A big big thankyou to all, £92000 better off

rog2

andys15 wrote: »

I completly agree with stu the don. Dont start congratulating this guy. He is basically a con man. He has spent £100000 and hasn't paid a penny back. What the hell did he spend over £100000 on. People in here sympahise with this guy, but he has probably lived like a king racking up this stupid amount of debt, with no intentions of giving it back. Who are the mugs, we are who pay back our debt.

At the risk of, but with no intention of, starting a well-aired argument, your statements are, at the very best, judgmental and do not appear to be backed by fact.
Without knowing the OP's full circumstances, how can you, or anyone, surmise that he 'probably lived like a king.......with no intention of ever giving it back'?
Not all 'alleged debtors' are con men, andy, and we do not know that he actually spent '£100,000 without paying a penny back'.
Many 'alleged debts' will be made up of a mix of 'original credit', charges - many of which are not only punitive, but often unlawful - and interest which may, or may not, be unreasonably high.
The fact that the OP has achieved what he says with help from the Financial Ombudsman and Trading Standards, as well as using template letters from this site, would indicate that there was, indeed, something wrong with the 'alleged debts' in the first place.
Of course, genuine debt should be paid back, and nowhere is that more advocated on this site - we do not condone deliberate or intentional Debt Avoidance and never have done.
We will, however, assist anyone, if only by pointing them in the direction of the correct legal institutions, who feel that the 'alleged debts', for which they are being pursued, are wrong or unfair.
I neither congratulate or criticise the OP - if those 'alleged debts' were unfair, non-existant or legally unenforceable and he has excercised his legal rights to avail of any protection that the Law affords him, then he has done nothing to warrant the criticism that you make.

MyLastFiver

I'm torn on this. Part of me thinks that, if you have had the benefit of the goods and services then you should pay back what you've borrowed and not try to wriggle out on a technnicality.

On the other hand, banks are the absolute scum of the earth and have been robbing us all blind for years. They deserve it.

Personally, I'll carry on paying back my debts bit by bit because, regardless of what other individuals or organizations do, I want to sleep soundly at night with a clear conscience.

StuTheDon

rog2 wrote: »

At the risk of, but with no intention of, starting a well-aired argument, your statements are, at the very best, judgmental and do not appear to be backed by fact.
Without knowing the OP's full circumstances, how can you, or anyone, surmise that he 'probably lived like a king.......with no intention of ever giving it back'?
Not all 'alleged debtors' are con men, andy, and we do not know that he actually spent '£100,000 without paying a penny back'.
Many 'alleged debts' will be made up of a mix of 'original credit', charges - many of which are not only punitive, but often unlawful - and interest which may, or may not, be unreasonably high.
The fact that the OP has achieved what he says with help from the Financial Ombudsman and Trading Standards, as well as using template letters from this site, would indicate that there was, indeed, something wrong with the 'alleged debts' in the first place.
Of course, genuine debt should be paid back, and nowhere is that more advocated on this site - we do not condone deliberate or intentional Debt Avoidance and never have done.
We will, however, assist anyone, if only by pointing them in the direction of the correct legal institutions, who feel that the 'alleged debts', for which they are being pursued, are wrong or unfair.
I neither congratulate or criticise the OP - if those 'alleged debts' were unfair, non-existant or legally unenforceable and he has excercised his legal rights to avail of any protection that the Law affords him, then he has done nothing to warrant the criticism that you make.

Rog - some good points but the OP is basically saying that they have had 90% of their debt written off. For a start, it is not written off (it is deemed unenforceable) and secondly it seems like a lot of errors to get 90% of your total written off. I hope for his/her sake that some of those creditors dont suddenly find the missing CCAs.

There may be very good reasons for the £100k plus debt (business loans etc), but if this extremely high. I cant imagine for one second that the OP has considered selling some of the goods they have availed of to pay off some of this debt.

I really believe it is these attitudes that have, at least partially, caused the credit crunch and I don't believe people on here should be called "an inspiration" or congratulated for it.

If there is an issue with the credit agreement then give back the good, or failing that, only pay back the original capital amount minus charges and interest.

rog2

StuTheDon wrote: »

Rog - some good points but the OP is basically saying that they have had 90% of their debt written off. For a start, it is not written off (it is deemed unenforceable) and secondly it seems like a lot of errors to get 90% of your total written off. I hope for his/her sake that some of those creditors dont suddenly find the missing CCAs.

There may be very good reasons for the £100k plus debt (business loans etc), but if this extremely high. I cant imagine for one second that the OP has considered selling some of the goods they have availed of to pay off some of this debt.

I really believe it is these attitudes that have, at least partially, caused the credit crunch and I don't believe people on here should be called "an inspiration" or congratulated for it.

If there is an issue with the credit agreement then give back the good, or failing that, only pay back the original capital amount minus charges and interest.

Your opinion, Stu - to which you are fully entitled - not necessarily mine. Thanks.

moneymakestheworldgoround

Not sure this post was designed to produce these kinds of responses.

Who are any of us to judge?

I think the original poster was offering hope and inspiration to people who were in the process, or considering, the route of reclaiming bank charges, PPI, and unenforcable CCA.

These are all legal ways of dealing with debts. Martin offers advice about this and a large part of this board is about dealing with this.

If you dont agree, dont read the post and offer judgement.

If you are in the processes described, I hope this gives you the hope to carry on.

Horses for courses and all that.

Fire_Fox

Remind me not to come on here when I am celebrating that my disputed service charge 'arrears' have been written off - the ones that I had every intention of paying until I discovered that I was being charged for invoices that were fraudulent. The managing agents have deliberately blocked me from seeking additional information, and have attempted to bully me into paying £160 a month for communal areas that are in a shocking state.

We don't know the full background and it's not like this board to judge. :mad:

andys15

I honestly think our society is going to the dogs. We are now in a blame culture. We are suing everyone, we are blaming everyone else for our shortcomings, and we seem to find loopholes in every little thing. Now I fully agree that banks take the mick, and have been for years, and I am all in favour of claiming unfair charges from the banks, BUT the OP borrowed alot of money and is now using some loophole in the paperwork in order not to repay these loans. The banks are not going to lose out, they will just find a way of getting more money out of joe public , ie mortgage rates, higher APRs to get a loan, increased APR on credit cards. I cannot think of any justification why the OP feels he can run up such huge debts and not pay it back, or escape without penalty. Some poor sod will be made bankrupt tomorrow, or reposssed. Some poor sod will be having a sleepless night tonight worrying about how to treat there kids tomorrow without a penny to there name, or living in fear of the ballifs coming round. If this OP has lived like a king running up this debt, and gets away with it, then it is morally wrong.

andys15

moneymakestheworldgoround wrote: »

Not sure this post was designed to produce these kinds of responses.

Who are any of us to judge?

I think the original poster was offering hope and inspiration to people who were in the process, or considering, the route of reclaiming bank charges, PPI, and unenforcable CCA.

These are all legal ways of dealing with debts. Martin offers advice about this and a large part of this board is about dealing with this.

If you dont agree, dont read the post and offer judgement.

If you are in the processes described, I hope this gives you the hope to carry on.

Horses for courses and all that.

Hopes and inspirations. False hope more like. When I first read the post, I though it was spam, and it still reads like spam. I hope people dont see this as a way out of debt. As I think they will be in for a huge shock...

blueback

Whoops, I upset some people.

My debt was due to spending within my means for years and paying it off, everything to losing my job and not being able to pay anything.

I went into a DMP and still continued to pay off what I could. During this DMP, Northern Crock took me to court and gained a charging order. At that point I felt absolutely gutted that I had spent years living on credit and paying it back and at my time of need and strill paying back I felt stabbed in the back.

I decided to sell the house and with what little left after paying back the charging order to start again.

It was pure luck that my solicitor knew about restrictions and that no creditor can fully secure personal debts with a charging order on a jointly owed property, that when I came to sell the house the full proceeds were paid into the Bank account. (see post about Charging Order Myth)

Now after being kicked in the teeth, I was not going to write a cheque to NR was I?

At this point we had no assets, renting and on a salaries that we could live within our means.

I pleaded with all the creditors to make me bankrupt, but none would and never do if you have no assets.

Determined not to have a crock CRA file for 6 years i started the process of asking for the CCA's, reclaiming PPI and default charges.

16 files containing lots of correspondence later most of the debt became unenforceable and the stuff that is left will be in limbo untill it is statute barred because they wont make me bankrupt and cant get a ccj as the default was not handled legally.

I felt bad about not honouring my debts as I do have morals, but feel a lot better now that the very banks that preech honor and moral duty did exactly as I did and got into debt without the the money to pay it back.

Hope that helps and placates some members views on here;)

Karen_30

Just wanted to wish you lots of luck for your future blueback - however you worked out clearing your debts they are gone and hopefully you can now have some deserved happiness after what seems a particularly bad time for you :-)

I have approx 50k of debt (originally 63k) and had to opt for a dmp due to large paycut (not my fault) - they're going....slowly! I've no doubt some creditors will get funny in time but will deal with it when and as.

Again, best of luck.

K x