Panorama: Can't Pay, Won't Pay

ILW

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Yip, always seemed a bit pervy to me too.

It does get pretty cold up there in the evenings.

StuTheDon

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Do I need to answer that! Please think before you type.....

Abolition of automatic unenforceability. Courts will now have discretion to enforce all invalidly executed agreements; the restrictions on this discretion, which applied in respect of certain infringements have now been lifted

Oops.

never-in-doubt

StuTheDon wrote: »

Abolition of automatic unenforceability. Courts will now have discretion to enforce all invalidly executed agreements; the restrictions on this discretion, which applied in respect of certain infringements have now been lifted

Oops.

post april 2007. Unenforceability refers to, in the main, pre 04/07. OOOOoooooppppppsssssss

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

StuTheDon

well done - i managed to get you to answer a question!! See, it is not that hard is it and you're actually quite good.

So lets get back to who forced you to borrow money.....

never-in-doubt

StuTheDon wrote: »

Abolition of automatic unenforceability. Courts will now have discretion to enforce all invalidly executed agreements; the restrictions on this discretion, which applied in respect of certain infringements have now been lifted

Oops.

By the way - next time use a more recent link and a relevant link, not one from Cambridge CAB!

http://www.cambridgecab.org.uk/What%27s_New/latest_update_items/Update_on_Consumer_Credit_Act.htm

StuTheDon

never-in-doubt wrote: »

By the way - next time use a more recent link and a relevant link, not one from Cambridge CAB!

http://www.cambridgecab.org.uk/What%27s_New/latest_update_items/Update_on_Consumer_Credit_Act.htm

Ok - so where is your link showing it is fully legal, not at a test case stage, and the criteria to be met?

never-in-doubt

I think maybe it is time to leave this alone and agree to disagree. We don't agree morally or in principle so it's pointless going over old ground really isn't it?

never-in-doubt

StuTheDon wrote: »

Ok - so where is your link showing it is fully legal, not at a test case stage, and the criteria to be met?

Ask me and i'll tell you the criteria! I know the legal background and have helped people on here get defaults removed thank you very much! Basically, the prescribed terms have to be met - here, a whole post I put up to answer this exact question! #29

Enjoy :beer:

StuTheDon

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Ask me and i'll tell you the criteria! I know the legal background and have helped people on here get defaults removed thank you very much! Basically, the prescribed terms have to be met - here, a whole post I put up to answer this exact question! #29

Enjoy :beer:

Well thank you for posting it, and on the point of law, I stand corrected.

I just completely disagree with people suddenly deciding they cant afford repayments and then using these loopholes to get out of it. I think it is wrong pure and simple - but on that we will differ.

But you still have not given an example of someone being forced to borrow money - I'd like to see that too please if you dont mind?

woody01

never-in-doubt wrote: »

really? think you'll find the law and GMC disagree. But then again, your opinion is all that counts as i've seen on here

Care to back that up?