Should my brother be receiving more support than this?

Willing2Learn

Anoneemoose wrote: »

...I agree that these things should be taken into account and I also think individual circumstances should be considered, however, IF you (and I!!!8217;m not saying you or OP!!!8217;s brother are) are a potential risk, as in in those few months where you are so ill you need help with this sort of thing, could or have racked up loads of debts that you can!!!8217;t pay back then isn!!!8217;t it the responsible thing to report that?

Well I'm just saying that someone with a mental health diagnosis, who is incapacitated on some level, should not be treated detrimentally when compared to someone with a physical health diagnosis that is equally incapacitating. It would be discriminatory.

marliepanda wrote: »

You have people to support you, if you cannot manage your affairs a few months a year then they should do it for you.

I organise my finances in such a way that I have a six month buffer with all my bills, contractual obligations and rent. I have six months worth of money in my current bank account to ensure everything gets paid on time and there is no risk of having a negative marker on my squeaky clean credit files. (But I learnt the hard way lol)

Anoneemoose

Willing2Learn wrote: »

Well I'm just saying that someone with a mental health diagnosis, who is incapacitated on some level, should not be treated detrimentally when compared to someone with a physical health diagnosis that is equally incapacitating. It would be discriminatory.

No, me neither. My point was that those with physical illnesses (as far as I’m aware) would still have their files marked with the relevant information, therefore why would/should mental illness be different? And I’m not saying I don’t believe that people with any kind of illness shouldn’t be helped..I have mental health issues, although, luckily they haven’t affected me through debt. They do affect my spending habits though. The case I mentioned with the client with bipolar, had over £10,000 worth of contracts with us and another company (their support worker told us that). We wrote the debt off because there was no way they could repay it and we put the relevant information on his credit file. This meant he wouldn’t be able to get into that position again, safeguarding both him and our company.



I organise my finances in such a way that I have a six month buffer with all my bills, contractual obligations and rent. I have six months worth of money in my current bank account to ensure everything gets paid on time and there is no risk of having a negative marker on my squeaky clean credit files. (But I learnt the hard way lol)[/QUO


Not very good at the quoting thing!!

Anoneemoose

Anoneemoose wrote: »

Willing2Learn wrote: »

Well I'm just saying that someone with a mental health diagnosis, who is incapacitated on some level, should not be treated detrimentally when compared to someone with a physical health diagnosis that is equally incapacitating. It would be discriminatory.

No, me neither. My point was that those with physical illnesses (as far as I’m aware) would still have their files marked with the relevant information, therefore why would/should mental illness be different? And I’m not saying I don’t believe that people with any kind of illness shouldn’t be helped..I have mental health issues, although, luckily they haven’t affected me through debt. They do affect my spending habits though. The case I mentioned with the client with bipolar, had over £10,000 worth of contracts with us and another company (their support worker told us that). We wrote the debt off because there was no way they could repay it and we put the relevant information on his credit file. This meant he wouldn’t be able to get into that position again, safeguarding both him and our company.



I organise my finances in such a way that I have a six month buffer with all my bills, contractual obligations and rent. I have six months worth of money in my current bank account to ensure everything gets paid on time and there is no risk of having a negative marker on my squeaky clean credit files. (But I learnt the hard way lol)[/QUO


Not very good at the quoting thing!!

And it safeguarded other companies.

midlander81

If my brother was to go onto a reduced payment plan then of course he would have to accept his credit file taking a hit. All that he is currently asking for is a lower rate of interest. If this is granted then there wouldn't need to be anything added to his credit file as he would be maintaining his minimum contractual payments.

warby68

I think the fundamental problem to get round is that your brother has too high a risk profile to qualify for a lower rate so needs a special arrangement but you don't actually want it to look like one. This will always be a judgement call ie an individual making a non-standard decision.

The way you are describing things is that he can afford the current payments but just doesn't particularly like the rate he is paying/qualifies for. Frankly, an awful lot of people could say that for an awful lot of reasons and a lot of problems would be solved if people could choose their own rates

The judgement call therefore might not be going in his favour because relatively his case doesn't seem very strong. People who can't meet their payments and are sinking as a result will appear to be far more in need of concessions.

I can therefore see why he isn't getting very far but no reason why you can't keep trying using his unblemished payment record to support the lower rate as well as his health issues. Eventually it might get in front of a decision maker who takes a 'softer' view. Request to be referred further up the line but not as a complaint just for further consideration because he knows the request is exceptional.

Your original question is should he be getting more support? Well plenty of support seems to have been offered, it just isn't precisely the narrow
and very specific requirement you want, so the answer is probably not as a matter of course.

Willing2Learn

midlander81 wrote: »

If my brother was to go onto a reduced payment plan then of course he would have to accept his credit file taking a hit. All that he is currently asking for is a lower rate of interest. If this is granted then there wouldn't need to be anything added to his credit file as he would be maintaining his minimum contractual payments.

Write to them, using one of the letter templates on StepCjange or National DebtLine websites. Edit the letter for your particular circumstance.

https://www.stepchange.org/debt-info/arranging-payment-with-creditors.aspx

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/information/10%20ways%20to%20clear%20your%20debt/Pages/Options-for-dealing-with-your-debt-informal-arrangement.aspx

midlander81

warby68 wrote: »

I think the fundamental problem to get round is that your brother has too high a risk profile to qualify for a lower rate so needs a special arrangement but you don't actually want it to look like one. This will always be a judgement call ie an individual making a non-standard decision.

The way you are describing things is that he can afford the current payments but just doesn't particularly like the rate he is paying/qualifies for. Frankly, an awful lot of people could say that for an awful lot of reasons and a lot of problems would be solved if people could choose their own rates

The judgement call therefore might not be going in his favour because relatively his case doesn't seem very strong. People who can't meet their payments and are sinking as a result will appear to be far more in need of concessions.

I can therefore see why he isn't getting very far but no reason why you can't keep trying using his unblemished payment record to support the lower rate as well as his health issues. Eventually it might get in front of a decision maker who takes a 'softer' view. Request to be referred further up the line but not as a complaint just for further consideration because he knows the request is exceptional.

Your original question is should he be getting more support? Well plenty of support seems to have been offered, it just isn't precisely the narrow
and very specific requirement you want, so the answer is probably not as a matter of course.

I take your point, however I do think that his situation is a bit different to the norm.

It would actually make less sense for him to go onto a reduced payment plan. Reduced payemnts, zero interest etc - that would not benefit neither party. My brother would be stressed over the impact on his credit file and the bank would be getting less back. He/We are just asking for a reduced rate to support his recovery.

We have written a letter and we are really hopeful that he will receive some ongoing support with this.

Savvy_Sue

midlander81 wrote: »

We have written a letter and we are really hopeful that he will receive some ongoing support with this.

If that doesn't help, can you / he not do some 'soft' applications for 0% cards and see if is offered any, before making a 'hard' application?

Anoneemoose

midlander81 wrote: »

If my brother was to go onto a reduced payment plan then of course he would have to accept his credit file taking a hit. All that he is currently asking for is a lower rate of interest. If this is granted then there wouldn't need to be anything added to his credit file as he would be maintaining his minimum contractual payments.

In that instance, I agree his credit file should not be affected. And I wasn’t disagreeing with your points..more just trying to get clarification on why payment plans because of mental health issues shouldn’t be recorded as I understood Sourcrates was suggesting. I could have misunderstood what they meant though.

midlander81

Update!

We bit the bullet and sent a letter to 3 of his creditors. We have received 2 replied...

CC1 - This provider has been amazing and had agreed to freeze interest for a whole year if he agreed to fix his payment to his current monthly payment. If he continues to pay then there is no impact on his credit file whatsoever. Fixing the payment at value of last months minimum payments means that he will bring the balance down much quicker with no interest to worry about. This has really helped to ease his worry.

CC2 - they have wrote back and have currently put his account on hold for 30 days. someone from the specialist support team will contact him to discuss options. The tone of the letter was supportive, so we are hoping that they can help. He did also receive a letter from this CC provider the following day telling him that his account is now restricted and will be closed as soon as his balance is cleared. Do you think that this is due to him telling them about his mental health difficulties? It's not a problem as he doesn't want to use the card, I am just curious if the letter has triggered this restriction.

CC3 - still waiting for a response!

Can anyone answer the question regarding CC2 being restricted? Do you think that our letter triggered this?