Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Aqua1985
    • By Aqua1985 9th Oct 19, 3:50 PM
    • 34Posts
    • 11Thanks
    Aqua1985
    Quickquid Successful Reclaim
    • #1
    • 9th Oct 19, 3:50 PM
    Quickquid Successful Reclaim 9th Oct 19 at 3:50 PM
    Finally paid my overdue redress of 1000 after a long and frustrating wait. Added to my list of Wonga, Sunny and PDUK and over 5000 claimed back! For those of you still claiming keep going and chasing and it will all be worth it in the end!
Page 2
    • glennstar
    • By glennstar 11th Oct 19, 5:57 AM
    • 250 Posts
    • 166 Thanks
    glennstar
    I don't agree.

    I think that the fact the OP borrowed from QQ at 1300.5% APR (representative) demonstrates desperation and possibly feeling that they sadly had no other viable options...
    Originally posted by Willing2Learn
    This presupposes that OP was actually weighing these various considerations up rationally. In my experience most people have little or no idea what APR is and certainly have no idea in the context of a 30 or 60 day loan.
    The views expressed here are my own. I am not a Solicitor nor am I affiliated with any of the parties I mention. If you disagree with any of my comments please say in whatever way feels most natural to you. No one self improves in a bubble!
    • glennstar
    • By glennstar 11th Oct 19, 6:01 AM
    • 250 Posts
    • 166 Thanks
    glennstar
    Quite possibly, to be fair, but that wouldn't commute the possibility of "predatory lending" from the lender.
    Originally posted by Les79
    Very true... but this then falls into the 6 of one and half a dozen of the other category which precludes blaming and complaining.
    The views expressed here are my own. I am not a Solicitor nor am I affiliated with any of the parties I mention. If you disagree with any of my comments please say in whatever way feels most natural to you. No one self improves in a bubble!
    • sourcrates
    • By sourcrates 11th Oct 19, 1:07 PM
    • 18,619 Posts
    • 17,527 Thanks
    sourcrates
    Everyone does, but a common theme is that it's ALWAYS the lenders fault.

    Is it, really?

    People need to take charge of the own affairs instead of blaming everyone else.
    Originally posted by boo_star

    Just for the sake of impartiality, I do understand your point made above, and I accept not all lenders operate in an unfair manner, but by far the majority of people who turn to these type of loans are from the poorest section of society, most may not even have finished school, and are unlikely to be financially astute, I know this could be argued till the cows come home, but when this product first took off, a plethorah of new lenders sprung up overnight to take advantage, of what was then, an unregulated market.

    You simply cannot deny many of these firms deliberatly took advantage of the situation, lined their pockets, and fled, leaving a lot of people in a very bad way, I know where your thoughts mainly lie on this subject, but please tell me you do accept that this happened, and was a deliberate act on behalf of the lenders, and I use the term "lenders" in its loosest possible context, as they were loan sharks in reality.

    Emptying the bank accounts of thousands of their customers using direct debt mandates which were unauthorised by the borrower, and also constant payment authority, taking small amounts at a time, in a continuous pattern throughout the night, until the payment failed for lack of funds.

    I see so many posts on this subject where the blame is focussed on the borrower, are people unaware of what these companies actually did ?

    or the scale on which it happened ?

    do they choose to ignore it, and pretend it didn`t happen ?

    a lot of these lenders were nothing more than cowboys/conmen/sharks, call them what you will, who only had contempt for the rules, and it seems their customers.

    A very revealing documentary was made a few years ago about uncle buck, who to be fair to them, were not the worst PDL out there, but certainly not the best either, and have now, not suprisingly, reinvented themselves elsewere, I would urge you all to watch it, if you can, its a real eye opener into how these payday lenders actually operate, or did at the time, there contempt for everything and everyone was astonishing, it was run on a day to day basis by a bunch of what i can best describe as "teenagers", 17/18/19 year olds who basically said and did whatever came into their heads to get results, a bit like the latest bunch of recruits on the apprentice, but not as well dressed.

    When companies deliberatly set up shop to scam there customers, which a lot did, you surely must have sympathy with the people who were fleeced.
    Last edited by sourcrates; 11-10-2019 at 1:36 PM.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Credit File and Ratings, Bankruptcy And Living With It, boards. "I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly".
    Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to:
    forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.
    Any views expressed are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
    For free debt advice, contact either : Stepchange, National Debtline, CitizensAdviceBureaux.
    • boo_star
    • By boo_star 11th Oct 19, 1:31 PM
    • 2,833 Posts
    • 2,177 Thanks
    boo_star
    Just for the sake of impartiality, I do understand your point made above, but by far the majority of people who turn to these type of loans are from the poorest section of society, most may not even have finished school, and are unlikely to be financially astute, I know this could be argued till the cows come home, but when this product first took off, a plethorah of new lenders sprung up overnight to take advantage, of what was then, an unregulated market.

    You simply cannot deny many of these firms deliberatly took advantage of the situation, lined their pockets, and fled, leaving a lot of people in a very bad way, I know where your thoughts mainly lie on this subject, but please tell me you do accept that this happened, and was a deliberate act on behalf of the lenders, and I use the term "lenders" in its loosest possible context, as they were loan sharks in reality.

    Emptying the bank accounts of thousands of their customers using direct debt mandates which were unauthorised by the borrower, and also constant payment authority, taking small amounts at a time, in a continuous pattern throughout the night, until the payment failed for lack of funds.

    I see so many posts on this subject where the blame is focussed on the borrower, are people unaware of what these companies actually did ? or the scale on which it happened ? do they choose to ignore it, and pretend it didn`t happen, a lot of these lenders were nothing more than cowboys who only had contempt for the rules, and it seems their customers.

    A very revelaing documentary was made a few years ago about uncle buck, who have now, not suprisingly, reinvented themselves elsewere, I would urge you all to watch it, if you can, its a real eye opener into how these payday lenders actually operate, or did at the time, there contempt for everything and everyone was astonishing, it was run on a day to day basis by a bunch of what i can best describe as teenagers, who basically said and did whatever came into their heads to get results.

    When companies deliberatly set up shop to scam there customers, which a lot did, you surely must have sympathy with the people who were fleesed.
    Originally posted by sourcrates
    I'm fully aware that payday loan companies were not, for want of a better term, "particularly nice."

    The problem is that a subsection of forum posters seemingly will not ever either take even a smidgen of responsibility for the mess they landed themselves in or, for those who are commenting from the sidelines, will not accept that those posters who end up in trouble have at least some responsibility for it. It's always the companies fault, in their entirety.

    We saw it with bank charges, we're seeing it with PDL's and eventually they'll move onto something else that will, of course, not be anybody's fault but the companies involved.

    People are not, in my opinion, best served by mollycoddling them and I think are far more likely to be careful in future if they can at least accept some responsibility.

    Obviously some people think differently.
    • keepcalmandstayoutofdebt
    • By keepcalmandstayoutofdebt 11th Oct 19, 1:41 PM
    • 3,857 Posts
    • 2,022 Thanks
    keepcalmandstayoutofdebt

    A very revelaing documentary was made a few years ago about xxxxx, who have now, not suprisingly, reinvented themselves elsewere, I would urge you all to watch it, if you can, its a real eye opener into how these payday lenders actually operate, or did at the time, there contempt for everything and everyone was astonishing, it was run on a day to day basis by a bunch of what i can best describe as teenagers, who basically said and did whatever came into their heads to get results.

    .
    Originally posted by sourcrates
    Erm no they have moved to bigger offices and improved their product.
    It took a few watches to see it from their side.

    I remembered the documentary as I paid off a debt collector recently and experienced exactly the same behaviour if not much worse, from a debt collector a number on here would say there sits a solicitor in their office, but their behaviour made that far from believable.

    I cringed watching rip of Britain this week - far worse cases rejected by the FOS - have to wonder how.
    Not leaving my 'childhood' Home without a fight
    • Willing2Learn
    • By Willing2Learn 11th Oct 19, 1:41 PM
    • 4,616 Posts
    • 4,173 Thanks
    Willing2Learn
    The problem is that a subsection of forum posters seemingly will not ever either take even a smidgen of responsibility for the mess they landed themselves in or, for those who are commenting from the sidelines, will not accept that those posters who end up in trouble have at least some responsibility for it. It's always the companies fault, in their entirety.
    Originally posted by boo_star
    The problem I have is not about apportion of blame, but is more to do with the fact that the (mostly new) members are not receiving advice, when that is what they signed up for. It seems that the members expressing their views the most loud, are those who do want to apportion blame squarely on to the shoulders of the member. I find this difficult to accept as I feel the blame should be equally spread by both the borrower and the lender. That is why I 'pop up' on these threads. Just to try and keep the discussion balanced and fair.
    I work within the voluntary sector, supporting vulnerable people to rebuild their lives.

    I love my job

    • sourcrates
    • By sourcrates 11th Oct 19, 4:09 PM
    • 18,619 Posts
    • 17,527 Thanks
    sourcrates
    The problem I have is not about apportion of blame, but is more to do with the fact that the (mostly new) members are not receiving advice, when that is what they signed up for. It seems that the members expressing their views the most loud, are those who do want to apportion blame squarely on to the shoulders of the member. I find this difficult to accept as I feel the blame should be equally spread by both the borrower and the lender. That is why I 'pop up' on these threads. Just to try and keep the discussion balanced and fair.
    Originally posted by Willing2Learn

    I have to agree with you W2L, sometimes advice does tend to flow in one direction only, i`m pretty sure folk are well aware of the situation they may find themselves in, they don`t particulaly want to come here to have it rubbed in their face yet again, it would be nice to see a culture of help and a little empathy return to the forums.
    Last edited by sourcrates; 11-10-2019 at 5:20 PM.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Credit File and Ratings, Bankruptcy And Living With It, boards. "I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly".
    Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to:
    forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.
    Any views expressed are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
    For free debt advice, contact either : Stepchange, National Debtline, CitizensAdviceBureaux.
    • glennstar
    • By glennstar 11th Oct 19, 9:13 PM
    • 250 Posts
    • 166 Thanks
    glennstar
    I find this difficult to accept as I feel the blame should be equally spread by both the borrower and the lender. That is why I 'pop up' on these threads. Just to try and keep the discussion balanced and fair.
    Originally posted by Willing2Learn
    It's probably worth understanding the circumstances, is it?
    The views expressed here are my own. I am not a Solicitor nor am I affiliated with any of the parties I mention. If you disagree with any of my comments please say in whatever way feels most natural to you. No one self improves in a bubble!
    • glennstar
    • By glennstar 11th Oct 19, 9:21 PM
    • 250 Posts
    • 166 Thanks
    glennstar
    I have to agree with you W2L, sometimes advice does tend to flow in one direction only, i`m pretty sure folk are well aware of the situation they may find themselves in, they don`t particulaly want to come here to have it rubbed in their face yet again, it would be nice to see a culture of help and a little empathy return to the forums.
    Originally posted by sourcrates
    I agree with the general sentiment, however, OP [in this case] didn't ask a question and hasn't answered genuine questions to him/her from others. I rather feel by not entering into the spirit of the forum they might well expect an uncharitable response. It might be observed that they didn't enter into the spirit of their financial contract either... possibly??
    The views expressed here are my own. I am not a Solicitor nor am I affiliated with any of the parties I mention. If you disagree with any of my comments please say in whatever way feels most natural to you. No one self improves in a bubble!
    • boo_star
    • By boo_star 12th Oct 19, 3:04 AM
    • 2,833 Posts
    • 2,177 Thanks
    boo_star
    I have to agree with you W2L, sometimes advice does tend to flow in one direction only, i`m pretty sure folk are well aware of the situation they may find themselves in, they don`t particulaly want to come here to have it rubbed in their face yet again, it would be nice to see a culture of help and a little empathy return to the forums.
    Originally posted by sourcrates
    But they don't really show that do they?

    They're looking for get out clauses, not genuine advice.

    When someone says (paraphrasing) "Well I accept I made a mistake but how can I use technicalities to wipe that mistake from the record books" I ask myself, "Do you really accept that you made a mistake or are you just paying lip service to the rest of the forum?"

    Unless people can truly acknowledge that they made a mistake, where they made it and why, they'll just end up in the same situation again.

    I don't know if beating them over the head with a stick is the best approach, but I certainly don't think mollycoddling them is better.
    • Aqua1985
    • By Aqua1985 12th Oct 19, 3:20 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Aqua1985
    My initial post was really to give a little bit of hope to the many thousands of people reclaiming interest charges through Quickquid (CEN). It wasn't intended to discuss the right and wrong of such actions but the thread seems to have gone that way so I will continue.
    I think the morality question is a difficult one. I do think there is two sides of the argument the lender and the borrower. Unfortunately the onus in terms of responsibility is also going to be on the side of the lender. They are the regulated party and have to show and demonstrate certain behaviors to obtain and indeed keep a credit license. The main reclaim aspect is the lender not checking affordability when lending money. QQ like others has shown in thousands of cases that not only did they encourage borrowers to borrow larger and larger amounts they did not complete satisfactory due diligence on affordability. This is not a moral argument but a legal one. The FOS and FCA position on this is quite clear hence the large number of successful reclaims.
    I do think the snobbery around payday loans reclaims is somewhat unfair. Many people mocking these claimants no doubt switch bank accounts regularly to make the most of introductory offers, reclaimed PPI on all loans and Credit cards, terminated PCP agreements at the VT point, use S75 protection on non delivery on dodgy websites... the list goes on.
    I do think some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in society receiving a refund on some of the sky high interest they paid is not necessarily a bad thing and if this area of the loan markets disappears most people would agree its a good thing.
    • Aqua1985
    • By Aqua1985 12th Oct 19, 3:21 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Aqua1985
    To all those who continue to reclaim, good luck stick with it and use the debt camel website for all templates and advice.
    • Aqua1985
    • By Aqua1985 12th Oct 19, 3:27 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Aqua1985
    The 4000 example isn't entirely true. Correct you are still liable for the original loan/capital amount. The interest you paid is returned plus 8% simple interest from the date paid. For one reclaim for example I have completed, 1000 refund of interest has turned into 1500 once the 8% per annum simple interest has been added.
    • sourcrates
    • By sourcrates 12th Oct 19, 3:55 PM
    • 18,619 Posts
    • 17,527 Thanks
    sourcrates
    I do think some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in society receiving a refund on some of the sky high interest they paid is not necessarily a bad thing and if this area of the loan markets disappears most people would agree its a good thing.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985

    Exactly, I get the impression some believe you get the full loan amount plus interest refunded, with simple interest added, when clearly that is not the case.

    If your claim is successful, you get back all the interest you have paid, plus any charges, plus simple interest @ 8% (in line with what a court would award).
    The original loan having effectivly been interest free.


    I share the FOS view that this represents a fair outcome.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Credit File and Ratings, Bankruptcy And Living With It, boards. "I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly".
    Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to:
    forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.
    Any views expressed are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.
    For free debt advice, contact either : Stepchange, National Debtline, CitizensAdviceBureaux.
    • camelot1971
    • By camelot1971 12th Oct 19, 6:32 PM
    • 1,102 Posts
    • 1,732 Thanks
    camelot1971
    My initial post was really to give a little bit of hope to the many thousands of people reclaiming interest charges through Quickquid (CEN). It wasn't intended to discuss the right and wrong of such actions but the thread seems to have gone that way so I will continue.
    I think the morality question is a difficult one. I do think there is two sides of the argument the lender and the borrower. Unfortunately the onus in terms of responsibility is also going to be on the side of the lender. They are the regulated party and have to show and demonstrate certain behaviors to obtain and indeed keep a credit license. The main reclaim aspect is the lender not checking affordability when lending money. QQ like others has shown in thousands of cases that not only did they encourage borrowers to borrow larger and larger amounts they did not complete satisfactory due diligence on affordability. This is not a moral argument but a legal one. The FOS and FCA position on this is quite clear hence the large number of successful reclaims.
    I do think the snobbery around payday loans reclaims is somewhat unfair. Many people mocking these claimants no doubt switch bank accounts regularly to make the most of introductory offers, reclaimed PPI on all loans and Credit cards, terminated PCP agreements at the VT point, use S75 protection on non delivery on dodgy websites... the list goes on.
    I do think some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in society receiving a refund on some of the sky high interest they paid is not necessarily a bad thing and if this area of the loan markets disappears most people would agree its a good thing.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    I don't agree on the morality point - if you borrow money, you should pay it back under the terms of the loan. If you don't agree with the terms, don't borrow!

    Now, that doesn't mean that no predatory lending went on, and I would never condone that when it happened. But where someone is borrowing money when they clearly know they can't pay it back, that is wrong. Making fraudulent applications, even if affordability wasn't checked, is still wrong.

    Access to loans for the poor or vulnerable will always be an issue, because the risks are so high that the money won't be paid back. But the question remains - what do you do to protect people from themselves?

    People don't have a right to credit and if you are poor and/or vulnerable, then you should look to charity/friends to help you out in a crisis. I understand people want access to nice shiny things but you know what, life isn't fair and if you can't afford it, you can't have it unless you save up.
    • Aqua1985
    • By Aqua1985 12th Oct 19, 6:49 PM
    • 34 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Aqua1985
    You can of course flip your statements on your their head! If you can't lend fairly and conduct appropriate checks as per the conditions of your credit license don't lend! These companies are not entitled to year on year growth or ever increasing profits! Life isn't fair and sometimes its tough, ask thr previous market leaders wonga!
    • boo_star
    • By boo_star 13th Oct 19, 2:04 AM
    • 2,833 Posts
    • 2,177 Thanks
    boo_star
    You can of course flip your statements on your their head! If you can't lend fairly and conduct appropriate checks as per the conditions of your credit license don't lend! These companies are not entitled to year on year growth or ever increasing profits! Life isn't fair and sometimes its tough, ask thr previous market leaders wonga!
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    Caveat Emptor.

    Even the Romans knew you needed to be careful, over 2000 years ago.
    • camelot1971
    • By camelot1971 13th Oct 19, 6:10 PM
    • 1,102 Posts
    • 1,732 Thanks
    camelot1971
    You can of course flip your statements on your their head! If you can't lend fairly and conduct appropriate checks as per the conditions of your credit license don't lend! These companies are not entitled to year on year growth or ever increasing profits! Life isn't fair and sometimes its tough, ask thr previous market leaders wonga!
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    What would you have done if the payday loan people had all turned you down?
    • glennstar
    • By glennstar 13th Oct 19, 9:07 PM
    • 250 Posts
    • 166 Thanks
    glennstar
    My initial post was really to give a little bit of hope to the many thousands of people reclaiming interest charges through Quickquid (CEN). It wasn't intended to discuss the right and wrong of such actions but the thread seems to have gone that way so I will continue.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    Morality forms the basis of all we do - it defines us.

    I think the morality question is a difficult one. I do think there is two sides of the argument the lender and the borrower. Unfortunately the onus in terms of responsibility is also going to be on the side of the lender. They are the regulated party and have to show and demonstrate certain behaviours to obtain and indeed keep a credit license.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    Well done for identifying the parties involved (although there are two parties, not is two parties!!), less so for the analysis. To suggest that a regulated party bears all responsibility for any given situation is quite frankly, alarming. You may as well say that the Highways Agency or the Police are responsible for the roads and that means you are free to drink and drive as they are responsible for apprehending you before anything bad happens... and if they don't, you should somehow, be compensated for your stupidity.

    The main reclaim aspect is the lender not checking affordability when lending money. QQ like others has shown in thousands of cases that not only did they encourage borrowers to borrow larger and larger amounts they did not complete satisfactory due diligence on affordability. This is not a moral argument but a legal one.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    As asked previously, what checks do you think should have been carried out that would have proved satisfactory?

    The FOS and FCA position on this is quite clear hence the large number of successful reclaims.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    Untrue! Justify this statement.

    I do think the snobbery around payday loans reclaims is somewhat unfair. Many people mocking these claimants no doubt switch bank accounts regularly to make the most of introductory offers, reclaimed PPI on all loans and Credit cards, terminated PCP agreements at the VT point, use S75 protection on non delivery on dodgy websites... the list goes on.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    Random statement without content or context!!

    I do think some of the most vulnerable and poorest people in society receiving a refund on some of the sky high interest they paid is not necessarily a bad thing and if this area of the loan markets disappears most people would agree its a good thing.
    Originally posted by Aqua1985
    This is probably the only thing in this post we agree on, although the principle and not the method.
    The views expressed here are my own. I am not a Solicitor nor am I affiliated with any of the parties I mention. If you disagree with any of my comments please say in whatever way feels most natural to you. No one self improves in a bubble!
    • Jane.1963
    • By Jane.1963 16th Oct 19, 9:38 AM
    • 49 Posts
    • 13 Thanks
    Jane.1963
    I was interested to read the OP as I stupidly took 6 payday loans about 9 years ago all with same company, I only ever intended to take 1 loan but as what seems to happen with these loans I ended up rolling for 6 months.
    I didn’t make any claim and as far as I was concerned they were time barred so I was extremely surprised when I received an email from the company telling me I was entitled to 700 compensation which I excepted and was paid into my bank account.

    So many people took out these loans and look on forums for advice and other people’s experience.
    It’s such a shame that the comments put on here will have put people off posting for fear of being judged and sneered at.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

753Posts Today

6,417Users online

Martin's Twitter