write off credit card debt

henrik1971

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Not another one! Get off your high horse and smell the coffee! :mad::mad: The CCA is an act, of parliament and must be adhered to and if it is not then the lenders are in breach and therefore the debtor need not pay the balance. Jees, instead of piping up with bitterness, just walk on by - please, do us a favour!

Ignorant is not bliss, contrary to popular belief

I think you're right, but Manic Mum would have been better making her point in a different way. Surely the OP didn't rack up the debt knowing it could be wiped off? Nor is the OP looking into this course of action as some kind of legal crusade to test consumer credit law. When the credit agreement was entered into, the OP would be fully expecting to have to repay.

Sure the lenders have not made their agreements airtight, so tough luck to them. But, I think many people raise an eyebrow or two at the cyncism of people trying to get their debts wiped out. In contract law, if there is a defect in a contract making it unenforceable, a judge would always ask himself - "what was the original intention of both parties in forming this contract?". This seems a common sense approach to me, and a bit of a shame that the same practicality and pragmatism like isn't brought brought to bear in these cases.

leveller2911

ManicMum wrote: »

No mate. you are wrong. It is people like this and people like you that are destroying society. people who take no responsibility for themselves and then expect everyone else to pick up the tab. You get yourself into a mess, get yourself out. No one pays my bills for me and I wouldn't expect them to either. You buy the goods, you pay for them. If you can't afford them, don't get them in the first place.

Save your wrath Manicmum, your only saying the same as countless others have stated over the last year or so.

There are two camps on the Forum with regards to people trying to renege on their debts, those for and those against and neither can agree..... There are far better threads to read than this one, ive just put the kettle on, fancy a cuppa, same goes for you NID tea or coffee???:D

never-in-doubt

ILW wrote: »

Helo again.

None of the links show any evidence of credit card debts being written off, they do refer to unenforceability.

I would suggest there is a difference between the two and the OP seems to be under the impression that they will get the former. I would suggest it is probably worth a punt if you are already in financial straits with nothing to lose, but as an easy route to "free money" could well make a "not too bad situation" worse even if you "win".
Guidance on the possible pitfalls seems to be rather ignored in the race to get the cash and get one over on the banks.

You know me by now mate, i'm not into the jack-the-lads who want a freebie but I do stand by those that have been clearly ripped off, my mate captain has just been sent a clear forgery - I mean it was stamped as received in 2005 but apparently he signed the agreement in 2006 - impossible lol..... See here: #550

So the lenders are definitely dodgy - it we done that it would be fraud, pure and simple!

The links were there to show that it is a law and not, as some think, a legal loophole..... anyway - i'm not going here with you :D

never-in-doubt

henrik1971 wrote: »

Sure the lenders have not made their agreements airtight, so tough luck to them. But, I think many people raise an eyebrow or two at the cyncism of people trying to get their debts wiped out. In contract law, if there is a defect in a contract making it unenforceable, a judge would always ask himself - "what was the original intention of both parties in forming this contract?". This seems a common sense approach to me, and a bit of a shame that the same practicality and pragmatism like isn't brought brought to bear in these cases.

I agree entirely with your post - however one point to mention is that fortunately the CCA would not conform to contract law in the same respect because the lender will always win, in that a lot of loans etc were issued in duress (i.e. you owe us £6k on a CC either get a loan with us or we'll sell the CC debt to a DCA and take your house etc) - yes, that has been said to people before (by Natwest as it happens)..... What I mean is a contract should be fair and not cheated in any way, i.e. adding PPi when you left the branch etc and being told 'it must be taken with the loan' (in other words I need a bonus of commission!)

All i'm saying is the CCA was formed to protect both the lender and consumer, but the lenders have abused it for years and a little payback keeps them on their toes.... this will die a slow death and by this time in 2012 there will be little mention of it again.

never-in-doubt

leveller2911 wrote: »

There are far better threads to read than this one, ive just put the kettle on, fancy a cuppa, same goes for you NID tea or coffee???:D

Like this post - haha! - #10

Tea please - 1 sugar white :D

(do you have any rich tea or penguins to dunk?).... i'm easy to please!

ILW

The OP said that they were told (or heard) that ALL pre 2007 agreements could be written off.
I don't think that putting a little balance into the advice would go amiss, rather than the "get stuck in they are all thieves" approach which could be very poor advice in some cases.

never-in-doubt

ILW wrote: »

The OP said that they were told (or heard) that ALL pre 2007 agreements could be written off. I don't think that putting a little balance into the advice would go amiss, rather than the "get stuck in they are all thieves" approach which could be very poor advice in some cases.

Ok, apologies missed that point.....

The OP was mis informed because as we both know, hardly any get 'written off' but a few are unenforceable (as you rightly said, big difference between the two) :cool:

never-in-doubt

leveller2911 wrote: »

fancy a cuppa, same goes for you NID tea or coffee???:D

Where's that cuppa - have you gone to china to get the leaves :rotfl::rotfl:

Tetleys 4 Leveller

Here's one I made earlier! Enjoy

michaelvintner

ManicMum wrote: »

Sorry but is it me but does anyone else find it morally wrong that you can rack up credit card debts and then try to wriggle out of them by saying agreements are unenforceable? Even if that is true, it surely can't be right that the rest of us are paying off our debts on our cards or not buying things in the first place to run up these debts? How right is it that you can spend what you like then just think it's ok to get it wiped out? I think that's disgraceful.

Exactly, would it not have been better to pay the £495 off the credit cards.

That amount is less than 5% of what I owe to various credit cards but I would rather pay them than give it to someone who promise something they cannot deliver.

Credit card companys have phones and you can come to arrangments with them if you are having problems paying.

If you want send me £400 and I promise I will do all this crap and wipe all your credit cards. If 1000 people send me £400 thats a cool £40000 for me but I have done sod all.

michaelvintner

leveller2911 wrote: »

Save your wrath Manicmum, your only saying the same as countless others have stated over the last year or so.

There are two camps on the Forum with regards to people trying to renege on their debts, those for and those against and neither can agree..... There are far better threads to read than this one, ive just put the kettle on, fancy a cuppa, same goes for you NID tea or coffee???:D

Tea please, two sugars.