We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Barclaycard's mean credit limit ?
Comments
-
never-in-doubt wrote: »All i'm saying is that in the eyes of the law, if the agreement is not binding then it becomes unenforceable. Morals (i.e. what you think) doesn't come into things and so the law remains.
Laws win in court - morals do not. If the banks cannot issue a legal document then why should you pay it when the law backs the fact that you may not be liable to pay it!
Yes its not legally theft but thats because of the way the law works.
It is tantamount to theft though as soon take legal action with your intention is to not pay it back therefore you are depriving the owner of that cash so it has become almost theft.
You should pay back as they lent you that money in good faith if you choose not to pay interest then thats up to you but at least if you pay back the capital you have not deprived the lender of what they lent you in good.
We all pay in the end one way or another!
Hence we are in a big financial pickle because people where lenty money the either won't or can't pay back and the bank went toxic with tons of bad debt!
If people can't grasp the concept that this cant go on we will be in a mess again in another few years.0 -
never-in-doubt wrote: »All i'm saying is that in the eyes of the law, if the agreement is not binding then it becomes unenforceable. Morals (i.e. what you think) doesn't come into things and so the law remains.
Laws win in court - morals do not. If the banks cannot issue a legal document then why should you pay it when the law backs the fact that you may not be liable to pay it!
all im going to say, http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2009/10/could-the-debt-write-off-industry-soon-become-a-write-off
Courts are seeing through people0 -
all im going to say, http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2009/10/could-the-debt-write-off-industry-soon-become-a-write-off
Courts are seeing through people
Well what you have 'said' means nothing - provision for unenforceability remains, the point highlighted refers specifically to the default the lender will add but these are reasonably easy to get removed separately as most lenders do not follow the correct procedures for issuing them either!
I think, before being clever, get the facts and your story right! The link you posted above is irrelevant and an isolated case involving one crappy bank and one customer who did, by all accounts, try it on.
The vast majority will still win because the provision for unenforceability remains for pre 04/07 accounts.
As for courts seeing through people, I wasn't aware that judges just overrode legislation because of their beliefs (morals) and until I see sight of such then i'll just ignore that last quote cos it is pure speculation and unfounded. As I said, the judge above agreed that RBS could leave the default if they wanted, however any decent lawyer will win on the grounds no agreement = no reporting cos last I checked the agreement is where you authorise the lender to share data so without it, where is this authority? Hmmmmmm..... The case above was not as clear cut as you make out....
2010 - year of the troll
Niddy - Over & Out :wave:
0 -
never-in-doubt wrote: »Utter nonsense - you keep spouting rubbish like this yet have no idea of the actual facts at hand do you?
1. It is not wriggling out of anything, it is a legally binding contract pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - if it does not conform then it can be unenforceable which means the debt cannot be pursued. Nothing whatsoever to do with wriggling out of anything!
2. These people are not stealing from anyone - learn the meaning of the word theft before you try and argue this point :mad:
3. The fact that debt is written off has no bearing on you or rates you pay - if you apply for a product and get a high quote (APR) then look in the mirror at your own credit status - don't blame others! The facts of the matter is that debt is written off against profits for the company - you are not charged anything extra!
4. Learn the facts before you preach your rubbish! :rolleyes:
He has a point though.
It does cut into the lenders profits but they'll claw these back somehow, they're not just going to accept these losses are they? They'll just increase the APR, which has happened on all of my credit cards since I've owned them. There is already talk of charging for bank accounts due to the recent claims, and if this goes ahead it's a prime example of this being passed to the customers.
Im not saying you shouldn't claim back money if you can, but it will be passed on to the consumers at the end of the day and to think otherwise is naive.0 -
bingy_burge wrote: »You can rape an old lady get 12 years be back free as a bird within 6 years.
The same type of person can take out credit spend the money happily and then get advice on the net to wriggle out of any responsiblity of paying it back because of a slightly wrongly worded agreement.
Are you saying that a debtor who challenges the enforcability of their consumer credit agreement is likely to be a rapist ?
Or are you saying that the act of challenging an enforcable agreement is as morally wrong as the act of rape ?
Either way, I find it very strange that you have to bring up a dispicable criminal act and liken it to a perfectly legal litigation process. And all because the OP didn't get the Credit Limit they were hoping for. Bizarre
0 -
He has a point though.
Where? I must have missed it amongst the drivvle....?It does cut into the lenders profits but they'll claw these back somehow, they're not just going to accept these losses are they?
Yes of course they do, they have risk and business loss adjustors to work on that front; as I always say if the rate offered is too high then go elsewhere! The losses are written off against company profit meaning less bonus' for the shareholders - it does not directly affect you and I...They'll just increase the APR, which has happened on all of my credit cards since I've owned them.
Means you're classed as high risk then - lol, what part of that don't you grasp?There is already talk of charging for bank accounts due to the recent claims, and if this goes ahead it's a prime example of this being passed to the customers.
As been the norm for the rest of EU/US for the last few years you mean? i.e., we're simply joining the revolution! :beer:Im not saying you shouldn't claim back money if you can, but it will be passed on to the consumers at the end of the day and to think otherwise is naive.
It will not be and I am anything but naive! :rotfl: 2010 - year of the troll
Niddy - Over & Out :wave:
0 -
Are you saying that a debtor who challenges the enforcability of their consumer credit agreement is likely to be a rapist ?
Or are you saying that the act of challenging an enforcable agreement is as morally wrong as the act of rape ?
Either way, I find it very strange that you have to bring up a dispicable criminal act and liken it to a perfectly legal litigation process. And all because the OP didn't get the Credit Limit they were hoping for. Bizarre
Mate - I reckon (like so many others) he thinks it is fine to compare a criminal act with a debt (civil legislation) which pretty much confirms what i've been saying - unless he knows what he's on about then best to give up!
Rape is the same as unenforceability is it? Cool, i'll go rape myself a few virgin nuns later tonight then in the knowledge i'll get off on (whats the word again?) - ahh, a technicality!
LOL :rotfl: :rotfl: 2010 - year of the troll
Niddy - Over & Out :wave:
0 -
Yeh I just pointing out how flawed are legal system is.
If you ignore the rape coment and just focus on the non repayment of debt.
Once you put in a claim that the credit agreement is enforcable you are in effect attempting to deprive the bank/credit card company of money they lent and that althought its civil matter is a legalised theft!0 -
bingy_burge wrote: »Yeh I just pointing out how flawed are legal system is.
If you ignore the rape coment and just focus on the non repayment of debt.
Once you put in a claim that the credit agreement is enforcable you are in effect attempting to deprive the bank/credit card company of money they lent and that althought its civil matter is a legalised theft!
You dont claim its enforceable, you simply ask the lender to send the legal documents and if they fail or there are inconsistencies then it becomes unenforceable.... as I say, its not something you seem to know much about so maybe best you drop it eh?
Its also got nothing to do with theft, more mismanagement of financial and regulatory documents by the lender
2010 - year of the troll
Niddy - Over & Out :wave:
0 -
Same for me. Most of my cards are around £7k-£9k (Egg is £14k), but BarclayCard gave me £740!!!!Little_Chicken wrote: »Not much help - but I have always found that Barclaycard give low limits, so don't use them anymore. Whereas other lenders usually give me between £7k-£10k. They once gave me a poxy £500!!! 0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards