Amigo loans sold to First Credit (Intrum?) - please help

John_

DCFC79 said:

John_ said:

Bill11 said:

Not sure how that is a concern on my end, if anything, borrowing at 50% APR for a holiday surely should raise some concerns on the borrower's side.

I also checked my ClearScore by equifax, and  I can see that the loan is still with Amigo and the amount is 4800. Does it mean that Intrum will try to recover 4800 from me or they will try to recover 4800 + arrears + any interest on top? How does it work?

This really doesn’t make sense. If your friend had good enough credit to be a guarantor then he had good enough credit to borrow himself, so why did you act as guarantor?
Anyway, you committed fraud on the application, and this isn’t a good reason to try to get out of your obligations.

I understood the friend was the guarantor.

Yes, that’s what I was saying, if the friend had good enough credit to be a guarantor they had good enough credit to borrow themselves.

Bill11

So it appears to me that there is no concrete advice available as such e.g. like in the "parking fines" section on MSE.

kuratowski

You might try the Debt-Free Wannabe section, as you've noted the different sections have different types of posters and there is perhaps more experience on that board of the kinds of questions you raise.

MEM62

Bill11 said:

So it appears to me that there is no concrete advice available as such e.g. like in the "parking fines" section on MSE.

We cannot give concrete advice as we cannot predict the actions of the lender. 
I will give you an opinion though - you should have stopped payments the moment that your friend stopped paying you.  He is the guarantor and they would have pursued him.  You have been paying someone else's debt for years with no hope of recovering your money.  You should have nipped it in the bud.   

[Deleted User]

Bill11 said:

So it appears to me that there is no concrete advice available as such e.g. like in the "parking fines" section on MSE.

Can you let us know what answer is acceptable, and then someone will type that response for you. Thanks.

John_

Bill11 said:

You can read Fraud Act 2006 for that. 

Yes, this is exactly how it works, the lender has to make himself comfortable that the loan that it gives out is affordable for the person taking the loan and that the nature and purpose of the loan makes sense, considering the onerous conditions AND refuse the loan in cases where the product is not suitable to customer's circumstances.

 I am sorry, but going on holiday on a 50% APR is not reasonable and should have been raised as a concern by the agent, but because those shark loan companies prey on people like us without any punishment, people like you think this is our fault for asking the money for a wrong reason. You should read some guidance from FCA on principles of business, conduct and consumer lending.

Honestly dude, you have not answered any of the questions raised in my starting topic, have not provided a single valuable input to my issues, yet you have 4.6k posts in threads ranging from housing to lending. I would appreciate that you go and rant in other threads. Dismissed.  

You thought it was reasonable at the time, as out of all of the lies that you could have told you picked this one, which you thought gave you the best chance of being accepted.
You keep mentioning the fraud act, but the only one who has committed fraud here is you. If you try to use your fraud as an excuse not to honour the deal,that you freely entered into then this could end up in a far worse place than where you are now, with a criminal prosecution being brought, so please, drop any thoughts of mentioning it to the lender.

Mr_Angry

The debt collectors will hound you to the ends of the earth. But you probably know that already. 

Companies like Amigo exist because of people like you and your mate!

[Deleted User]

Not very eloquently put but probably right.

As soon as a person is dealing with monies/banks/loans they are then in the business world and as such it is up to the person to do their due diligence on that 'purchase', failing to carry out that due diligence is just asking for trouble and claiming ignorance after the fact is no way out of paying what is owed.

Hard lessons learned here @Bill11, sorry