Loan that should never have been approved?

redpete

opinions4u wrote: »

But I'm seeing people who asked for PPI getting refunded.

I think it's worse than that, I'm sure I read that someone who knew they didn't have PPI on a loan and that they hadn't paid for any PPI put in a claim just in case and received a 'refund' - presumably because it was cheaper for the bank to pay out than go through the hassle of checking their records.

John1993_2

JuicyJesus wrote: »

It leads to the sort of bizarre thinking where people think if they applied for a payday loan when they should have known damn well they couldn't have paid it back, it's the fault of the payday loan company.

As I said above, if you compare it to a personal loan, it seems even more ridiculous. "I asked my uncle for £300, as I'd not saved up for my holiday. He never should have lent it to me, what can I do to get compensation?"

Just because the lender is a registered company, it doesn't change the morals of the situation.

Apples2

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Actually, Peanuts aren't actually nuts, they are a legume, like peas, beans, lentils etc.

So warning that a bag of Peanuts may contain nuts is valid. (Peanut allergy and Nut allergy are different)

So Peanuts are being Mis-Sold. What if I had a Bean, Pea or Lentil allergy?

Right, who can I sue for compensation?

For example, when PDL's empty their bank account. If someone tries to set up a repayment plan and the PDL disregards that and clears them out, some people say 'you owed the money so it's fair game' or words to that effect, but I completely disagree with that.

The is where Right & Wrong and Morally Right & Wrong merge.

A lot of these posts where the poster has been cleaned out are a result of taking the loan and running. Making zero attempt at all to repay on a repayment plan but simply to run and hide.

The Ninja attack on the robbers bank account may not be right and proper but it doesn't stop the rest of us admiring their tactics. I could never defend someone who has deliberately set out to deceive and take what isn't theirs.

If they are on an repayment plan and get cleaned out, I am all for the Poster, but not these guys who simply run away and start applying for more loans elsewhere. I have far too many morals for that.

Kapoww

Am I missing something here?

Apples2

Kapoww wrote: »

Am I missing something here?

We went off on a tangerine talking about some other posts this week.

What do you say about the OP's opinion that none of this is his fault?

John1993_2

PawleyN wrote: »

I know most of these is my own fault for spending, but I was a typical young lad spending money on all sorts of things whereas now I am far more sensible and to be honest, frugal. What I really need to know is whether this loan should have ever been approved...

I thought it was worth quoting this ppart again, as it's so typical of many posts on here. Essentially it says "I know that I claim to have learned to be responsible, but I'd still like someone else to pick up the bill for what I did."

Learning from your mistakes includes learning that you are still responsible for them, it does not mena saying "I've learned, now can I just walk away from what I did."

matttye

Apples2 wrote: »

So Peanuts are being Mis-Sold. What if I had a Bean, Pea or Lentil allergy?

Right, who can I sue for compensation?



The is where Right & Wrong and Morally Right & Wrong merge.

A lot of these posts where the poster has been cleaned out are a result of taking the loan and running. Making zero attempt at all to repay on a repayment plan but simply to run and hide.

The Ninja attack on the robbers bank account may not be right and proper but it doesn't stop the rest of us admiring their tactics. I could never defend someone who has deliberately set out to deceive and take what isn't theirs.

If they are on an repayment plan and get cleaned out, I am all for the Poster, but not these guys who simply run away and start applying for more loans elsewhere. I have far too many morals for that.

Two wrongs don't make a right and these companies arguably have a higher duty to be responsible than consumers.

That said, I was referring more to the cases where people have tried and failed to set up repayment plans because of the companies being difficult.

John1993 wrote: »

I thought it was worth quoting this ppart again, as it's so typical of many posts on here. Essentially it says "I know that I claim to have learned to be responsible, but I'd still like someone else to pick up the bill for what I did."

Learning from your mistakes includes learning that you are still responsible for them, it does not mena saying "I've learned, now can I just walk away from what I did."

I too disagree with that mindset, but I can confirm from experience that creditors sometimes make it really difficult to pay what you owe.

I lost my old job and got into debt. As soon as I got a new job as an apprentice, earning £80 a week, I got in touch and wanted to pay back every penny I could afford. They kept pushing for more and saying they wouldn't accept what I was offering etc. I literally couldn't offer them any more and it took weeks of constant phone calls before they backed off.

Sometimes things happen and people can't pay back as agreed, but when they're clearly making an effort to put the situation right, the creditors should back off a bit. It's stressful (and in my opinion, pointless) when you're offering to pay every penny you can but the idiots are just threatening court action ad nauseum.

John1993_2

matttye wrote: »

It's stressful (and in my opinion, pointless) when you're offering to pay every penny you can but the idiots are just threatening court action ad nauseum.

One problem is that some people won't be completely honest, and will claim that they have less available than they really do. The comany can't tell which sort of person is which, and know that, on average, they'll get more money back if they apply more pressure, so this is what they do. It's not spite, it's sound commercial sense.

It's unfortunately another case where bad customers push lenders down a route that harms the better customers.

matttye

John1993 wrote: »

One problem is that some people won't be completely honest, and will claim that they have less available than they really do. The comany can't tell which sort of person is which, and know that, on average, they'll get more money back if they apply more pressure, so this is what they do. It's not spite, it's sound commercial sense.

It's unfortunately another case where bad customers push lenders down a route that harms the better customers.

I understand why they do it, but after a little while they should either back up their words and start proceedings, or back off.

I got a handful of calls every day off a DCA and every time I told them I was already paying everything I could afford.

I kept telling them I wanted clear of the debt as much as they did!

It's harassment.

Apples2

AlecHawk wrote: »

I think it was the success of sheer a vision to over come the problems in every situation.

You can't beat a good sheer vision.