Unenforceable Credit Agreements

KrisD

Ugly, Angry or opinionated - if it is rude and unhelpful then it is not relevant or useful to posters on this forum.

Simon! - A 'love in forum'? Seriously, what on earth are you on about? Differences in opinion are great. What isn't so great is ridiculous bullying from those who perch themselves on a self proclaimed moral high ground. You do not simply have a difference of opinion, you attempt to ridicule others and condemn them for having their opinion as it is conflicting to your moral beliefs. This along with the tone used to convey your message is what is ugly and angry!

Now, the fact that this point has been made clear in other posts and you continue to ignore it's validity, shows how blinkered and self-righteous you are.

Good luck!

bert&ernie

97trophy wrote: »

I have no doubt that 0% finance and other offers do cost the CC's money. However, IMO there is a huge difference between a firm deciding to offer such services and a CC customer deciding not to pay back money they have spent.

I acknowledge that you have a different view and there is nothing I can say that will change your view.

Lenders decided to book business without bothering to ensure that is was legitimate and enforceable. In the mad rush to obtain market share, they neglected their legal obligations and entered into agreements that they cannot legally enforce. This is nothing short of gross negligence on their part.

It saddens me that you are so defeatist. Our views differ, but I keep an open mind and welcome all those who disagree with me and encourage them to put their argument forward. Some of us may be combative, but I believe this is a worthwhile debate.

simon_templar_2

I mean if you want a forum that only has one view and everybody is madly in love then the CAG forum is the one. As far as i know people can air their view which some will agree with and some wont. I find it disturbing a person would trawl through anothers posts to such an extent as you are doing. Maybe you should get out more often..

Francesanne

ditchd wrote: »

Thanks but now I'm even more confused . I'm not in difficulty with them or anything owed, I keep up regular appropriate payments, all very manageable.

I just fancied the idea of a complete wipe out of all monies owed. Partly of course because its better in my pocket than theirs but also my principles are if youre going to do something do it properly so if they've misold or made a profit on the back of a debt I neednt strictly have their time is up and I'll have back what I can from them.

Can anyone explain the way it works in simple terms ?

Thanks

Take a loan out, spend the money and then find a way out of repaying the debt. Just can believe some people. Completely dishonest in my eyes. You've had the loan, just pay back what you've borrowed.

macie_2

Francesanne wrote: »

Take a loan out, spend the money and then find a way out of repaying the debt. Just can believe some people. Completely dishonest in my eyes. You've had the loan, just pay back what you've borrowed.

Hahahaha! This is a description of what the banks have just done to the tax payers. Do you think their loan from the taxpayer will ever get repaid?

If I were you, if you have an agreement which could be deemed unenforceable, then get your share of the tax you have paid, via the banking bailout, back now by having your agreement declared unenforceable.

Otherwise, the bankers will just pay it out as a bonus anyway.

simon_templar_2

macie wrote: »

Hahahaha! This is a description of what the banks have just done to the tax payers. Do you think their loan from the taxpayer will ever get repaid?

If I were you, if you have an agreement which could be deemed unenforceable, then get your share of the tax you have paid, via the banking bailout, back now by having your agreement declared unenforceable.

Otherwise, the bankers will just pay it out as a bonus anyway.

As a tax payer would you say we are all allowed to drive tanks, fly jet fighters, carry out operations in hospitals, get free machine guns from army bases?

PROLIANT

macie wrote: »

Hahahaha! This is a description of what the banks have just done to the tax payers.

Wrong

macie wrote: »

Do you think their loan from the taxpayer will ever get repaid?

What loan?

macie wrote: »

If I were you, if you have an agreement which could be deemed unenforceable, then get your share of the tax you have paid, via the banking bailout, back now by having your agreement declared unenforceable.

And further contribute to the financial misery of this country?

macie wrote: »

Otherwise, the bankers will just pay it out as a bonus anyway.

Maybe not.

macie_2

simon_templar wrote: »

As a tax payer would you say we are all allowed to drive tanks, fly jet fighters, carry out operations in hospitals, get free machine guns from army bases?

The Government has largely forgotten that it is elected to represent the will of the people.

If the banking bailout was put to a public vote it would be rejected out of hand.

On the other hand, I suspect that the majority of the populous would agree that the public shouldn't get their hands on tanks or carry out operations.

PROLIANT

If a bank writes an unenforceable agreement then that is their tough luck. Their lawyers get paid enough to get it right and the banks should have a cause of action against whoever prepared the agreement.

The rules were there for the banks to follow (since 1974 and 1983). They have the best lawyers, but they got it wrong. If the boot were on the other foot then I am sure they would have their pound of flesh.

As regards Britain, there are more serious concerns looming than unenforceable agreements........

macie_2

PROLIANT wrote: »

Macie - Hahahaha! This is a description of what the banks have just done to the tax payers.
Proliant - Wrong
Mavcie - Do you think their loan from the taxpayer will ever get repaid?
Proliant - What loan?

Surprised you haven' heard about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_Kingdom_bank_rescue_package

£500Bn, now that is, in my humble opinion, theft.

onlyforboards_2

PROLIANT wrote: »

Getting back on the subject, is there anyone out there who has successfully used this "loophole" to carry out debt evasion?

Is there anyone actually willing to post in this thread anymore about the subject?