Noone forced you to spend the money.
I can't for the life of me imagine how the debt'd be anything other than enforceable. They offered to lend you money; you accepted the offer. That's the whole story, isn't it?
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 17 Jul 2009, 9:46, 1 reply)

Without signing an application for a credit card
you are not technically (nor, might I add, legally) agreeing to the terms of using that credit card. Naturally there is the moral obligation to pay debts owing on it, but even banks realize that they're impotent (again, legally speaking) in getting one to pay the debt on a credit card that one had never agreed to getting - even suing for it won't work. Strange world indeed. However, as a student there is the chance that it was part of a student package where they give you a overdraft on your current account and a credit card. Naturally, you need to sign a few things to open up these accounts. Here in NZ all they have to do to show you applied for a credit card is tick a checkbox which says "Gimme a credit card as part of this package". Your signature agreeing to the current account will suffice.
(thecurriedavenger, Sat 18 Jul 2009, 9:16, closed)

This ^
Only thing I would add, is that I don't think that you are morally obliged to pay that debt because it's not part of the rules of the game. The bank is not concerned with being 'moral', just it following its legal obligations, and likewise you should do the same. What's sauce for the goose...

Actually, a lot of this argument comes back to common conceptions of contracts. There is a well established legal notion of an 'unfair' contract. There are a range of circumstances in which contracts are not valid. Basically, just because you agree to something, don't make it a legally binding contract, there are a range of other criteria which must be met.
( Sextant goes to him is emotionally erect, on this day, Mon 20 Jul 2009, 3:35, closed)