Payday Loan Ombudsman Victories - Large Refunds!!!!

Monkeyballs

Drunk_Monkey wrote: »

What about your girlfriend's son? Have you paid him back? What about your mum? Christ! Have you paid her?

Let me guess here ... since he didn't hide his money well, this constituted irresponsible behaviour ... ergo, your only liable to pay back half the money due to his "irresponsibility". Your mother should have probed-and-questioned you more about your "financial difficulties" regarding loans .... so she has acted irresponsibly too.

Being an adult is accepting responsibility for your actions. You're trying to shift that responsibility onto others so they carry the burden of your actions!

There is no victory on your thread.

Good post, you're half right in my opinion.

Disregarding GF's son and his mother who are not financial institutions lending in the interest of making profit and should indeed be repaid ASAP no questions asked.

There is no victory here but an interesting story of someone making a claim against PDL's and succeeding.

For whatever reason the ruling was in his favour, it does not appear that he is about to go off and blow the whole amount on gambling again and is going to out it to use to get his life back on track.

Morally speaking? I think that the award is too much, it should have been limited to the interest charged on anything beyond 3 months of debt.

If you look around you will hear stories on this forum of peoples lives who have been ruined (admittedly in no small part of their own making) and how PDL's are "scum preying on the poor" etc. Perhaps if the OP didn't confess to having a gambling problem then his post might have been more favourably viewed?

I don't know the answer to that question but there seems to be a bit of double standards here?

MB

sourcrates

Well I am not making any judgement on the OP, as im certainly not qualified to do so, although there seems to be a number of barrack room lawyers all too eager to contribute !!
My dealings with the FOS have been mixed, complaints I thought I should of won, as others in similar circumstances have, I have lost, and others I expected to lose, I have won !!
There seems to be a great deal of disparity in the way similar complaints are handled, depending on who handles them, it is no secret the FOS have been inundated with complaints recently, PPI mainly, and they have taken on lots of new staff, who have possibly been "rushed" through the system, I have had fairly major points of law/reasonable cause ignored by the FOS of late in a complaint, don't get me wrong, I think the PDL companies do bear some responsibility for there actions here, but I feel there are question marks over how they deal with some complaints of late.

nrsql

Think it's probably a reasonable outcome.
The OP took out the loans and bears some responsibility.
The PDLs should have realised the loans were being rolled over and not sustainable - something they often say (publicly and privately) that their systems prevent.
I guess they've already received a fair bit of interest and the OP is paying off the amount borrowed so that seems fair.

I'm just happy for him that he now seems in control and sorry that it didn't happen sooner.

dubs57

Simon96 good luck with trying to get your life back on track. It is easy for people to criticise but you are making an effort to lmprove your situation which cant have been easy. After finding yourself in an awful situation it is impossible to go back to the beginning and start a gain so you just have to do the best you can. The refunds will help to make this possible and therefore must be a positive thing. Obviously nobody would want all this to have to deal with.

Marker_2

-taff wrote: »

Is smoking a mental health issue?
Is weed/heroin/ketamine a mental health issue?


It's simply an addiction, but it's more PC these days to describe it as being out of soeone's control by describing it as a mental health issue.

I don't doubt that some people who gamble or smoke or take drugs do have mental problems, but I don't think you can say cateorically that gambling is a mental health issue, other than in terms of someone convinces themselves they have to do it.

As already indicated your examples are substance misuse, which is different.

It is not about someone being out of control. Someone who will leave their kids in the car for hours on end forgetting they are there to gamble - someone who uses money to gamble instead of travelling to see their kids - someone who uses their last pound to gamble instead of buy food - someone in a well respected job that defrauds company to finance their gambling - someone who constantly has suicide ideation because the depths of their gambling is too much - someone who kills themselves and their families because of their gambling.

All of the above and much more has happened. What makes it a mental illness is the Jekyl and Hyde character it creates. Gambling addicts are not bad people. They are not dirty little druggies, or constantly smell of booze. They are normal people. Suit and ties, mothers, family men. Most can hold down a 9 to 5 no problem, the secret 'disease' if you like.

You have the normal person and the gambling person, the latter gets so transfixed in it that nothing else exists but the gambling. It is so hard to understand. I have had years of asking my own husband to just stop, pleading with him to stop jeopardising us all. But his illness, and I finally accept that it is an illness, is dragging him down. But until he asks for medication* to cure/manage that illness, he will not get better.

*Medication is currently in the form of counselling, but I know recent research has found there is brain activity linked to gambling addiction, whether some magic pill will ever be created to cure it, who knows.

-taff

Marker wrote: »

What makes it a mental illness is the Jekyl and Hyde character it creates. Gambling addicts are not bad people. They are not dirty little druggies, or constantly smell of booze. They are normal people. Suit and ties, mothers, family men. Most can hold down a 9 to 5 no problem, the secret 'disease' if you like.

DId you know substance addicts can also hold down a job? You're stereotyping way too much in your zeal to prove mental illness.

Addiction is addiction, that's all it is. Otherwise all people addicted to something are mentally ill, whether that's a substance, or a physical activity.

Marker_2

-taff wrote: »

DId you know substance addicts can also hold down a job? You're stereotyping way too much in your zeal to prove mental illness.

Addiction is addiction, that's all it is. Otherwise all people addicted to something are mentally ill, whether that's a substance, or a physical activity.

I know quite a few druggies that work in call centres ... but how many high flying bankers, doctors, nurses etc do you know that are substance abusers, that can keep it quiet for long periods?

You don't believe it is an illness which is fine. But that sort of attitude is exactly why people like my husband are too ashamed to come forward and admit to others they have this illness.

Monkeyballs

-taff wrote: »

DId you know substance addicts can also hold down a job? You're stereotyping way too much in your zeal to prove mental illness.

Addiction is addiction, that's all it is. Otherwise all people addicted to something are mentally ill, whether that's a substance, or a physical activity.

Boring now, if you don't get it now then you never will - sorry.

There is no "zeal to prove this is a mental illness" only zeal to prove it's not from what I can see? Gamblers are not necessarily addicted to either a physical act or to a substance as the craving is in their head where mental stuff lives...

MB

-taff

Yep...whatever.....

hohum

-taff wrote: »

This is an addiction, not an illness.

No one is born addicted to gambling, no one catches beng addicted to gambling.

It's a choice you make to start gambling, then losing becomes the reason to keep going because you 'could' win...and you convince yourself the next time you will win, but you never keep a running total of what you've lost, just the amounts you win, etc etc....

If the criteria for something being recognised as an illness are a) infectious and/or b) born that way then I suppose that rules out a lot of cancers, asthma, exczema, MS, collapsed lung, late onset allergies, heart disease, Alzheimer's plus of course mental illnesses including depression, anxiety, etc etc

I think in your eagerness to be right you may be making some unsound arguments...