Paper Short Abstract:

In this paper I show how the particular configuration of the communication strategies utilized by the Czech debt industry can lead to debtors’ confusion and disengagement. This in turn, particularly in the case of the property-owning class of debtors, enables the debt industry to capture and extract much larger profit via wage and property seizure. Simultaneously, I argue that debtors are not just passive victims to the system and actively decipher and contest those strategic tools, with the ultimate aim of 'unwriting' their debts.

Paper Abstract:

In this paper I want to explore the various forms of communication devices utilised by the debt collection industry and their effect in (de)attaching debtors from, and towards, their debt obligations. Drawing on existing scholarship (Davey and Koch 2021; Deville 2015; Rock 1973), I highlight the role of affect and emotions in those communication strategies and look at the ways in which these shape the debtors’ responses. Specifically, I critically examine the use of, what I call, the ‘legalistic language’ in the written communication sent by the legal representatives of creditors, collectors and enforcers legal representatives and examine its effects on debtors’ ability to take control over their financial obligations.

Drawing on the preliminary findings from my ethnographic research among defaulted debtors in a deindustrializing town in the Czech Republic, I argue that the particular configuration of the communication strategies utilized by the debt industry often results in debtors’ confusion and disengagement. This in turn, particularly in the case of the property-owning class of debtors, enables the debt industry to capture and extract much larger profit via wage and property seizure. Simultaneously, I argue that debtors are not just passive victims to the system and actively decipher and contest those debt indusry's strategic tools, with the ultimate aim of 'unwriting' their debts.