Clear your Debt Comapnies for Credit Cards

cooltt

ElkyElky wrote: »

Of course it is to do about it being lawful. If they can't enforce the agreement by law, then they can't force you to pay it back. Paying it back or not comes entirely your decision. Why pay back a loan when you don't have to?

Lending money to family members is a different situation. In that situation, two people can be badly affected by the decision of not to repay. Whereas a bank will continue banking if you don't repay.

Lets face it, your an arrogant tw*t who needs to get the facts straight. It's not 'us' who got this country into the mess it is in, it's the banks.

No let's face facts you and others like you are moral less tw*ts who would sell their own grandmother to get out of paying back the money you owe over a technicallity in law AND since your all for exploiting legal loopholes to your own end, lets hope you or any of your family don't get murdered and the murderer get off on a technically in law. Not so helpful then is it.

ElkyElky

cooltt wrote: »

No let's face facts you and others like you are moral less tw*ts who would sell their own grandmother to get out of paying back the money you owe over a technicallity in law AND since your all for exploiting legal loopholes to your own end, lets hope you or any of your family don't get murdered and the murderer get off on a technically in law. Not so helpful then is it.

Perhaps you should run along, and understand how the legal system works. Murder, and unenforceable debt are two completely different and separate things.

A murder trial, for example, goes by evidence that has been collected by the forensic specialists and witness statements. It's evidential based. There is no technicality in the law that states murder is legal, and no possible way to exploit the law to the murders advantage. The decision of whether the murder is guilty or not, lies with the jury.

Unenforceability goes by whether a credit agreement exists, and if it is drafted in a way that is deemed to be legal in the eyes of the law. If the lender has failed to draft the credit agreement in a way that can be enforced by law, not my problem... they've dug the hole for themselves.

I can't see where your coming from by comparing the two situations, since they are clearly different in so many ways. lol, moron.

How amusing. :rotfl:

Edit: As for the grandmother comment, I had an excellent and sarcastic comment to reply with however I think I'll just laugh at you.

NickX

What

On another thread someone compared debtors who challenge their agreements to rapists, now they are as bad a murderers.

Get a grip people. Whatever your moral opinion on challenging the legitimacy of your debts, there is absolutely no comparison to serious criminal actions such as rape or murder.

_Andy_

Groundhog day.

cooltt

ElkyElky wrote: »

Perhaps you should run along, and understand how the legal system works. Murder, and unenforceable debt are two completely different and separate things.

A murder trial, for example, goes by evidence that has been collected by the forensic specialists and witness statements. It's evidential based. There is no technicality in the law that states murder is legal, and no possible way to exploit the law to the murders advantage. The decision of whether the murder is guilty or not, lies with the jury.

Unenforceability goes by whether a credit agreement exists, and if it is drafted in a way that is deemed to be legal in the eyes of the law. If the lender has failed to draft the credit agreement in a way that can be enforced by law, not my problem... they've dug the hole for themselves.

I can't see where your coming from by comparing the two situations, since they are clearly different in so many ways. lol, moron.

How amusing. :rotfl:

Edit: As for the grandmother comment, I had an excellent and sarcastic comment to reply with however I think I'll just laugh at you.

Your total lack of understanding of my comments thus far only serves to confirm what i and other intelligent law abiding citiezns reading this forum have concluded, in that you have no comprehensive understanding of the implicatons and effects (and there are many) of the damage your and others actions are causing not just to our fragile economy but to the British financial sector as a whole.

Believe me when i say that were it not for UK's huge and lucrative fanacial sector (one of the biggest in the world) the UK would be little more that a tired washed up nation with
NO manufacturing,
NO aguculture,
NO sizeable ecomnomics of any kind. So i'll make it easy for you to understand, that would mean,
NO low rate easily obtainable morgages to buy your own home with,
NO low rate easily obtainable loans to buy what you want when you want,
NO credit cards with huge limits and 0% ballance transfers.

Which all equates to the vast majority of the UK population living quite a misserable existance and not the current standard of living we all enjoy.

The fact that you cannot understand where i'm coming from on this betrays your thinly veiled attempt at intelligence in your previous posts.
I do not need to know the exact details of how our judicial system works no more than i need to know how an engine works in order to drive a car. Therefore it does not follow that i am not capable on commenting on the subject.

I have not ever said that the banking sector has not made mistakes, they have and we know they have but they are attempting to rectify those mistakes so you and i can continue to live the way we have become acustomed to. To kick them while they were down by wriggling out of debt which YOU have built up at their expense only serves to force the banks into introducing tough lending criteria for the rest of us. I think the expression that sums up your kind is "stuff the rest of you, i'm alright Jack!"

I'd also like to add that those big nasty banks also employ alot of people with families and morgages just like you and me, but then again why should you care.

So why not keep your schoolboy comments / smilies to yourself and stop showing yourself up for the illiterate, morrally bunkrupt, distatseful individual that you so obviously are.

ElkyElky

cooltt wrote: »

Your total lack of understanding of my comments thus far only serves to confirm what i and other intelligent law abiding citiezns reading this forum have concluded, in that you have no comprehensive understanding of the implicatons and effects (and there are many) of the damage your and others actions are causing not just to our fragile economy but to the British financial sector as a whole.

Believe me when i say that were it not for UK's huge and lucrative fanacial sector (one of the biggest in the world) the UK would be little more that a tired washed up nation with
NO manufacturing,
NO aguculture,
NO sizeable ecomnomics of any kind. So i'll make it easy for you to understand, that would mean,
NO low rate easily obtainable morgages to buy your own home with,
NO low rate easily obtainable loans to buy what you want when you want,
NO credit cards with huge limits and 0% ballance transfers.

Which all equates to the vast majority of the UK population living quite a misserable existance and not the current standard of living we all enjoy.

The fact that you cannot understand where i'm coming from on this betrays your thinly veiled attempt at intelligence in your previous posts.
I do not need to know the exact details of how our judicial system works no more than i need to know how an engine works in order to drive a car. Therefore it does not follow that i am not capable on commenting on the subject.

I have not ever said that the banking sector has not made mistakes, they have and we know they have but they are attempting to rectify those mistakes so you and i can continue to live the way we have become acustomed to. To kick them while they were down by wriggling out of debt which YOU have built up at their expense only serves to force the banks into introducing tough lending criteria for the rest of us. I think the expression that sums up your kind is "stuff the rest of you, i'm alright Jack!"

I'd also like to add that those big nasty banks also employ alot of people with families and morgages just like you and me, but then again why should you care.

So why not keep your schoolboy comments / smilies to yourself and stop showing yourself up for the illiterate, morrally bunkrupt, distatseful individual that you so obviously are.

I can honestly say that I could not be bothered reading all of that. To be frank, I find you impertinent.

I could sit here all evening and argue with you, however I have a monobrow that I need to pluck, and turn into two separate eyebrows, which is much more interesting and entertaining than reading your babble bull !!!!!!.

In addition, I note your comments of my being an illiterate individual and I suggest you at least use a spell checker. Perhaps you should take your own advice and stop showing yourself up for the illiterate pathetic little man that you are. Consider accepting my kind donation of an Oxford Dictionary, compliments of us all here at MSE.

Have a pleasant evening!



"Morrally Bunkrupt" :rotfl:

thorsoak

Frankly, I'm horrified at the lack of morality shown as well as the disrespectful language to other posters on this thread.

Very very disappointed ....its what I expect to see on Yahoo - not on Martin's Money

moonrakerz

_Andy_ wrote: »

Groundhog day.

...............without Andie MacDowell !

bingy_burge

Bottom line borrowing money in good faith and then not paying it back because a techincallity within the agreement doesnt make the goods or services you have had any less bought and enjoyed.

The reason we are in this mess is banks lent to people who couldn't pay or won't pay back what they borrowed and so this will keep making peoples lifes a misery while individuals who spend money they can't afford then decide that because of error in the paperwork the banks and everyone else can pay for their borrowing.

I expect the same people who do this and encourage it wouldn't lend a penny to anoyone in debt because they believe they won't learn their lesson. The same must happen with peoples who debts get written off due to an error in a contract.

NickX

bingy_burge wrote: »

The reason we are in this mess is banks lent to people who couldn't pay or won't pay back what they borrowed

This comment about the current situation being due to "bad debtors" keeps getting repeated on these boards, and it is simply not the case.

The commercial side of banking has generally remained stable and profitable (with the noteable exception of Northern Rock who were running a flawed business model), the financial crisis came from the investment side of banking. This was nothing to do with Credit Cards, Loans and the kind of financial products on the high street, no the crisis came from bad investment decisions made by fund managers in Canary Wharf whose primary aim was to line their own pockets with enormous bonus payments in the short-term rather than the long term longevity of the bank.