Is only 50,000 paid back out of 120,000 debt? Exposing the gray industry of "discounted debt repayment": some merchants claim you must first default to qualify.

This article is from Times Weekly, authored by Lu Yongzhi and Wang Miaomiao.

Image source: TuChong Creative

“Credit cards starting at 30,000 yuan, settled at 30-50% off, with a clearance certificate from the bank; online loans starting at 100,000 yuan, settled at 1-1.5% off, if not approved, full refund.” On the occasion of International Consumer Rights Day (March 15), Times Weekly reporters found that on secondhand trading platforms, some merchants openly promote “debt relief” services, even诱导 consumers to deliberately default. One merchant claimed: “Only by default can it be handled.”

On February 6, the State Administration of Financial Supervision, Cyberspace Administration, Ministry of Public Security, People’s Bank of China, and China Securities Regulatory Commission jointly issued a risk warning, directly addressing the rampant chaos of “illegal代理维权” (unauthorized rights protection). These criminals use slogans like “debt clearance,” “debt optimization,” and “credit whitening” to诱导 consumers into委托 (entrust) them for “rights protection,” but in fact set numerous traps.

Times Weekly investigation found that some merchants not only诱导 debtors to “must default to handle,” but also set thresholds such as “vehicles worth over 300,000 yuan cannot be processed.”

Wu Zewei, a special researcher at the Commercial Bank of Suzhou, told Times Weekly that these thresholds reveal the true purpose of these merchants: they are not helping genuinely distressed groups, but selecting those with moderate debt, lacking professional knowledge and resistance, as “soft targets,” exploiting their urgent desire to get rid of debt through fake documents and malicious complaints to “harvest” them. After委托, consumers’ personal information faces huge risks of secondary sale and泄露, and they may even be诱导 into deeper金融犯罪.

“Credit card settlement at 30-50% off, online loan write-off at 1-1.5% off, no default means no processing.”

“To handle this, you must default. If you don’t default, they will think you have repayment ability and won’t agree to a discount.” On March 10, Times Weekly contacted a merchant on a secondhand platform as a debtor, who straightforwardly explained the core logic: “You have to default.”

When the reporter expressed concern that defaulting would affect life, the merchant immediately proposed a full “托管” (trust)方案: “Even if you default, we will handle it for you. You just need to go to work. If collection agencies come, we handle it, and your contacts won’t be exposed. You’re worried about answering calls and affecting the process? We will sign a confidentiality agreement. If you want to handle it face-to-face, you can come to Chengdu.”

According to him, the processing cycle depends on the default period: “If you haven’t defaulted yet, it takes at least three months; for overdue cases, the fastest can be done in over a month. The big five banks (Agricultural, Bank of China, Industrial, Construction, Postal) take longer, others are faster.”

More surprisingly, the merchant clearly set client筛选标准: “Vehicles over 300,000 yuan can’t be processed, mortgage houses are okay, but provident fund accounts should not exceed 50,000 yuan, and you need a business license to operate. Without these, no deal.”

When asked about recent successful cases, the merchant said a client owed over 120,000 yuan, but finally paid 54,439 yuan plus 2,000 yuan lawyer fees, totaling 56,439 yuan. This means a debt减免 of about 55%.

Another merchant provided a more systematic approach. Their product detail page states: “Legal and compliant” debt reduction of 40%-70%, capable of handling all five major banks, with proof issued within 7-15 working days after settlement, quick if资料齐全, and full refund if unsuccessful.

This merchant explained the “business rules” in detail: “Credit cards starting at 30,000 yuan, online loans starting at 100,000 yuan. Credit cards can be settled at 30-50% off with a bank-issued证明; online loans can only be核销 (write-off), at 1-1.5% off. Multiple credit cards totaling over 30,000 yuan are acceptable; online debt must be at least 100,000 yuan, or we can’t process.”

Regarding success rate and operation principles, the merchant was confident: “Write-offs are 100% successful; discount settlements have about a 60-70% success rate. For credit cards, we can申请 (apply for) 30-50% off, and after settlement, the bank issues a证明, and the credit report shows ‘C’ (settled). Online loans can’t be fully settled, only核销, or combined核销 of online and credit card debt.”

When asked why online loans can’t be fully settled, the explanation was: “All online loans have fund providers, and they can’t coordinate like banks. Settlement doesn’t affect credit reports;核销 just pauses repayment, which definitely impacts credit.”

Experts analyze the “discounted debt repayment” gray industry:诱导 default “drinks poison to quench thirst,” and there is no such thing as “legal and compliant.”

What is the true nature of these “debt relief” services? If debtors believe诱导 default, what risks do they face?

Tian Lihui, director of the Financial Development Research Institute at Nankai University, told Times Weekly that from a bank risk control perspective, large-scale debt reduction on credit cards only occurs in the non-performing asset write-off stage after confirming the debtor has lost repayment ability and judicial collection has failed. This is an internal bank disposal, not an主动申请 (voluntary application) policy. Merchants exploit information asymmetry between consumers and banks, packaging this low-probability event as a普遍规则 (general rule).

Wu Zewei explained that “banks usually only consider大比例减免 (large-scale reduction) of credit card principal when they have彻底丧失 (completely lost) confidence in the debtor’s ability to pay, and recovery costs far exceed the value. This is part of non-performing asset disposal, not regular negotiation.” He emphasized that merchants distinguish between credit cards and online loans because credit cards have mature核销转让 (write-off transfer) mechanisms, while online loans involve multiple fund providers and often have insurance, making principal reduction negotiations extremely difficult. The so-called “1.5% off核销” is merely暂停催收 (pause collection), fundamentally an illegal operation under information asymmetry.

Regarding the behavior of诱导“必须逾期才能办理,” senior partner Sun Yuhao of Shanghai Hahai Yongtai Law Firm said: “This behavior is not only涉嫌违规 (suspected violation) but may also constitute违法 (illegal). Merchants诱导 debtors to deliberately default, essentially instigating malicious违约 (breach), violating the basic principles of good faith under the Civil Code.”

He further explained that if debtors follow诱导, they first face信用污点 (credit blemishes). According to the Credit Reporting Management Regulations, overdue information will be truthfully recorded and retained for five years, seriously affecting future loans and employment. More seriously, if merchants further诱导 debtors to forge poverty or medical证明 (certificates) to申请 (apply for) debt减免, they may涉嫌骗取贷款 (fraudulently obtain loans) or欺诈 (fraud), bearing civil or criminal liability.

BoTong Consulting’s chief industry analyst Wang Pengbo added: “This artificially induced default模式 (model) distorts正常的信用履约行为 (normal credit performance), increasing banks’ overall risk costs. Long-term, banks will tighten risk controls, raise approval standards, and increase credit rates, ultimately harming legitimate creditworthy users.”

Regarding the fundamental difference between“核销 (write-off)” and “结清 (settlement),” Tian Lihui explained: “Settlement means the debt relationship is terminated, and the credit report shows a zero balance.核销, however, is an internal accounting process; the debt still exists, and the credit report will show a long-term ‘bad debt’ status, which is far more serious than overdue, essentially indicating the credit relationship with正规金融机构 (formal financial institutions) is permanently ended.”

Sun Yuhao further pointed out that according to the Ministry of Finance’s "Financial Enterprise Bad Debt Write-off Management Measures,"核销 must follow the principle of ‘账销案存’ (accounting and case retention), and banks still retain追索权 (residual rights). Merchants packaging “核销” as “discounted settlement” is false advertising; if users pay high service fees but the debt remains, the merchant’s behavior may constitute fraud.

Regarding thresholds like “vehicles over 300,000 yuan cannot be processed,” Wang Pengbo analyzed that this is a precise筛选 (screening) of target objects. Setting such asset thresholds aims to筛选 (filter out) users without sufficient repayment ability or strong执行资产 (enforcement assets). These users are more容易被诱导逾期 (more easily诱导 into default) and closer to the real non-performing asset disposal group. Consumers委托 (entrust) such机构 (agencies) at极高风险 (very high risk), as they require身份证 (ID),银行卡 (bank card),征信 (credit report),验证码 (verification code), etc. These机构 (agencies) lack正规资质 (formal qualifications), and所谓保密协议 (so-called confidentiality agreements) have no binding force. The risks include信息泄露 (information泄露), being subjected to二次催收 (second collection),诈骗 (fraud), and收费后失联 (losing contact after payment).

Despite multiple警示 (warnings) and规范 (regulations) from监管部门 (regulatory authorities) about illegal代理维权 (代理 rights protection) and反催收 (anti-collection) behaviors, related机构 (organizations) continue to operate under the guise of legal咨询 (legal consultation) and债务咨询 (debt consultation) on various platforms. The chaos persists, and the underlying reasons deserve关注 (attention).

Wu Zewei pointed out that the survival of “illegal代理维权” companies relies on exploiting信息不对称 (information asymmetry) and fake材料 (fake documents) to maliciously投诉 (complain) in a “碰瓷” (stunt)模式 (mode), using “法律咨询” as a cover to evade监管 (regulation). To eliminate this chaos, multiple堵点 (blockages) must be addressed: financial consumer education to inform the public about正规维权渠道 (legitimate rights protection channels) and信用失信风险 (trustworthiness risks); banks should optimize internal协商流程 (negotiation processes), establish humane纾困通道 (relief channels), and reduce debtors’ impulse to seek黑产 (black-market) help;监管执法 (regulatory enforcement) should联合部署 (jointly deploy) measures to crack down on违规广告 (illegal ads) and信息 (information), increasing违法成本 (costs of violations).

For consumers陷入 (陷入) debt, Sun Yuhao suggested proactively negotiating with financial institutions, directly contacting official customer service of banks or online lenders, and applying for personalized installment plans, such as暂停息 (interest suspension) and挂账 (deferment); for complex debt disputes, consult正规律师事务所 (law firms) or resolve through litigation or arbitration. Never trust third-party intermediaries claiming to“减免债务” (reduce debt) or“征信洗白” (whitewash credit), protect personal information, and avoid secondary losses.