loan taken out before April 07 you may be entitled to have the balance cleared

Natalie6999

CHR15 wrote: »

So anyone who thinks you should repay the money someone LENT to you is rude???

It was a LOAN not a GIFT which you whittled away on nothing and think it only right you walk away from those mean people wanting it back.

Yes it was a loan, & if the couple had been able to continue in employment, then they would have been able to repay the loan. Are you suggesting that anyone unable to pay their mortgage should not be able to use the new rescue scheme & should be thrown out onto the streets?

You will be suggesting that the workhouses be reopened next.

People suffer unfortunate unforseen events in their lives that have an effect on their ability to pay, it could be you next & would you not take advantage of any measure to help you maintain your standard of living?

Credit-Crunched

"I am a former Broker, former IFA and former compliance officer, for my sins.

However, I have since seen the light."

I am sure you benefitted quite well in the past with those proc fees!

petermb_2

So now you move away from the argument to have a little go at me personally.
Typical !!!. You dont have a reasonable answer for my point because you know i am correct so you attack me.

Credit-Crunched

petermb wrote: »

So now you move away from the argument to have a little go at me personally.
Typical !!!. You dont have a reasonable answer for my point because you know i am correct so you attack me.

I agree that banking greed was the casue of the downfall, jsut claiming anthing will make it worse imo.

So i did not argue as i agreed, i was just highlighting that everyone involved id quite well out of it

petermb_2

You tell those that have had their homes repossessed and the bread winner ended it all when the family home was taken away. Then after the even the borrower was victim to fraud, bribery and mis-selling, which contributed to their undoing.

Especially when you later discover that the loan was unenforceable but neither the lender or the courts felt it necessary to being this to everyones attention at the time.

Looking at such a senario, please now tell me that what we are talking about is merely administrative errors and loopholes. I can tell you now that you will never convince me.

My point is that flip remarks and jibes at people who genuinely feel aggrieved is not going to help anyone. Attacking me is going to achieve even less.

petermb_2

Can we now get back to discussing the issues only?

petermb_2

To finish the issue where it started and as I suspected, the original link is to a web site that claims to be regulated by the Ministry of Justice for handling claims. The site does not actually say who is handling the claims nor does it quote a CRM number as it should.

Just another claims company peddling the propaganda.

kevinelly

Credit-Crunched wrote: »

"The poodles will have you believe that the lenders can do not wrong and it is your moral obligation to repay your debts even when the lenders have either ripped you off or acted totally contrary to UK Law."

If they have ripped people off then fine Petermb, however if you are suggesting that writing off a debt on a technicality is morally right then your views are somewhat bizarre.

I am not condoning the mis selling of insurances or underhand tactics to lure people in, however if money is lent to someone, who applies for a loan and the only thing wrong in that transaction is the lack of a CA due to an administration error, then i feel it should be re-paid.

Our banking system is in meltdown for various reasons, however giving lenders more to fear about lending money will not aid our contures recovery.

I am pursuing a loan from BH to be made voidable. Tried to claim PPI back legitimately. Was fobbed off with their technicalities so have taken the route of pursuing them for the lot. Would never have done this if they had payed by the book and refunded my PPI. Fight fire with fire. Why should you be so sympathetic to these institutions? If they can get one over on the consumer they will. If they can use a technicality to get out of their obligations they will. As pmb says the law is there for everyone and when you know that these mercenaries will try to use it against you then you would have to be a fool not to use it to your own advantage.

itsnever2lateisit?

Natalie6999 wrote: »

You will be suggesting that the workhouses be reopened next.

The one in my village sold for £1.8m in 2007;)

~Brock~

Natalie6999 wrote: »

People suffer unfortunate unforseen events in their lives that have an effect on their ability to pay, it could be you next & would you not take advantage of any measure to help you maintain your standard of living?

You know what? I think that single statement sums this whole attitude up. Let's break it down.

"People suffer unfortunate events in their lives that have an effect on their ability to pay"

Quite true - I have no problem with that statement. However some people take steps to mitigate this by having some protection in place to cover things like redundancy and unforseen illness. This can be PPI, or some other income replacement insurance - it could even be (heaven forbid) an emergency savings fund.

Instead of bleating about such cover being mis-sold (and I have no sympathy for companies that do mis-sell it by the way), the media should understand the important part such cover plays - escpecially nowadays. In the event that the individual chooses not to cover themselves, because they presumably are not prepared to spend the extra few quid a month, it seems that they view it as the lenders fault for lending it in the first place and should therefore immediately seek a way out of paying it when the going gets tough.

"it could be you next & would you not take advantage of any measure to help you maintain your standard of living?"

The first thing I would do is look at how I could cut back, in order to ensure that those people I had entered into contracts with would be repaid to the best of my ability. How many people nowadays would consider dropping the Sky Sports and movies package, or maybe cutting down on the beer & fags? A certain standard of living is also not a god given right - escpecially when it was artificially boosted by unsustainable borrowing with no safety net in place.

To blame the lenders for the consequence of this is simply the easy way out and the longer it goes on for the longer the general population will be made to suffer from the fallout of the lack of availible credit. There are also, it seems, plenty of people around to encourage such attitudes, more for personal gain rather than any moral crusade.

Grow up people and take some responsibility !!!!!!.