a stupid mistake as a youngster comes back to haunt me

BritRael

drewwhonumba2 wrote: »

Wow how many people tonight feeling that they can dish out moral advice?? ...

So your expert financial advice is 'borrow money...don't pay it back...borrow some more...'.

Thank you very much Mr. Buffet. That technique is one of the reaons why the world is currently in financial meltdown. But no problem, better to have that than make a 'moral judegment' huh?

Ronaldo_Mconaldo

BritRael wrote: »

So your expert financial advice is 'borrow money...don't pay it back...borrow some more...'.

Thank you very much Mr. Buffet. That technique is one of the reaons why the world is currently in financial meltdown. But no problem, better to have that than make a 'moral judegment' huh?

Exactly pal. I mean it's all well and good thinking of the banks as some evil overlord who should simply be providing the downtrodden people of this country with as much free money as they might posibly want without having to pay it back. However, there are some stupid people in this country who think that they should repay people they owe money to.

People who just think that it's alright to borrow as much as you can and then skank the lender when it comes to payback time just end up costing those fools that actually want to repay their debts more

drewwhonumba2

BritRael wrote: »

So your expert financial advice is 'borrow money...don't pay it back...borrow some more...'.

Thank you very much Mr. Buffet. That technique is one of the reaons why the world is currently in financial meltdown. But no problem, better to have that than make a 'moral judegment' huh?

The forum is called money SAVING expert...and the advice has been to not pay back DEFAULTS....as the debt no longer legally exists and is STATUTE BARRED.

A satisfied default looks no better to lenders than an unsatisfied default....can you see the logic in not paying back a default being MONEY SAVING?

The financial crisis was caused by the banks trying to profit from sub prime credit and default swaps..and many bankers made huge profits doing so, its their fault if they didn't price risk accordingly.

birkee

And if the bank involved refuses him an account in the future? Refuses him a mortgage?

Treat them badly, and don't complain if they do the same to the debtor.

Pay / don't pay.....up to you to decide.

mo786uk

drewwhonumba2 wrote: »

Regardless of weather or not you are the person they are after, the debt is statute barred so they can just !!!!!! off.

Anyway, we never took out damn debts out with CRA's, they are money making organisations setup purely to profit out of people in hardship....if the bank want their money then they can chase us

If OP doesnt owe any money due it being SB then they would be better of telling them that.

DCA agencies are 'legitimate business' - does it really matter if an external company to your creditor is doing the chasing? People should just be glad they cannot charge on fees like they can with commercial debts.

MichaelCR

chattychappy wrote: »

I'm curious about this not having an international treaty or no assured value thing.

By writing this on the letter (Preferably on a sticky label placed over the addressee window on the letter), You are saying the following,

- I do not Recognize you
- I do not understand your intent
- We have no contract
- We have no international Treaty
- No liability accepted
- No assured value.

Basically, Its a kind way of telling them to **** off, And leave you alone, And also it shows that you know the law, You know the system, and you know your rights.

YorkshireBoy

MichaelCR wrote: »

And also it shows that you know the law

Or that you saw it somewhere on the internet.

chattychappy

Still don't get the bit about international treaties or assured values. (Or understanding intent.)

Oh well never mind. Obviously I don't know the law.

MichaelCR

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Or that you saw it somewhere on the internet.

Indeed it might, Nothing wrong with doing research though and putting it into practice. If its helped me, And other people, Then it might help others, So i'm only passing on what i know and what i've researched.

'Oh well never mind. Obviously I don't know the law.'

Just because you don't understand a rather tiny aspect of this doesn't mean you don't understand the law, the law is an extremely complex and endless maze...

chattychappy

MichaelCR wrote: »

Just because you don't understand a rather tiny aspect of this doesn't mean you don't understand the law

But do you understand this "tiny aspect"? You haven't been able to explain the logic behind the "no assured value" / "international treaty" stuff.

Frankly it's nonsense writing all that stuff on an envelope.