FLM Quick are destroying us.

Loans_Scams

Currently the situation is with the FOS for investigation. The person who is dealing with the investigation has contacted me explaining her role. Ironically as soon as the FOS wrote to them then FLM sent a cheque returning the money they took from my account in February.

It has already cost FLM Quick £500 for the investigation. This one they are not going to win. They admit the bankruptcy and still sent correspondence about the loan afterwards. Dear o dear if that isn't harassment I don't know what is. Not my fault that FLM Quick part of Haymarket Lending Ltd doesn't know what the left or right hand is doing and they done nothing about the websites. The petition has a few signers so if anyone is looking for it it is Richmond Group Scam on Google

OpheliaCSN

Hax wrote: »

I'm not preaching - just stating facts. What's the point in simply saying that the current system is "wrong" when you are unable to offer any alternative proposals?

Personally, I think it's the current "want it now" mindset that is at fault - that's what creates the market for all these loans and that's what gets people in to trouble - they just see the opportunity to have something now, without thinking about the long-term - how they're going to pay it back and how they're going to cope if something goes wrong.



That's a fantastic way of demonstrating that things are wrong in the financial world. I mean, you wouldn't catch a mainstream bank like Barclay's sponsoring football would you?

I agree with this. The reason we are in the dire financial mess we are in around the world is because of this type of toxic credit. Everyone wants to buy huge tvs, phones and everything else, but they don't want to work for any of it. They simply borrow money and don't think things through about how they are going to repay it, or even if they can realistically afford it.

Whilst I have every sympathy for the OP whose partner is seriously ill, I wonder what the £300 loan was actually for? And because it's such a small amount of money (for a loan!) why couldn't it just be saved up, if it was for some silly gadget, or if it was for some essential living expense, it could have easily been borrowed from family and friends. Better still, an overdraft would have been cheaper!

I think that people need to get with the programme about borrowing money for silly things. There was a post on the Your Say Pays forum a month or so ago which was a whinge and moan from someone that the bank had charged them X amount of money for helping themselves to a £300 overdraft - what really made me laugh was that the £300 was to buy a car for his daughter!!! This is typical of the mentality that goes with this sort of borrowing: "I want it now and I don't care how I get it or if I can pay it back".

I'm sick of the whining from these people. Save for what you want, and stop borrowing money for things that aren't essential!! The rest of us manage it. My husband and I work very hard and we save for the things we want - if we can't afford it, we don't buy it. Simple as.

I have a neighbour who is a social worker - she recently visited a family who didn't have any money to buy food for their children, so they were being considered for some sort of emergency benefit. When my neighbour walked into the house these people (who had no money for food) had a brand new 64" plasma tv, a smartphone each, two computers, 3 laptops, (all lying around the front room), a Sky movies and sports subscription, and the kids were walking about with their "designer" clothes. What is wrong with these people??

OpheliaCSN

lionelator wrote: »

In the end payday companies fill a niche area which is providing loans to very high risk people, and they manage to do this by charging enormous interest rates which regular banks wouldnt, but then regular banks wont loan to the people who need to resort to payday companies.
As these people are high risk, they often default, and when they do the methods of claiming the money owed to these companies is often quite harsh, but then they are not running charities, they do need to get back the money they owe, and the terms and conditions are made clear before the loan is taken out. With alot of the people defaulting on debts with these companies, just asking them nicely and infrequently is not really going to get anything done, is it?
If anything, people have come up with methods, for example, changing bank accounts and writing to these companies and stating you will pay them a fixed amount, say 1 pound, or 5 pounds, indefinitely, which if anything is a bit unfair to the loan companies really, isnt it?
I mean, if any of the people complaining about how unfair these loan companies are, lent someone 100 pounds, and then got nothing back and a letter without some excuse and the information that they were going to be paying back 1 pound as and when they could, I wonder how they would feel.

Well said!:T

jambojam

hmmm, bit of a rant there mrmuknuts!

I think a lot of people get rather caught up in situations with loans and there is always a human element to the misfortune.
I'm lucky in the respect that I've never had to take out a loan (apart from the student loan, and given what my degree has done for me I'd consider that one a waste). I don't want to ever be in a position where I need to take a high interest loan, but I would hope that they provide with it a clear understanding of what is owed and when it has to be repaid, clearly illustrated charges for non-payment and I think that maybe it would only be fair to see the high interest have a maximum term (3-5 yrs) and then have monies owed fall down to a level that reflects base rates. If they set out everything and are perhaps able to illustrate it when called upon by the customer, then it can help the customer budget for repayment.



loanscams - apologies, defamation liability is now out of english law as of 2009. So it does remain a civil offence. However, I would still not be inclined to keep up this website. If they were to decide to Launch a more personal campaign against you, then burden of proof falls upon you as a defendant. It also could harm the action you are currently taking against FLM, as you no longer appear as the victim but rather as someone maliciously trying to undermine a company to force it to write off your debt. Again in your explanation, so much of english law is defined by terms such as "reasonable" "fair", if a judge deems the action of creating the website then that could harm you as ultimately it is down to their interpretation of the facts and law. Still, very interested to hear how this goes for you. I know you said that you have a record of the phone call to cancel, if you have any kind of proof that they have said it has been cancelled then that's fantstic.

jambojam

Also, I have to ask loanscams...

How have you had so much bad luck with halifax, the un-named debt collection agency, virgin media and bt that you have needed to take legal action against all of them?


I hope you do pardon this impression, but it appears almost as if while bankrupt that you are making a living through filing lawsuits

Loans_Scams

jambojam wrote: »

Also, I have to ask loanscams...

How have you had so much bad luck with halifax, the un-named debt collection agency, virgin media and bt that you have needed to take legal action against all of them?


I hope you do pardon this impression, but it appears almost as if while bankrupt that you are making a living through filing lawsuits

Well it is what it is,
Firstly BT I think Early 2011
was quite some time ago they failed to provide an adequate service over a 7 month period. I won that case and BT Settled without a defence.

Second Virgin Media 2010
Basically the same problem as BT failed to provide and adequate service, Settled out of court without a defence. Just to note. I changed to o2 since BT and not had any issues. The problem was found to be the wiring in the exchange, not my phones as BT Claimed. BT also did some serious overcharges but got caught as I check my bills

Halifax October 2009
I originally sued Halifax for failing to provide money from our account in April 2009 the case went to court in October 2009
They defended the case and lost.

They used the Security system picking up transactions as fraudulent whilst abroad. I proved that I had contacted Halifax and many previous transactions had been completed at the same ATM so it was almost impossible that the transactions were fraudulent.

They were alerted to the fact that our card was blocked but did nothing about culminating in a missed flight that we had to pay for.


Halifax November 2009
Again Halifax blocked our cards whilst abroad this was less than two weeks after Halifax losing the above case. (So They Were Kind of Dumb)

I commenced proceedings against Halifax and used the overdraft to sort out the problem while abroad.

A senior manager agreed to write off the overdraft in exchange for me dropping the second lawsuit. He wrote this in an email and phone conversation. I dropped the lawsuit as agreed and they changed my bank account as agreed to stop hassle in the future and retain our overseas address instead of UK address so they our transactions are genuine.

Nothing happened and then all of a sudden in September 2011 about 18 months later I got a letter from Wescot demanding payment. I called and explained to them the circumstances and they wrote saying they would get back to me when completing there investigations.

Halifax called me and said they were reviewing my complaint and would get back to me in four weeks.

I received a letter from Halifax stating thank you for contacting us we will get back to you in four weeks. (They contacted me) Low and behold Halifax never got back to me.

Wescot never wrote to me saying they had completed there investigation. As far as I am concerned it was still in dispute.


April 25th (3 months after bankruptcy) received a letter from Moorcroft Debt Recovery purporting to be a pre-action notice. You know the type pay up in 7 days or Court action will commence.

Halifax claim they didn't know my address although they had written to my address numerous times. Account numbers, address was all provided to the OR (Official Receiver) OR confirms letters sent to Halifax that I am currently bankrupt. hence they are now the subject of a Harassment Lawsuit under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997. Case number 2QT64682.


In relation to FLM Quick I put this matter in the hands of the FOS ("Financial Ombudsman Service")

FLM Quick have already sent me a cheque for the repayment of the money they took without consent. thus in my opinion admitting guilt. They also return two other payments to my bank account.

They state even though I am subject of a bankruptcy order the loan will not be extinguished and they will continue placing faults on my credit file.

It is down to the FOS at the moment and should they fail to resolve the situation then FLM Quick will be on there way to the High Court on a Harassment Suit.

In relation to the website you mention, I have enough evidence to prove my points. Should they have wanted to take action they have exactly 1 year to issue proceedings from the date of first noticing the website.

I have the date they knew about the sites. It is highly unlikely they would issue any proceedings for the following reasons.

1 I do have proof.
2 The cost of taking this all the way would be about £120,000
3 Likely-hood of winning is slim.
4 If they did win or stood a chance of wining chances of recovery of costs is impossible. I am bankrupt remember.
4 I would give my cousin the websites prior to court action he would reside the domain names in the USA and host in the USA so extremely thin odds of getting the websites removed.

Altogether it would have been better for FLM Quick FLM Loans (Now Amigo Loans) Richmond Group and Haymarket Lending Ltd to have resolved this issue.

They chose not to.

Evidence is always a key point to everything in the Court Room, To be fair I do think I have enough experience to deal with a court case.

The websites wont harm this case at the FOS nor in court the only thing it could possibly do is bring a counter action. No matter what they do all the costs will be on them.

I spoke to a Director at FLM Quick he asked me to accept what the FOS and they will also. I said it depends what they say and what the resolution is.

The FOS are in receipt of the phone bill showing the phone call on the Friday as I stated and no phone on the Monday as FLM Quick stated. The evidence is going against FLM Quick.

I will be interesting to see what the FOS come up with. at the end of the day. But I must say I am not worried about Courts in the slightest. I hope that answers your points.

Loans_Scams

Jambojam
In summary companies should not do the stupid things they do then they don't end up in Court.

Fact remains should a company breach any law dealing with me. I will take Court Action.

If everyone was like me in doing this then companies would not do the things they do.

Making a living from taking the Court action is untrue. Its all about the Gamble some people play cards some go to the Casino and me I go to court.

In the next few months you will see my name come up in a case against Westminster Council for a pretty large amount whereby I am acting as a Litigation Friend.

In this matter you will a Barrister has already being struck off for misconduct over this case.

Most in the legal profession are not to be trusted, hence I learnt how to do this myself.

Back to the FLM Quick Saga the only reason why this has not gone the court route is simple I already are dealing with two cases and it would not be good having a third.

antrobus

jambojam wrote: »

depends how vindictive they are, defamatory libel is a criminal offence and not civil. So you could find yourself with a record to go with the bad credit rating. It is dealt with as a crime and so it wouldn't cost FLM much to persue it, but definitely would cost you to defend it.

No it isn't. The common law offence of 'defamatory libel' was abolished by s73 Coroners and Justice Act 2009.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/section/73