Comment on CFPB-2013-0016

I think the arbitration versus litigation analysis stalls getting to the true, underlying problems related to credit card defaults. If alleged credit card defaulters could simply plead either voluntary default or involuntary default, the presiding judge would instantly have latitude to do more than simply rubber stamp 99% of all credit card cases in favor of the credit card company. If the judge concluded that the alleged credit card defaulter was involuntarily defaulting, meaning a legitimate life circumstance beyond the debtors control led to their default, the judge could then have latitude to do the following... ...The Judge could waive all future interest rate charges on the credit card debt and set a percentage of the involuntary defaulter's monthly income towards paying down the debt as well. Additionally, this would give cause to not continue to damage the debtors credit score since a voluntary "agreement" had been reached. The voluntary default vs involuntary default classification would also free up debt collection agencies to go after those who truly don't care about paying their debt back, aka the voluntary defaulters. Debt Collectors could more effectively use their resources and focus them on the voluntary defaulters. If they see a default is more likely going to be ruled an involuntary default by a judge, they might agree to a debt instrument letter and a set payment per month based on the debtor's total monthly income and avoid going to court altogether. Thank you for your consideration in this matter, sincerely, Alessandro Machi, Debt Suspension Rights.