Wonga causing damage 'from beyond the grave'

jpsartre

Clive_Woody wrote: »

How many people have accused Tesco of mis-selling them milk?

I have no idea. How is it relevant in any way?

Clive_Woody

jpsartre wrote: »

I have no idea. How is it relevant in any way?

You're the one who started banging on about Tesco.

jpsartre

Clive_Woody wrote: »

You're the one who started banging on about Tesco.

Because there's a relevant comparison between them and Wonga - neither have a sales team calling people. So if Wonga wasn't selling anything because of this then neither is Tesco (which, presumably, we can all agree isn't the case). It's argumentation theory 101 and the number of people that have complained about missold milk is entirely irrelevant to this point.

jimbo26

dealer_wins wrote: »

Wonga didnt sell loans, the had no sales team calling people.

Weird logic, so you can only sell stuff if you have a sales team? Using that warped theory my local butcher isn't selling meat because he doesn't have a sales team.

KatrinaWaves

jpsartre wrote: »

Because there's a relevant comparison between them and Wonga - neither have a sales team calling people. So if Wonga wasn't selling anything because of this then neither is Tesco (which, presumably, we can all agree isn't the case). It's argumentation theory 101 and the number of people that have complained about missold milk is entirely irrelevant to this point.

There is no comparison.

No one forces you into tesco to buy milk. No one forces you to take out a Wonga lona.

jpsartre

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

There is no comparison.

No one forces you into tesco to buy milk. No one forces you to take out a Wonga lona.

I agree but that isn't what's being argued. The argument was that Wonga didn't sell a product because they didn't have a sales team calling people. That's a very poor argument.

KatrinaWaves

jpsartre wrote: »

I agree but that isn't what's being argued. The argument was that Wonga didn't sell a product because they didn't have a sales team calling people. That's a very poor argument.

The argument is that when you applied for a loan you gave details of income and said you could afford the repayments. Many people disagree this is misselling, it is missbuying.

Its not about selling, its about misselling. How can you missell something when you have done it based on the information given. If I go to tesco and say 'I would like some milk please' have they missold me the milk if it turns out I wanted cream instead, or was allergic to dairy and actually wanted almond milk, or that I am now in massive debt I cant afford because of the milk.

jpsartre

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

The argument is that when you applied for a loan you gave details of income and said you could afford the repayments. Many people disagree this is misselling, it is missbuying.

I am not arguing it is misselling. I am saying that it's a poor argument to say that Wonga didn't sell a product because they had no sales team calling people. I'm sure you can think of dozens of examples where products are sold without this. So it's a poor argument.

Willing2Learn

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

The argument is that when you applied for a loan you gave details of income and said you could afford the repayments.

I think the real problem was Wonga's systemic failure to carry out full affordability checks when considering an application for credit. It meant that many people were given credit when the evidence showed that the loan repayments would be unaffordable. It was a poor business model.

KatrinaWaves

Willing2Learn wrote: »

I think the real problem was Wonga's systemic failure to carry out full affordability checks when considering an application for credit. It meant that many people were given credit when the evidence showed that the loan repayments would be unaffordable. It was a poor business model.

Well it very clearly was a poor business model!

I suppose alongside that though, it does annoy people when people get 'compo' or written off loans when a lot of them did lie or exaggerate to get the loans.