Unenforceable loan agreements

never-in-doubt

StuTheDon wrote: »

I agree. The time it must take NID to split out each quote and comment on it individually IN EVERY THREAD must take up half his day alone!

Nope there is a little button you click that does it for ya! :rotfl:

StuTheDon wrote: »

NID - if you are happy coaching people on debt avoidance then go ahead.

Muppet :rotfl: You mean the legalities don't you? Ignorance to the unknown!

StuTheDon wrote: »

As for having 4 cards - you are a muppet. You are like the green protesters who still drive cars. If you hate the banks that much, why be a customer?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

StuTheDon wrote: »

Stoozing is a waste of time - the effort expended is for little return and if your salary is as high as you claim, then it does not make sense why you are wasting your time on pennies.

Ok whatever! You know best ;)

StuTheDon wrote: »

Do you admit there are a large proportion of people out there who have overspent, been greedy, and are now looking for easy ways out? Is it right that you should help them? I'd be intrigued by your answer to this.

Its nothing to do with the ifs and buts but the law. If the agreement is wrong then you do not have to pay - simple. It is the law.

StuTheDon wrote: »

Would you be willing to state your actual salary for clarity?

And this will achieve what exactly? Like you say, I could say anything.

never-in-doubt

iolanthe07 wrote: »

never-in-doubt, according to post 147 you have a salary in excess of £120K (£3K + £4K + £4K + £1K times 10). This is well inside the top 1% of earners. For such a high achiever and high earner, you do seem to spend a lot of time on this board in a state of indignation and anger, defending numpties who have taken on more debt than they can handle and are seeking an escape route. Fair enough; but if I was as wealthy as you I'd do something a lot more interesting with my time.Something doesn't quite stack up.

1. I never said I earned that, you did!
2. What does it matter to you who I help/don't help?
3. The top 1% of earners earn !!!!!! loads more than £100k which for the record, is actually a low income in moderation.
4. Rich people (not me) do actually help people you know.
5. Get a grip and stop worrying about what I get up to and just move on and stick to your pathetic take take take life whilst us in the real world get on helping others.

Finally, £4k + £3k + £1k + £500 x 10 does not add up to £120k............................. School anyone?

iolanthe07

Finally, £4k + £3k + £1k + £500 x 10 does not add up to £120k............................. School anyone?

Well, even on these revised figures your income is still £85,000, or 3.5 times the median income of £24,000, so you're still a rich man, and good luck to you. But why are your posts so hostile and aggressive?

never-in-doubt

iolanthe07 wrote: »

Finally, £4k + £3k + £1k + £500 x 10 does not add up to £120k............................. School anyone?

Well, even on these revised figures your income is still £85,000, or 3.5 times the median income of £24,000, so you're still a rich man, and good luck to you. But why are your posts so hostile and aggressive?

Actually my income is only £102k and trust me, that does not make me rich - far far from it! Before the preachers start I can post a P60 if needed

My posts are not hostile nor aggressive - where are you reading? My posts are helpful except on those threads where people attack me because I support LAW whilst they support MORALS and they fail to recognise that morals do not win in court - law does. I support unenforceability because it is the law. People then start attacking my posts as they morally disagree so yea it winds me up.

I am only human after all and when you're speaking to a brick wall life becomes tedious - I couldn;t care whether you think something is right or wrong, if the law says it is right then it is actually right and no matter how much you argue, i'll always be right cos I agree with the law!

Please, check my post history and you'll see i'm far from aggressive - I only try and help people but do defend myself strongly.

make sense lol :beer:

leveller2911

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Actually my income is only £102k and trust me, that does not make me rich - far far from it! Before the preachers start I can post a P60 if needed

My posts are not hostile nor aggressive - where are you reading? My posts are helpful except on those threads where people attack me because I support LAW whilst they support MORALS and they fail to recognise that morals do not win in court - law does. I support unenforceability because it is the law. People then start attacking my posts as they morally disagree so yea it winds me up.

I am only human after all and when you're speaking to a brick wall life becomes tedious - I couldn;t care whether you think something is right or wrong, if the law says it is right then it is actually right and no matter how much you argue, i'll always be right cos I agree with the law!

Please, check my post history and you'll see i'm far from aggressive - I only try and help people but do defend myself strongly.

make sense lol :beer:

OH and attack anyone who has a rational view of who exactly is to blame for the mess the country is in.............

1. Banks for poor lending
2.F eckless borrowers who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back
3. Labour government for failing to regulate Banks properly..


Yet you continue to Blame the Banks alone.........Your not rational..
You are agressive to anyone who doesnt' share your views...
So in "supporting the LAW" you agree with lenders being able to charge rates of say 45% interest? because its "LAWFUL"?

If talking to a brick wall gets tedious, then stop talking .........simples

never-in-doubt

leveller2911 wrote: »

OH and attack anyone who has a rational view of who exactly is to blame for the mess the country is in.............

1. Banks for poor lending
2.F eckless borrowers who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back
3. Labour government for failing to regulate Banks properly..


Yet you continue to Blame the Banks alone.........Your not rational..
You are agressive to anyone who doesnt' share your views...

If talking to a brick wall gets tedious, then stop talking .........simples

1. Banks for poor lending
100% spot on - you hit the nail on the head

2.F eckless borrowers who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back
Nope, you cannot blame the public - the problems stem from the source, i.e. the lenders!

3. Labour government for failing to regulate Banks properly..
Partially, yes. However even now they seem to be reluctant to do much but then if I wanted my government to run my life for me i'd move to Cuba. I don't so the regulatory problems don't matter too much cos at the end of the day we still have good ole fashioned English Law to fall back on

Yet you continue to Blame the Banks alone.........
Yes, because they are to blame - the root cause. fact, proven! Greed, incompetence, monopolisation to name a few!

If talking to a brick wall gets tedious, then stop talking
LOL, ok mum :rotfl:

leveller2911

never-in-doubt wrote: »

1. Banks for poor lending
100% spot on - you hit the nail on the head

2.F eckless borrowers who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back
Nope, you cannot blame the public - the problems stem from the source, i.e. the lenders!

3. Labour government for failing to regulate Banks properly..
Partially, yes. However even now they seem to be reluctant to do much but then if I wanted my government to run my life for me i'd move to Cuba. I don't so the regulatory problems don't matter too much cos at the end of the day we still have good ole fashioned English Law to fall back on

Yet you continue to Blame the Banks alone.........
Yes, because they are to blame - the root cause. fact, proven! Greed, incompetence, monopolisation to name a few!

If talking to a brick wall gets tedious, then stop talking
LOL, ok mum :rotfl:

Oh stop it NID, making me laugh here, If I didnt know better I'd think you were TROLLING..lol

I won't bother saying any more, other people will make up their own minds.

poker-playa

leveller2911 wrote: »

Oh stop it NID, making me laugh here, If I didnt know better I'd think you were TROLLING..lol

I won't bother saying any more, other people will make up their own minds.

i have seen a few of nids posts cos im in a bit of trouble with my loan and cards due to my wife passing, no insurance the likes. how can you call nid a troll when he clearly spends all his time helping us out and all you do is try and argue with no sustance behind any of your arguments? you are a pri*k. if it wasnt for his help i'd be paying ridiculous amounts to lenders that i shouldnt need to. i never knerw what letter to send. i never knew what the process was. now i do all thanks to nid. i think youre a pri*k and so do lots of others. and over 5000 obviously think nid is useful unlike the 900 you have.

does this help

Post Count: 6,215
Thanked 6,556 Times in 4,274 Posts

Post Count: 597
Thanked 977 Times in 399 Posts

leveller2911

poker-playa wrote: »

i have seen a few of nids posts cos im in a bit of trouble with my loan and cards due to my wife passing, no insurance the likes. how can you call nid a troll when he clearly spends all his time helping us out and all you do is try and argue with no sustance behind any of your arguments? you are a pri*k. if it wasnt for his help i'd be paying ridiculous amounts to lenders that i shouldnt need to. i never knerw what letter to send. i never knew what the process was. now i do all thanks to nid. i think youre a pri*k and so do lots of others. and over 5000 obviously think nid is useful unlike the 900 you have.

does this help

Post Count: 6,215
Thanked 6,556 Times in 4,274 Posts

Post Count: 597
Thanked 977 Times in 399 Posts

If you read what I said "If I didn't know better,I think you were trolling"

Did you understand the "If I didn't know better"??????

My point was NID consistantly fails to recognise who was to blame for the current financial mess..........sorry if you dont agree with me, thats your choice and I respect that, name calling will have no effect, I have wide shoulders...

never-in-doubt

leveller2911 wrote: »

If you read what I said "If I didn't know better,I think you were trolling"

Did you understand the "If I didn't know better"??????

My point was NID consistantly fails to recognise who was to blame for the current financial mess..........sorry if you dont agree with me, thats your choice and I respect that, name calling will have no effect, I have wide shoulders...

LOL - groupies eh :D

I do realise who is to blame, I think it is you who fails to acknowledge the cause is directly the banks or lending institutions and their unfounded greed. Do you need me to troll the web and post link after link?

What more can I say? Either hit me with proof that suggests it is not the lenders fault or drop it mate, you gotta let go :beer:

p.s. I don't agree with the prik comment, no need to make it personal Mr Poker!. (for the record)