Quote from: yahoo62278 on March 03, 2024, 06:57:27 PM

Throughout my whole life I have always thought that if you "vouch" for someone, then you are telling people that you trust that person. You also agree to take responsibility for that persons actions.

Now to my question. If you "vouch" for someone that they are trustworthy and they take a loan, is the person who vouched putting their reputation on the line? If you didn't trust a person to repay, why would you "vouch" for them?

Curious to see what others say about this.

I can vouch for someone based on our past dealings and the person might have changed his behavior over time. But there is a difference between serving as a guarantor for a loan and to vouch for someone. If you guarantee that someone will repay a loan, you are liable if he defaults but you are not responsible if you just vouched that the person will repay the loan.

Quote from: Helena Yu on Today at 06:15:33 AM

No offense, if you trust the person, why you didn't lend your money? I feel like if you didn't want to lend your money, it means you're not completely trust the person. Yeah you could argue if you don't have enough money due to your needs or the amount is too big, but the point is you can lend the money you currently have, not necessary to lend when you have full amounts.

Apart from not having the funds to lend to a friend, why would I have to lend money to someone when some people or organizations offer such a service? Don't also forget that lending money to a friend or relative also has some repercussions. Your relative or friend might not willingly pay back a debt because of a close relationship. They might be trustworthy but the closeness might mark them default because they know that there will be no penalty and you will always consider them. It is ideal for your relative only funds you can afford to forgo.