1 late payment fair?

danothy

malkyh wrote: »

But didn't the banks refund any late charges etc etc? What more could they do?

Pay you an admin fee for having to notify them of their mistake that needs correcting? I think the point was that they lay on an extra charge when you don't pay them but only put you back to where you were before when they don't pay you.

KingElvis

If a late payment is just down to slack organisation on your part then no, it's not unfair...just an accurate record of your ability to pay on time.

Janie4Now

simon2010 wrote: »

Hi there

I was wondering what people's thoughts were on '1 payment late in the last 12 months' and we won't lend blah blah.

1. What if you missed that payment cause of a holiday?
2. Should one be penalised for a whole 12 months just for being one payment late?
3. Is it really possible to maintain the perfect credit file all of the time?

Just to say b4 the lectures start, NO I am not 1 payment late. But interested to know when do you become 1 payment late, 1 week? 2 weeks? 1 month, 6 weeks etc.

Thanks in advance.

1. One day after payment due is LATE
2. Use a Direct debit
3. We all know the rules - there are no excuses except death (your own)
4. Rule 2 applies
5. If you're going to be late making a payment, then call them
6. Rule 2 applies


One missed payment will not ruin your credit rating but it does not need to happen!

Janie4Now

danothy wrote: »

Pay you an admin fee for having to notify them of their mistake that needs correcting? I think the point was that they lay on an extra charge when you don't pay them but only put you back to where you were before when they don't pay you.

Their argument is that there is an additional cost involved in administering your account if you don't pay on time, as against no cost if people do pay on time. This seems reasonable. I don't want to go into whether or not these costs are reasonable.....

If you can prove that their error actually cost you in financial terms - for example, if you had to take time off work and couldn't just deal with it over the phone - then that would be refunded. They were quite clear about ensuring that people didn't lose out due to their error. This is a straight forward legal principle.

BugsyBrowne

Like I say mine was 15 years ago which I ended up choosing a bird instead of paying MBNA and at the time took the chick out for a slap up.

malkyh

BugsyBrowne wrote: »

Like I say mine was 15 years ago which I ended up choosing a bird instead of paying MBNA and at the time took the chick out for a slap up.

I hope the sex was good. :beer:

danothy

Janie4Now wrote: »

They're argument is that there is an additional cost involved in administering your account if you don't pay on time, as against no cost if people do pay on time. This seems reasonable. I don't want to go into whether or not these costs are reasonable.....

I don't want to get into whether they are reasonable either to be honest ... either way, my personal suspicions are that the fees are cynical in implementation (i.e. that than they can get away with it rather than to cover costs).

Janie4Now wrote: »

If you can prove that their error actually cost you in financial terms - for example, if you had to take time off work and couldn't just deal with it over the phone - then that would be refunded. They were quite clear about ensuring that people didn't lose out due to their error. This is a straight forward legal principle.

What if I could prove that my leisure time was taken up dealing with it? How would that be valued? What about the work the individual has to do to develop the equivalent methodology to deal with the other party's error that the lender would likely all ready have in place?

I wonder how it would fly if an individual said they would return a lender to their previous expected financial state after a late payment and rejected the standard charge model? Not well I speculate.

These are the reasons that I suspect that the charges are cynically applied as disincentives to the consumer and to increase profit from a loan, rather than to their actual costs. If it were really about costs then surely the system would be differently implemented?

marleyboy

simon2010 wrote: »

Hi there

I was wondering what people's thoughts were on '1 payment late in the last 12 months' and we won't lend blah blah.

1. What if you missed that payment cause of a holiday?
2. Should one be penalised for a whole 12 months just for being one payment late?
3. Is it really possible to maintain the perfect credit file all of the time?

Just to say b4 the lectures start, NO I am not 1 payment late. But interested to know when do you become 1 payment late, 1 week? 2 weeks? 1 month, 6 weeks etc.

Thanks in advance.

1. My 6 Year loan is 3 Months away from being completely paid off. I have never been late with any of the payments.

2. I guess it depends on the T&C for the loan, had I been 1 payment late, then I would have been penalised for it, as per the T&C on my loan.

3. Yes its possible as upto now, I still have a perfect credit file, (touch wood).

BugsyBrowne

malkyh wrote: »

I hope the sex was good. :beer:

Well I thought the slap up would of done the trick but it didn't.

malkyh

danothy wrote: »

What if I could prove that my leisure time was taken up dealing with it? How would that be valued? What about the work the individual has to do to develop the equivalent methodology to deal with the other party's error that the lender would likely all ready have in place?

I wonder how it would fly if an individual said they would return a lender to their previous expected financial state after a late payment and rejected the standard charge model? Not well I speculate.

The lender doesn't sign up to any T&Cs you may have on the agreement. You do however sign up to theirs.