Panorama Tonight - BBC ONE, 8.30pm

Broken_hearted

bookworm1363 wrote: »

*I* haven't, no. But that's irrelevant in this instance.

The person who has -allegedly- borrowed the money, let's call him A, owes to creditor B. For whatever reason, he can't repay it some time later. B, anxious to cut his losses, sells the debt for about 10% of its supposed value to debt collector C and washes his hands of A.

C has no contractual relationship to A. Simple as that. If B wanted to pursue A for the money owed, he could and should have done so. If he decided instead to flog it to a DCA for a quick sale, that's his choice. It doesn't give the right for C to pursue A, as, I repeat, there is no contractual relationship between A & C.

When you say what you said above, you bring in an emotional value, which has no relevance to the contractual one. If you want to add a moral value, then there it is: The moral obligation is for B to repay A. Once A has flogged off the debt to C, there is no moral obligation for B to pay C, since he didn't borrow the money from them.

So D ends up paying for A mistakes

stapeley

Broken_hearted wrote: »

from halifax for fun yes I remember

Well then lets say for FUN you spent it ! But for even more FUN! if the halifax do not supply a copy of a CCA , will you just for FUN pay it !
I very much doubt it . BUT JUST FOR FUN YOU CAN COME ON HERE AND TELL EVERYONE ELSE, YOU SPENT IT SO PAY IT . The word hypocrite comes to mind .

mummum2

climbingoutoftheabyss wrote: »

What worried me was the fact that the financial institutions are so eager to apply for a charging order and then sell properties.

I am on a DMP, I've done it for 2 years and increased my payment at the end of year 1. Although I have been made redundant I am hoping to be back in work soon and if I can get a better salary I will increase my payment again - but the thought that it takes only 1 debtor to get a charging order and then apply to sell my house frightens the life out of me and I didn't sleep last night.

Yes, I owe the money, but I will pay it back, all I am asking for is time

So on the same page COOTA. I also know I owe the money and want to pay it back, but can't pay it all at the same time, (Yes! for those on the moral high ground....shouldn't have exceeded borrowing...I and many others on this board knows this!). I only now wish I didn't and if the creditors would just let us pay back what we borrowed within say a time limit, before now trying to get charging orders and make people sell their homes (I only have one and it is my home!) then I think a lot of what is happening now with people going along the CCA route wouldn't be so high.

bookworm1363

Broken_hearted wrote: »

So D ends up paying for A mistakes

No, not really. I kept it simple for obvious reasons, but when flogging it off to C, B will be able to offset against their tax and what not, effectively reducing their loss quite effectively.

Again, you are using an emotional argument, saying that A has made a "mistake", for which an unknown D will become the "victim". That's making an assumption, which is that A set out to avoid paying back the debt when you don't know whether A actually owes the money, or why he fell behind with payments, etc... and further assuming that some innocent D will be then made to pay for A, which is simply not true, but a propaganda truism well and oft repeated by the credit companies to justify some of their fees.

The only time I got debt collectors after me was for money I didn't actually owe. The supplier (Sky) said I owed money, which I knew I didn't. I asked them over and over to send me a breakdown, something, ANYTHING to show where they thought I owed them this. They never did instead passing it to DCA after DCA. For YEARS, I tried to discuss it reasonably with them (not being as clued up them about their tactics as I am now), thinking that someone had to finally see reason. Eventually, the non-debt became statute-barred and still I was getting the threatening letters etc... Now and then, I get a letter from yet another bottom-feeder... I just ignore it... I have told them time and again: "prove that I owe you and I will pay you" and they never have, choosing to try to harass and threaten me into paying...

The point of my little story is that you can't just say that people spent the money and don't want to repay it, for each (alleged) debt, there is a different story. But when push comes to shove, the law is the law: prescribed terms, proof of existence of the debt, etc...

Bambywamby

My opinion is very simple, you spent it...you pay it back.
Half the reason this country is on its economic knees is people borrowing money they cannot afford/or don't think they should have to pay back.

We have to take responsibilty for our actions, full stop.

equinox747

this is blatant legalise robbery of your home, if this was not written into the terms and conditions surely it makes it il-legal? had this been made apparent to many thousands caught up in this credit crunch i for one would never had signed ONE credit card aggrement, and i am sure many thousands like me would never had signed up.is anything ever going to get done about this, or are we doomed to the finance Co and banks holding us all to ransom!:mad:

Broken_hearted

Is it though, you/we owe them money and have the ability to pay it off using the assets we have. the option to go after your home was always there it has only changed in the speed they can now do it.

Broken_hearted

stapeley wrote: »

Well then lets say for FUN you spent it ! But for even more FUN! if the halifax do not supply a copy of a CCA , will you just for FUN pay it !
I very much doubt it . BUT JUST FOR FUN YOU CAN COME ON HERE AND TELL EVERYONE ELSE, YOU SPENT IT SO PAY IT . The word hypocrite comes to mind .

Since they havn't provided it and the debt is still being paid, you are still wrong.

bathgatebuyer

stapeley wrote: »

I would not comment too much BH , I seem to remember the last I heard from you , was you were requesting a copy of CCA . I WONDER WHY ?

To check that the banks are conforming to the legislation? Seems a reasonable request by a customer.

bathgatebuyer

Bambywamby wrote: »

.
We have to take responsibilty for our actions, full stop.

As do the banks. Customers asked, banks gave. 2 parts to the problem.