federal law just because they have your signature on a contract.
My guess is that if you insisted on paying with cash, they’d allow it but say you were in breach and so cancel your card. In other words, they’d let you pay your current debt, but not allow you to borrow any other money from them.
Credit card companies are creditors. They lend you money, you have to pay it back. They can call it a service all they like, but it doesn’t make any difference legally. CC debt gets discharged in bankruptcy, split in divorce, and counts against assets.
They are creditors.
No they can’t, and on that note I don’t believe the credit card company is refusing to accept cash at all. I cannot find that as a policy of any of the major credit cards or banks. The most I am finding is that cash payments must be made at particular locations or in person (as opposed to by mail). So really this whole discussion seems moot.
I think the credit card issuers are not trying to get around federal law, and I will concede that I may be misunderstanding the law, and that they are obligated to accept cash under any circumstance.
That’s my take on it as well. I really don’t see a card issuer refusing payment for any reason (well…unless you tried to pay by trading livestock or something) even if they are allowed to, but they probably would not do business with that person again who disregarded their preference.
If your credit card is with a bank, you might be able to pay the bill at a local branch, in cash. But if you try to send cash to pay your bill, they’ll probably cancel your account, as suggested above.
Discharged in bankruptcy: Not always
Split in divorce: not legally in that a a judge cannot assign credit card debt to the other person and then enforce it- the debtor who signed the credit card application is still responsible to the company no matter who the divorce gave it to, and if the other person does not pay it as ordered the debtor has little choice but to pay it themselves and take it up against the other person in civil court.
Counts against assets: of course
I’m sorry, but I fail to see the point in this or how it relates to the OP. Of course credit card debt is debt, there was never any doubt about that. I may be misunderstanding the law, I will grant that and concede that you know much more about it than I so you are absolutely correct. But that doesn’t really change the definitions of words, does it? Debt is debt a creditor is a creditor a service is a service goods are goods…
Well don’t cofuse the ability to CREATE an obligation with one created.
For instance, if I go into a store and try to pay for a pack of gum with a $50.00 bill, they can refuse. There is no debt. You haven’t bought that gum yet, you’re still trying to buy that gum.
At one time or another, I’ve paid all my credit cards at the local bank. I still pay my 5/3 Bank credit card. At 5/3 bank you can’t pay online unless you have a bank account with 5/3. So I just walk over to the bank with my credit card and pay it in person
I think the big issue is that a creditor cannot force you to pay in a way that is unreasonable like palladium ingots and in effect prevent you from paying the debt
While in the air, American Airlines no longer accepts cash for its on board meals and drinks.
And they claim its legal.
I guess everyone was handing them a twenty dollar bill and the attendants couldn’t make change.
Of course it’s legal for American Airlines to accept only credit cards for on-board purchases. I assume that they make this clear up front, before the transaction is made, so there’s no question of a public or private debt. (BTW, I’m fairly sure that Southwest Airlines and JetBlue do the same thing and other airlines may do so as well.)
In dissolutions, it depends on state law. It’s certainly enforceable to assign joint debts to one party in many states (including mine), as debt accrued during the marriage is marital debt and is divided like any other property. You don’t need to implead your ex to avoid debt collection. In bankruptcy, it of course depends on how you file (ch13 or ch7), but CC debt seems to be the biggest unsecured debt in most BKs.
A creditor is someone to whom you owe a debt. Currency is legal tender for all debts. The credit card company can’t refuse to take cash except where it’s silly to do so – you can’t make them come to your house and pick up $10k in pennies, but if you can get the cash to them in a reasonable manner, they have to take it.
Hrm, no cite on this without some research. In practice, I’ve never seen problems, though, with CC companies going after an ex (as long as the account was closed before the judgment). Take it with a grain of salt, I guess.