on bbc: Some store card debtors may be let off with upgraded cards

CremeBrulee

redpete wrote: »

Why can't the law be more simple?

Did the borrower know that they were borrowing money?
If Yes then did the borrower pay back the money?
If No than they have to.

Ignore all the nonsense about whether the lender provided information that would have made no difference to the borrower's actions.

Loving the spat between CAG and AAD though - let's have more of this.

From what i read above this was a judgment in court where the judge ruled for the defendant. Are you arguing against a judge's decision? Do you think UK consumers should not have any rights against lenders? The court didn't seem to agree with you on this!

InsideInsurance

mgarl10024 wrote: »

If she didn't understand the terms and conditions (because she didn't have them), that should have prevented her from using the card?
Who in their right mind would accept a loan without understanding the implications of taking it?

I would argue many people dont know what they are getting when they get loans or credit cards or insurances or probably 95% of financial services
.

CremeBrulee wrote:

Are you arguing against a judge's decision? Do you think UK consumers should not have any rights against lenders?

Because the courts have to rule on the law and when legislation is in place it is not their job to decide if the legislation is sensible or not etc.

Consumers have a massive amount of rights, many coming from laws that were written when we lived in a very different world than we do today.

Are you really saying that we should all never have to pay back anything we owe to anyone if we can find a small technicality that they didn't follow? Do you honestly think that the woman would have acted in any way differently if she had had the new T&Cs sent with the card?

endora

No point in arguing about it when we already have a court judgment and even the claimant didn't appeal! This is a consumer forum and any consumer victory has to be good news! :T:T:T

The link above is a bit misleading though as it was AAD not CAG where the case was dealt with.

InsideInsurance

Unfortunately not every consumer victory is a good one. Where do you think the banks will raise the capital to cover all the subsequent claims from? Are you really cheering credit card interest going up?

chanz4

I wonder if CAG had permission to copy tut tut

nottoolate

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/16.4.12_santandermayhewjudgement.pdf

Gordon_Hose

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Unfortunately not every consumer victory is a good one. Where do you think the banks will raise the capital to cover all the subsequent claims from? Are you really cheering credit card interest going up?

I don't have a credit card... how does credit card interest going up affect me?? lol

Good to see consumers winning with THE LAW ON THEIR SIDE.

If the bank had their house in order they'd have got their money. No-one to blame but themselves.

CremeBrulee

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Unfortunately not every consumer victory is a good one. Where do you think the banks will raise the capital to cover all the subsequent claims from? Are you really cheering credit card interest going up?

Any consumer victory is good! Banks use any excuse to put interest up so they can make more money. Most of the time you pay a lot more in interest on your cards than what you actually spend, that is why they were giving cards to everyone and increasing credit limits without you asking.

bengal-stripe

CremeBrulee wrote: »

Most of the time you pay a lot more in interest on your cards than what you actually spend.......

That only applies to a minority! About 2/3 of UK credit card holders pay their statements in full on a regular basis, so they are not paying any interest at all.

Those people, who know the game and can play it to their advantage, are the true consumer victors. Not those ones who max-out their CC right to the point of no return and then start screaming about the interest.

endora

chanz4 wrote: »

I wonder if CAG had permission to copy tut tut

Probably not, as neither the defendent nor the solicitor are active members there. They are active members of All About Debt so it's a mistery how CAG can try and claim it as their own.