ABSTRACT

According to the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the three debt collection areas are personal, family, and household debt. The collection of these areas is for non-payment of medical bills, credit cards, student loans, repossession of property by default of the loan on real-estate or vehicles, and repossession of property by defaulting on real-estate taxes.

A strategic business analysis will show how the spatial impact of debt affects the U.S. national debt, with repercussions against the United States Department of Education. This research illuminates the ways that courts favor creditors and well-connected lawyers by rubber stamping against a pro-se person; an individual acting on his/her own behalf for a legal court proceeding. By examining Michigan licensing laws for collection agencies, this paper will show the political climate for each collectible area with the pitfalls and dangers for repossession of vehicles and a deeper look into what qualifies as debt collection practice.

Based on this analysis, this paper will frame current debates about personal debt including student loan debt with questions of whether debtors should be allowed to offset their collections in private and whether student loan debt should be included in the language of FDCPA. Also, this paper will deal with whether debt from student loans should be allowed to be offset against a security in private if not allowed to be discharged under U.S. bankruptcy laws.