Firstplus (elderbridge) secured loan

John_G_Jones

halifax71 wrote: »

As well as being a condescending reply, the rates didn't fall. Jeeze,

Are you the OP? If not why are you contradicting what he wrote in the first post where he said that his rates both rose and fall?

halifax71

John_G_Jones wrote: »

Are you the OP? If not why are you contradicting what he wrote in the first post where he said that his rates both rose and fall?

I'm referring to the period from 2007, the the period 03 to 07 would have minor fluctuations.

'But since 2007, Bank of England reduced the rates so many times, but this Bank never reduced but increasing the rates?'

The main point of my reply was its condescending tone.

halifax71

John_G_Jones wrote: »

What you did, borrowing this money and spending it, without even bothering to understand the contract was more than foolish.
.

The issue is ambiguity of the wording. No one would have anticipated that the contract could have been administered in this way. That is the issue.

To be honest the only foolish thing the OP has done is seek constructive advice on this issue from this forum. Don't get me wrong, this has its place, just not for stuff like this as it brings out the holier than thou crowd.

Happy for Peter to PM me for a direction elsewhere.

dealer_wins

SIMOED wrote: »

You are also full of !!!!!, the reason why the consumer is suffering is purely the behaviour of the plank in terms of rates & retrospective responsibilities..........rates go down, they charge more, rates go up, they charge more........pay up or go down....dont ever tell me this is lawful..........

Of course its lawful, its all in the contract that was signed.

Its all very well spouting on a forum what you think is lawful, but you are incorrect to put it simply.

Go and read about contract law :T

halifax71

dealer_wins wrote: »

Of course its lawful, its all in the contract that was signed.

Its all very well spouting on a forum what you think is lawful, but you are incorrect to put it simply.

Go and read about contract law :T

Case in point. :rotfl:

BrassicWoman

John_G_Jones wrote: »

Why are you insulting people who are trying to help you?

SIMOED is not the OP unless they've got an alter. Just a stirrer.

poppasmurf_bewdley

The OP hasn't been back for more than a week now, despite saying he would answer questions after receiving a few more comments.

Another one who goes away when he doesn't get the responses he wants?

SIMOED

BrassicWoman wrote: »

SIMOED is not the OP unless they've got an alter. Just a stirrer.

You are right about not being the "op" but, the advise on here is patronising & does not take into account the rights of the consumer. The guy wants some assistance & a contract is between two or more parties all with an equal duty to be fair & reasonable.

The op would do much better being re-directed to a specialist site/thread.

SIMOED

dealer_wins wrote: »

Of course its lawful, its all in the contract that was signed.

Its all very well spouting on a forum what you think is lawful, but you are incorrect to put it simply.

Go and read about contract law :T

I have & it works both ways, not just in favour of the bank. That is why consumers who push back are winning.

SIMOED

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

The OP hasn't been back for more than a week now, despite saying he would answer questions after receiving a few more comments.

Another one who goes away when he doesn't get the responses he wants?

I think he/she may of wanted some assistance rather than a load of patronising comments over decision making & how there is little anyone can do.........