Bad Loan Advise from LloydsTSB

chesky369

Try to reclaim the ppi and educate your mum about finances. Then draw a line. In an ideal world your mum should have known what she was doing - make sure for her sake that she knows next time.

taylor_s

somethingcorporate wrote: »

If your mum didn't want the extra money she should not have applied and signed for it. Simple as.

I agree, and if she had realised the implications she would not have accepted it.

somethingcorporate wrote: »

In what world do you think it would be where they would have savings rates higher than loan rates? It simply does not happen or make financial, business, sense on a wholesale base.

I am aware that this is the case and agree with your statement. However my mother did not understand (nor was it explained) that this was the case.

[/QUOTE]I think everyone here understands the situation, you are trying to deflect blame in the wrong direction unfortunately. It lies only with your mother.[/QUOTE]

I am not trying to deflect blame, I think she's been stupid, however she did not understand the implications of what she was being advised and sold; which is why I was asking advise.

somethingcorporate

And the advice has been (repeatedly) given. The blame does not lie with the bank.

Sorry, but your mum's lack of financial comprehension or unwillingness to read the contracts she is signing cannot be pinned on the bank.

It would be obvious that the loan was given at X% rate and the ISA would be at <X% rate.

XXSCOTSLASSXX

kinda confused as to why u have felt the need to re submit the post again, I think everyone understood exactly from the 1st post what ur issue was.... however bottom line ... had ur mum left the £2000 in the ISA and topped it up with the x amount that she was gonna have left over after she had budgeted each week/month there would not be this issue personally I think the bank was actually very generous in offering this 'cushion' to start her savings off so to speak, once she had accumulated her own saved £2000 the extra £2000 could have been paid back ..... you may say the bank did not act in her best interests with issuing the extra £2000... however she in turn did not keep to her word as she had stated she was going to budget and save etc which she did not do.... the opportunity was there to sort her financial mess out and she unfortunately failed to take it

am unsure what ur complaint would be with the bank the money has been spent presumably a number of years ago that really isnt the banks fault tho and there was no issue or complaint when the funds were still availaible to be used, apologies but as an adult she really has to take some responsibility for taking this loan out in the 1st place.

XXSCOTSLASSXX

taylor_s wrote: »

I agree, and if she had realised the implications she would not have accepted it.

I am aware that this is the case and agree with your statement. However my mother did not understand (nor was it explained) that this was the case.

sorry thats a pretty poor argument in a way..... regardless of whether she was explained and understood the full ins and outs of the loan etc .... she would have been given a monthly figure of what she had to pay each month for the next 7 years..... she obviously understood how much this would be and felt it was manageable and not extreme...she did not have any issues or questions regarding the monthly payments at the time or she would have asked for an explanation or not taken it......

taylor_s

I take on-board everything everyone has said, and though it would probably be the case that she had no comeback as she has made some silly mistakes. Thank you all for your time.

As a final thought though:

An insurance salesman knocks on a door and suggests to the occupant that they should take out roof insurance as high winds are forecast and roof repairs are costly. The occupant hadn't considered this but it is windy out and the salesman appears knowledgeable so the occupant trusts him. The salesman suggests that the insurance costs less than the average roof repair and thus result in a saving. The occupant agrees and takes out the insurance.

All perfectly innocent until you consider that the occupant lives on the ground floor of a block of flats...

The occupant should have realised that they did not have a roof to insure, but they were not aware as old age had taken it's toll and they did not consider it. They did however trust the salesman as he appeared knowledgeable.

Has the salesman exploited the occupant selling them something they did not initially want and did not need, or is it their own fault for not knowing better?

BoGoF

You're just being silly now.

Earlier on you said "I can separate the emotion".......clearly you can't.

XXSCOTSLASSXX

taylor_s wrote: »

I take on-board everything everyone has said, and though it would probably be the case that she had no comeback as she has made some silly mistakes. Thank you all for your time.

As a final thought though:

An insurance salesman knocks on a door and suggests to the occupant that they should take out roof insurance as high winds are forecast and roof repairs are costly. The occupant hadn't considered this but it is windy out and the salesman appears knowledgeable so the occupant trusts him. The salesman suggests that the insurance costs less than the average roof repair and thus result in a saving. The occupant agrees and takes out the insurance.

All perfectly innocent until you consider that the occupant lives on the ground floor of a block of flats...

The occupant should have realised that they did not have a roof to insure, but they were not aware as old age had taken it's toll and they did not consider it. They did however trust the salesman as he appeared knowledgeable.

Has the salesman exploited the occupant selling them something they did not initially want and did not need, or is it their own fault for not knowing better?

youre clutching at straws now lol.... what if the man at the market told me it was gonna rain, sold me an umbrella and it didnt rain.... can i sue??

if ur mum is now financially sound and youve given her advice etc best thing she could do is over pay the loan with as much as possible to clear it quicker and reduce the interest...

if on the other hand she is in severe financial difficulty re this loan and struggling to make payments etc which may well be why this has been raised now.... looking at making complaints and blaming the bank for her situation may not be the best route to take in the long run....

BoGoF

Actually, back to your example, is it your belief that only the top floor occupiers are liable to pay for roof damage in a block of flats.....if so you are wrong.

somethingcorporate

If they are mentally incapable and you can prove that they were of unsound mind at the time the contract was signed (doctors note, hospital records etc) then you may have a tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny chance. Unfortunately it doesn't extend to stupidity/naivety/apathy etc.

You really are clutching at straws here.