Another hardship case!!

jdx

Neil1690 wrote: »

Hi JDX, no I have not gone down that route yet as Egg only ever charged me £12 for non-payment which I believe is what is considered to be a reasonable default sum. I believe I was only charged this amount 4 times- though the £48 would be a considerable sum for me in the position I am- but not a problem solver unfortunately.

I had deleted before seeing your response as I thought Egg are time wasters and are not quick in refunding and you need a quick sloution.

natweststaffmember

Neil1690 wrote: »

Hi JDX, no I have not gone down that route yet as Egg only ever charged me £12 for non-payment which I believe is what is considered to be a reasonable default sum. I believe I was only charged this amount 4 times- though the £48 would be a considerable sum for me in the position I am- but not a problem solver unfortunately.

If they are only charging you £12 that will come as a surprise to many Egg customers who are charged £16.00

natweststaffmember

Neil1690 wrote: »

I also think that some of the stuff outlined in your hardship guide would definitely apply to my situation, certainly points 139-140 specifically.

Many people may be in points 139-140 but it starts from 137 and goes on further than 140 so please read it a few times in its entirety.

Neil1690

Hi there again,

OK i have read this in its entirety again and still believe many of the points are relevant to my case. Admittedly, I am not yet in a position where I do not have a roof over my head but there comes a point where my folks will be unable to pay their bills as a direct consequence of having me living in their house contributing nothing. I have stated this in my previous letter to the bank and in actual fact the reason I moved back in with them was to try and help my financial situation. In all honesty, I should have continued renting, waiting for the default notices and threat of evictions to arrive and then sent off my claim. Why is the system designed to punish those who make efforts to help themselves...?

It should be noted that the parts relating to the 'non-priority' debts 'where there is no suprplus income' and not enough monies available to survive on a 'day-to-day basis' are directly related to the case I have put forward.

When I get paid on the 27th of this month, once all interest on the payday loans are paid(note:this is interest only, not the balance), along with rent, bills that are owed I will have £17 surplus income.

52p a day for an entire month.... How this could not constitute financial hardship is utterly beyond me....

the_insider

You mention paying for lunch at work. It seems obvious but have you considered taking a packed lunch? In my experience it costs about a third of the price of buying something from the canteen or shop. And is there a bus you could get? I know it's tempting to drive to work but just getting up half an hour earlier or whatever it might be can save you the money you need to get yourself out of this situation.

davidgmmafan

"If the lender holds the current account into which the customer’s wages are paid, it must not abuse its position by taking all the money that comes in."

The loan you mention to cover bank charges sounds very close to this, however I understand it is difficult to argue hardshipe retrospectively. Banks regularly do the above to peoples wages and benefits. I could change one thing it would be that!

natweststaffmember

Neil1690 wrote: »

Hi there again,

OK i have read this in its entirety again and still believe many of the points are relevant to my case. Admittedly, I am not yet in a position where I do not have a roof over my head but there comes a point where my folks will be unable to pay their bills as a direct consequence of having me living in their house contributing nothing. I have stated this in my previous letter to the bank and in actual fact the reason I moved back in with them was to try and help my financial situation. In all honesty, I should have continued renting, waiting for the default notices and threat of evictions to arrive and then sent off my claim. Why is the system designed to punish those who make efforts to help themselves...?

It should be noted that the parts relating to the 'non-priority' debts 'where there is no suprplus income' and not enough monies available to survive on a 'day-to-day basis' are directly related to the case I have put forward.

When I get paid on the 27th of this month, once all interest on the payday loans are paid(note:this is interest only, not the balance), along with rent, bills that are owed I will have £17 surplus income.

52p a day for an entire month.... How this could not constitute financial hardship is utterly beyond me....

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?p=156176#post156176

The above link is to two article from this year and 2004 about financial difficulties. The payday loans would not necessarily figure into the equation really.

Neil1690

How can they not come into it when the sole reason for them coming into existence was to meet the monthly loan payments to the bank, which itself was a direct result of bank charges imposed on me by the bank??!!

davidgmmafan

I can't access the link from work (before my shift honest), but the above is what I was thinking of. Also doesn't the company who made the payday loans have the same sort of responsibilities as the bank eg if the OP's circumstances are so tight that they are just covering interest and charges, the debt will never be paid off, shouldn't they at least consider lowering or freezing interest?

I don't see how anything else could be described as positive and sympathetic.

You are paying £527.50 a month (unless I've mis-understood the statement of affairs, it is a little difficult to follow). Mmore than five times what you spend in petrol to get to work. Whilst I'm NOT advocating stopping paying, only you can decide that, I strongly suggest getting some advice from the CAB or National Debtline. I used to volunteer for the CAB and I have used National debtline and beleive both would be helpful to you.

£527.50 is almost enough to go bankrupt, if this is you best option. Not an appealing option and not to be taken lightly but, as it stands at the moment, nothing is changing and you are killing yourself to stand still.

The balance on some of the loans is incredibly low, relative to the interest you are paying. I've not had any dealings with such companies myself but it would seem to me they've had thier pound of flesh (ie profit) so far and can't grumble too much if you do ultimately end up bankrupt. If they took you to court it would be evident you really can't afford the payments.

Regarding Egg credit card companies usually buckle very easily, quicker than the banks did even when they refunding charges left right and centre.

natweststaffmember

David, the issue is about priority debts.
Here is the link from April 2004 for you to read
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/39/financial-difficulty-debits-39.htm
There is also Ombudsman news from Jan/Feb 2010 which explains more as well.