Unenforceable loan agreements

never-in-doubt

whipped wrote: »

Is it correct that the Acceptance Fee and Broker Fee be added to the loan? My loan was for £35k and with fees and costs added are £37,600.

Not trying to wriggle out of anything but would like to know this part as I am a bit confused with everything going on at present.

Thanks

!!!!!!? Who and what are you paying? Did you read the link I posted about unenforceability.....?

never-in-doubt

StuTheDon wrote: »

NID - you are clearly very poisoned against the banks, and you probably have good reason. They have gotten away with too much for too long and are far too greedy generally.

Fair assessment. Mostly true....

StuTheDon wrote: »

I have not seen many win examples on here, and there may be a lot, but I dont think a lot of people are eligible. I think these companies that are being setup are praying on vulnerable people to part with money and then they cant "help" them (or refund the fee!).

Woah, i'd never say use a company - you do it yourself using the standard legal responses found throughout here - specifically here: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1868507

I agree those companies do rip people off and most are getting closed down (thank god) - they are as bad as the banks!

StuTheDon wrote: »

If you take a step back for a second and consider what will happen if thousands of loan amounts are declared unenforceable? The banks will restrict lending even more, the credit crunch will extend and everyone suffers.

Nope mate - totally wrong. This has absolutely no affect on anything other than the banks profits. It does not mean we will pay more at all (who told you this myth?) The banks cannot restrict lending - they are told to take more custom in exchange for more of my hard earned tax!

StuTheDon wrote: »

It may be the law, but it does not make it right. The Poll tax was law and look what happened there. Are you honestly saying that if someone racks up £20k on credit for holidays, clothes and gadgets they should just be able to walk away from it on a technicality? The legistaltion should allow for the capital amount to be recovered (or as much as possible) and the interest and any charges to be refunded where an issue is found.

Right and wrong differs between people though that is why we have clear laws in place to ensure fairness and the fact unenforceability is in fact legal says it all. But to answer you, yea I think its perfectly fine to fall into financial hardship then query the legitimacy of the contract - that is the society we live in and the sooner the 'old timers' get used to it the better. Its here to stay.

Of course legislation cannot and will not change, the moment it did we'd stop being a democracy and instead become a mess - bankruptcy is normal so is unenforceability.

Time to get used to it my man :beer:

iolanthe07

bankruptcy is normal so is unenforceability.

If unforceability becomes too 'normal' we shall have lots of people coming onto this board and whingeing on about how they can't get a loan because the banks won't lend them any money. One good thing about all this is that loans entered into after April 2007 are much harder to wriggle out of, so this particular loophole will fade away in time.

StuTheDon

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Nope mate - totally wrong. This has absolutely no affect on anything other than the banks profits. It does not mean we will pay more at all (who told you this myth?) The banks cannot restrict lending - they are told to take more custom in exchange for more of my hard earned tax!

Sorry you are wrong - banks such as RBS are still being hounded by the Government to lend more even after the bailouts - there is nothing legally obligating them to lend more. If all this nonsense continues they will close in, restrict credit, and you'll have every sub primer whining about the banks not lending. Remember - they are not a public service, they are a business with shareholders.

The other poster is completely correct - this will be irrelevant in a couple of years given the date stamp and rightly so.

Bankruptcy is not normal - it is a great solution for those who have fallen on hard times. Too much time on these boards has perhaps shifted your perspective - it is far from normal and perhpas you've been involved in too many group hugs on here.

whipped

never-in-doubt wrote: »

!!!!!!? Who and what are you paying? Did you read the link I posted about unenforceability.....?

No I did not. What does !!!!!! mean please?

never-in-doubt

iolanthe07 wrote: »

bankruptcy is normal so is unenforceability.

If unforceability becomes too 'normal' we shall have lots of people coming onto this board and whingeing on about how they can't get a loan because the banks won't lend them any money. One good thing about all this is that loans entered into after April 2007 are much harder to wriggle out of, so this particular loophole will fade away in time.

Right - last time of saying this for those few that are a little 'slow'

UNENFORCEABILITY IS NOT A LOOPHOLE BUT A LAW!

never-in-doubt

whipped wrote: »

No I did not. What does !!!!!! mean please?

Wat the fuk lol :rotfl::rotfl:

Never pay anyone - read that link for all the details you need to do it yourself! Aren't I looking at this for you on sutton thread - I replied to you.... Here: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=24107963&highlight=#post24107963

whipped

Sorry will have a look there, keep getting lost on here

whipped

sorry will have a look there, I keep getting lost on here

never-in-doubt

whipped wrote: »

Sorry will have a look there, keep getting lost on here

go to the thread, look for thread tools at the top and select subscribe to this thread! lol

Or click your username, find all posts by whipped and you'll then be able to click into the last thread you replied to. :beer:

Head back over to sutton thread for specific help mate