Quickquid Successful Reclaim

Aqua1985 · 12 October 2019 at 3:21PM

To all those who continue to reclaim, good luck stick with it and use the debt camel website for all templates and advice.

Aqua1985 · 12 October 2019 at 3:27PM

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 · 12 October 2019 at 3:55PM

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

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.

[Deleted User] · 12 October 2019 at 6:32PM

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

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 · 12 October 2019 at 6:49PM

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 · 13 October 2019 at 2:04AM

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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!

Caveat Emptor.

Even the Romans knew you needed to be careful, over 2000 years ago.

[Deleted User] · 13 October 2019 at 6:10PM

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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!

What would you have done if the payday loan people had all turned you down?

glennstar · 13 October 2019 at 9:07PM

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

Morality forms the basis of all we do - it defines us.

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

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.

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

As asked previously, what checks do you think should have been carried out that would have proved satisfactory?

Aqua1985 wrote: »

The FOS and FCA position on this is quite clear hence the large number of successful reclaims.

Untrue! Justify this statement.

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

Random statement without content or context!!

Aqua1985 wrote: »

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.

This is probably the only thing in this post we agree on, although the principle and not the method.

Jane.1963 · 16 October 2019 at 9:38AM

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.

Willing2Learn · 16 October 2019 at 1:12PM

Jane.1963 wrote: »

...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.

If anyone reading this is being put off from posting, then they should start a new thread on the Debt-Free Wannabe (DFW) board. No-one judges anyone else on the DFW board. Any threads started on the DFW board will simply receive appropriate advice, guidance and support.

Quickquid Successful Reclaim

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free