"This board is for help not for judgement" - how do you take that?

coolcait

It's one of the stickies at the top of the board - and it gets referenced regularly.

Yet, I often feel that my own understanding of it is different from others. So, I wondered if it would be helpful for people to share their views of what it means to them? OK, we probably won't all agree, but we might end up understanding each other better :T. Or not :rotfl:.

My own view is that we are being asked not to judge how other forum members came to be in a position where they need to (or feel they need to) become bankrupt. Or where they are made bankrupt. So, for example, we are being asked not to assume that a poster has tried to follow a WAG lifestyle (to cite a recent BBC Newsbeat article) without having the necessary footballer boyfriend/husband/significant other.

What happens if someone posts up an SOA which shows that they have been living beyond their means? IMO, it is perfectly fair to point out areas where they could (could) economise if they wished to do so. It is also perfectly fair to point out how certain spending patterns might have contributed to financial difficulties, and how those spending patterns could (could) be addressed - if the person wished to do so. The ultimate decision lies with the person posting - just as the ultimate decision on applying for bankruptcy or not lies with that person.

There's an element of judgement in coming to those conclusions - just as there is an element of judgement in suggesting to someone that they could actually allow themselves more money for a certain item of expenditure. It's interesting to see what is deemed to be 'judging me' and what is deemed to be 'good judgement' (even if not in so many words).

What happens if someone says that they have done something against bankruptcy legislation, or are proposing to do something against bankruptcy legislation? This forum asks us to report illegal posts. My view is that forum members also have a collective responsibility to point out any illegality while the thread is 'live'. Otherwise there is a risk that the illegal behaviour is accepted, and may be copied by others - possibly to their detriment.

What if someone says something which may not be technically illegal, but which other FMs find uncomfortable, immoral, unacceptable etc? Personally, I see no reason why they should not say so, in those terms. Their point of view is as valid as the opposing point of view. And, given that this is a public message board, a variety of views is important as this allows all readers - including those who never post - to base their own decisions and actions on a broad range of options and opinions.

So, in my view, a post which says "I think what you are doing/proposing to do is 'wrong' because..." is perfectly acceptable, and in no way a breach of the principle of 'help not judgement'.

In many ways, it would be deeply unhelpful not to tell someone that they risked breaching bankruptcy legislation and getting themselves into further difficulties. And, if they've already done something wrong, how does it help them or other posters to say nothing, and risk others doing the same thing and getting themselves into trouble?

Sometimes you have to use a fair bit of 'judgement' to be able to 'help'.

I'm interested to know how others see this issue.

freeoffers

coolcait wrote: »

It is also perfectly fair to point out how certain spending patterns might have contributed to financial difficulties, and how those spending patterns could (could) be addressed - if the person wished to do so. .

I disagree because it really depends on what the OP wants us to address. If the OP is vague then of course a trhead will be ambivalent in its answers. But if we're asked a specfic question that has nothing to do with asking about spending patterns it is rude to mention these simply because we're not babies on here and if people want lectures on the mistakes they made they'll go to uni.

For me what is important is to address the queries a person has in their OP without being judgemental. yes, there are times when we need to know more info but ive found ppl on here sometimes too quick to become moral police and judge the actions of others. Lets remember we only know a little about people's circumstances.

Thats not to say we should tread on eggshells. But There's difference between giving information that could be deemed negative and being judgemental. its a fine line but in the end if i make a post asking for specfic information it is reasonbale to expect subsequent posts to stick to what i asked and if some of the comments are a little negative so be it, as long as they are related to what i asked for.

maxmycardagain

The problem is that the written word on a forum/screen can be read any number of ways by different visitors, it can lead to some confusion when not knowing exactly what an OP has MEANT to infer, rather than what is typed..

kdean

coolcait wrote: »

What happens if someone says that they have done something against bankruptcy legislation, or are proposing to do something against bankruptcy legislation? This forum asks us to report illegal posts. My view is that forum members also have a collective responsibility to point out any illegality while the thread is 'live'. Otherwise there is a risk that the illegal behaviour is accepted, and may be copied by others - possibly to their detriment.

What if someone says something which may not be technically illegal, but which other FMs find uncomfortable, immoral, unacceptable etc? Personally, I see no reason why they should not say so, in those terms. Their point of view is as valid as the opposing point of view. And, given that this is a public message board, a variety of views is important as this allows all readers - including those who never post - to base their own decisions and actions on a broad range of options and opinions.

So, in my view, a post which says "I think what you are doing/proposing to do is 'wrong' because..." is perfectly acceptable, and in no way a breach of the principle of 'help not judgement'.

In many ways, it would be deeply unhelpful not to tell someone that they risked breaching bankruptcy legislation and getting themselves into further difficulties. And, if they've already done something wrong, how does it help them or other posters to say nothing, and risk others doing the same thing and getting themselves into trouble?

Sometimes you have to use a fair bit of 'judgement' to be able to 'help'.

I'm interested to know how others see this issue.

I agree that in order to 'help' all forum members it is right to point out the moral issues behind a decision. However, I do think that wording should be chosen very carefully to avoid a thread turning into a witch hunt. I know there are people out there who only want to stir up trouble in the forum so why give it to them. Point out the legislation or moral issues and leave it at that. We do not need to publicly reprimand someone for their choices or possible choices.

philnicandamy

And sometimes a post can appear written by someone using an AE just for the sake of causing an argument...even though you've been helping the poster for many posts only to find its a P*** take

kdean

maxmycardagain wrote: »

The problem is that the written word on a forum/screen can be read any number of ways by different visitors, it can lead to some confusion when not knowing exactly what an OP has MEANT to infer, rather than what is typed..

Exactly, I had the perfect situation the other day when my my husband text me a problem with travel whilst he was out on a stag do. I wanted to offer my help and was going to text "what do you want me to do?" which can be taken two ways, in the end I decided to text "what do you need me to do?" which got my message across without things getting twisted. My point is think before you press submit.

fatou256

coolcait wrote: »

It's one of the stickies at the top of the board - and it gets referenced regularly.

Yet, I often feel that my own understanding of it is different from others. So, I wondered if it would be helpful for people to share their views of what it means to them? OK, we probably won't all agree, but we might end up understanding each other better :T. Or not :rotfl:.

My own view is that we are being asked not to judge how other forum members came to be in a position where they need to (or feel they need to) become bankrupt. Or where they are made bankrupt.

it is my understanding that this board is not for judgement as to face bankruptcy is hard enough but to go for it , it is even harder.

many people who come to this board are very depressed, even suicidl after meany years of bad treatment form their creditor .

many people who came to face BR didnt leave beyond their mean as lifestyle choice but by necessity , it was tht or no food, medication etc.. .. .

however i came across where the some of th e illeglity were faced this board does promote idleness or even taking out our responsability but give us a tool to face BR as smoothly as possible.

Pammybun

Well I don't think anyone has a right to judge as without knowing the poster personally and their circumstances, frame of mind etc we are not in any position to judge.

I mean someone could have gone on a massive spending spree and accummulated debt that way but the question would be why they did that - often spending masks depression (in the same way that people might comfort eat) so in those circumstances we might judge someone for basically being depressed.

The only people that I do judge are those who think that people who are BR are a bunch of idiots who went out and cheerfully maxed out credit cards and had no intention of paying. Being honest I have not come across one BR yet who firts that criteria yet I feel that is the way many non BR people view BR's.

Myself and my OH have worked all our lives and paid taxes (a large amount) and progressed through the property ladder. We have never claimed benefit in our entire lives and have never had credit cards, Hp or anything. Our mistake???????................to trust a national brewery who gave us false accounts on a business.

Hard to swallow (even harder since we have just poroved they knew the accounts were false) but here we are, no house and BR.

So if someone judged me I would be pretty Pi**ed off to say the least as we did everythign right (we even had an independent accountant look at the books before we took over the business).

Pam

PS The accounts were based on illegal out of hours trading which accounted for £57,000 per year.

crow

No one in this board is in a position to judge how others got in the situation they are. Every bankrupt has avoided paying at least some debts to their creditors. So everyone has benefited from the bankruptcy laws to some degree or other. If you wnat to start talking about morals, you're in a very dangerous area, as everyone's morals are different and depend on their particular circumstances. Is it immoral to withdraw more money from your account so you can petition your own bankruptcy? Perhaps it is, I offer no judgement, but if that person is being hounded to the point of suicide by illegal/unfair debt chasing practices, can it be justified, or does it become moral to protect oneself and one's family from potential harm by such practices?

If you want to talk about self restraint, then maybe someone shouldn't have spent so much money (that's obvious) but maybe they had little choice in order to provide a lifestyle for their family? Or maybe the spending masked other problems as already pointed out.

We shoudln't forget that everyone here can be criticised by someone, it isn't hard to find fault, and basically the same criticsms can be levelled at everyone.

For those who criticse people who start a question long the lines of 'how do I avoid paying this', well, the title of this site is moneySAVINGexperts, people come here to learn about saving money. I daresay some of you have used Tesco vouchers..... is that any different from trying to save money elsewhere?

Is it immoral to tailor your circumstances to give you the best outcome? eg, by considering your income and the impact on your IPO? It depends on your view. It isn't illegal.

I'll give 2 examples that I've come across as a newbie. One where a member was roundly criticsed in a couple of different posts by the same members
because he wanted advice on how to make the best of his situation. he was roundly criticsed by virtually all contributors. In another thread, a Member described debts of probably £200k +, and complained about having to buy her car back from the OR, and was worried about him asking again for the personal number plate........., now, no one criticsed that second member, and one of the members who criticised the first one, sympathised with the second...... kind of difficult to see the difference isn't it. A response along the lines of "your creditors have lost £100k and you're complaining about paying for the car that the OR feels is unreasnable for you to keep, and you can buy back your interest in your home and you still complain? Perhaps if you can get yor hands on that money it should be handed over to the OR anyway" That kind of response would at least have been consistent. (The above may not be verbatime accounts and are used as examples of subjective judgement)

If someone asks about breaking the law, then, no that's not acceptable because you then become an accomplice, and are breaking the law yourself, as well as bringing the board into disrepute.

I think it's acceptable to point out how a course of action may be viewed by others, but not to say you are wrong to do that. One is giving the person information to consider that may affect his decision, the other is expressing your judgement.
This board is

Radiantsoul

I suppose the thing is to be kind and charitiable in your assumption of motives of posters.

I don't think suggesting that some can cut expenditure is wrong. Nor that they should seek to make bankruptcy a last resort.

From societies point of view it is a good thing there is some shame or embarassment in being made bankrupt. Otherwise no-one would repay their debts.

fatou256

the shame and embarassement ids nto due form the Br per se but more the feeling of failure it is a shame that creditor who use harassment do not feel shame for their action ! and i knwo some of my creditor use pretty illegal methods to get where they wanted have they been told off

for once i do not feel ashame for sticking my fingers up to some of my creditor as most of them were ruthless , and even putting charges after charges and added interest on the top of it ! they were even offering me loan even thghou they knew i wasnt able to repay them as i was inhsopital and having no job but hey they offer me loans, overdraft credit card etc... even natwest kept one accoutn open even though i request it to close for the sole purpose of puttign charges on it for being overdranw by 10 p ended up with an unauthorise overdraft of 800 pounds go figure

funnyly enough today i receive statement of a bank account which is in overdraft , managed by my OR to be told they slap an 150 pounds charge on it ?!?!?! even though i am bankrupt and they know it and wont get one penny form me they still do it !

i am not passing judgement onto fellow BR because the situation is difficult and having lost quite a bit in the process for once i would like to see creditor put into their place and be held accountable .

the majority of people looking down on BR are the one who are ignorant of BR and its mechanism.