Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 19 March, 2009 Share Posted 19 March, 2009 There was a thread on here some time ago, possibly before the server change about the credit consumer act and how there are holes in many of the credit agreements signed on unsecured debts (credit cards, store cards and personal loans) before 6th April 2007 enabling people to have their debts deemed unenforcable and wiped in a court of law. I couldnt find it so I guess it was before the server change, so I have started this thread. I fully expect there to be people who are morally against it and expect replies like 'If you borrowed it you should pay it back'. However, the fact is that there is a market out there and people do want to challenge their banks and building soceities, especially in the current economic times. Banks were very slack in composing the credit agreements often missing out important information like cancellation rights or incorrectly quoting APR's. In a court of law it can be shown that this invalidates the agreement and the debt is deemed unenforcable. Surprisingly, a lot of the time, the lender cannot even provide the original credit agreement you signed, and lenders are settling out of court and agreement to completely wipe the debt or significantly reduce it. Think its too good to be true? I did too before I looked into it and realised there have already been a lot of success cases which have gone through and seen how the banks and building societies have reacted to some of these cases (like fraudulently producing agreements and doing 'cut and shut' jobs on others!) So, should you have a credit card, store card or unsecured loan with balances totalling over £2k, check out http://www.thedebtfairy.co.uk. There is more information on there, alterntively, PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 There was a thread on here some time ago, possibly before the server change about the credit consumer act and how there are holes in many of the credit agreements signed on unsecured debts (credit cards, store cards and personal loans) before 6th April 2007 enabling people to have their debts deemed unenforcable and wiped in a court of law. I couldnt find it so I guess it was before the server change, so I have started this thread. I fully expect there to be people who are morally against it and expect replies like 'If you borrowed it you should pay it back'. However, the fact is that there is a market out there and people do want to challenge their banks and building soceities, especially in the current economic times. Banks were very slack in composing the credit agreements often missing out important information like cancellation rights or incorrectly quoting APR's. In a court of law it can be shown that this invalidates the agreement and the debt is deemed unenforcable. Surprisingly, a lot of the time, the lender cannot even provide the original credit agreement you signed, and lenders are settling out of court and agreement to completely wipe the debt or significantly reduce it. Think its too good to be true? I did too before I looked into it and realised there have already been a lot of success cases which have gone through and seen how the banks and building societies have reacted to some of these cases (like fraudulently producing agreements and doing 'cut and shut' jobs on others!) So, should you have a credit card, store card or unsecured loan with balances totalling over £2k, check out http://www.thedebtfairy.co.uk. There is more information on there, alterntively, PM me. Fcking Pikey! Let me guess how the country got in this sh11tty mess in the first place, which is now affecting normal hard working people who are intelligent enough not to borrow more money than they can afford to repay... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 Fcking Pikey! Let me guess how the country got in this sh11tty mess in the first place, which is now affecting normal hard working people who are intelligent enough not to borrow more money than they can afford to repay... I would like to add my agreement to the above statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Post-it note Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 I would like to add my agreement to the above statement. People trying to wriggle out of debts on technicalitys are a bunch of nobs. You borrowed and spent it, so ****ing pay it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Trubble Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 No doubt the company involved in the link above are entitled to some sort of grant or other government form of assistance[like a Legal Aid type function], which in itself means that more money is taken out of the system to ensure that people who are irresponsible don't get their fingers burned or face the consequences of their actions. That goes for the companies that give them the money which they know damn well that they can't pay back. Meanwhile, the sensible people get taxed more to partly fund it and to ensure that the irresponsible people never learn from their 'greed is good' or 'Me, myself and I' mentality as they know if they act irresponsibly then they have a safety net to fall into anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 20 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 20 March, 2009 Fcking Pikey! Let me guess how the country got in this sh11tty mess in the first place, which is now affecting normal hard working people who are intelligent enough not to borrow more money than they can afford to repay... People trying to wriggle out of debts on technicalitys are a bunch of nobs. You borrowed and spent it, so ****ing pay it. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, however if there were not people doing it there would not bea market for it. There are situations where this can be beneficial. Single parents who are struggling to put food on the table from debts they incurred when they could previously afford it (like when they had a partner, or a job but have since been made redundant) and by clearing these debts they can breathe easier and other similar situations. Just because your moral views dont believe in this doesnt mean it is not right. How about someone taking out debt but not realising how much it will cost them due to incorrect agreements. Is that right? Considering the size of the banks which have made these agreements and the resources openly available to them, you would think they would have the ability to get the agreements right and to comply with law! No doubt the company involved in the link above are entitled to some sort of grant or other government form of assistance[like a Legal Aid type function], which in itself means that more money is taken out of the system to ensure that people who are irresponsible don't get their fingers burned or face the consequences of their actions. Sorry Barney but you talking carp here. The company is entitled to no grants or anything of the like. It is set up part owned by a firm of solicitors and is a company regulated by the Office of Fair Trading and Ministry of Justice. Just because this may not be your 'thing' doesnt mean to say thatit cant and wont be a vital tool in helping others. I would imgaine the majority of people who poo poo this and call the people who do it 'pikeys' are people who have never really been swamped in debts and struggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 as someone who had a huge amount of debt after leaving uni and worked has arse off to clear it, i feel I can comment on it. Of the points you made above, none still mean that a person who has debt should be allowed to wipe some or all of it off. Someone who has lost a job and had a large amount of debt should have had the sense to take out some payment protection. If someones partner has left them, then why cant they get a job themselves to pay the debt off? If they have kids and cant work then the errant partner can be made to pay towards the debt. There is no reason why my bank charges, tax or anything else should increase to bail out someone that has failed to plan for the future in a sensible manner. People need to start taking personal responsibility for their financial actions, not rely on the latest sneaky way to drift through life ignoring the important things... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 20 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 20 March, 2009 ... Pancake if there is an industry for it, people will do it. I respect your views but not everyones views are the same and there are people out there that will want to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essruu Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 This just goes to show what sort of a morally bankrupt person Crouchie's Lawyer is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 Pancake if there is an industry for it' date=' people will do it. I respect your views but not everyones views are the same and there are people out there that will want to do this.[/quote'] What a pony reasoning... There is also an industry for drugs, prostitution and guns, you ok with that too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 Getting out of paying debts that one has incurred is c***ish. No arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooohTerryHurlock Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 I'm not for crouchies argument entirely but lets just analyse the bank and what they do for us. Sir Fred Goodwin oversaw the huge losses at RBS and gets a £700000 pension for life - for what exactly. The country has massively bailed out the banks but they are still ****ing us over - so why not adopt the same principles? Sir Alan Stanford - Corrupt Madof - Corrupt AIG has been bailed out by the USA government - but they award themselves countless million in bonuses - Northern Rock - gets bailed out by us to stop it going to the wall for its mismanagement but is the fastest bank to repossess people's home? Is that right? I'm not sure it would n't have been easier for the banks to pay off all our mortgages and start again - that would have certainly given the economy in the shot in the arm it needed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 20 March, 2009 Share Posted 20 March, 2009 (edited) There was a thread on here some time ago, possibly before the server change about the credit consumer act and how there are holes in many of the credit agreements signed on unsecured debts (credit cards, store cards and personal loans) before 6th April 2007 enabling people to have their debts deemed unenforcable and wiped in a court of law. I couldnt find it so I guess it was before the server change, so I have started this thread. I fully expect there to be people who are morally against it and expect replies like 'If you borrowed it you should pay it back'. However, the fact is that there is a market out there and people do want to challenge their banks and building soceities, especially in the current economic times. Banks were very slack in composing the credit agreements often missing out important information like cancellation rights or incorrectly quoting APR's. In a court of law it can be shown that this invalidates the agreement and the debt is deemed unenforcable. Surprisingly, a lot of the time, the lender cannot even provide the original credit agreement you signed, and lenders are settling out of court and agreement to completely wipe the debt or significantly reduce it. Think its too good to be true? I did too before I looked into it and realised there have already been a lot of success cases which have gone through and seen how the banks and building societies have reacted to some of these cases (like fraudulently producing agreements and doing 'cut and shut' jobs on others!) So, should you have a credit card, store card or unsecured loan with balances totalling over £2k, check out www.thedebtfairy.co.uk. There is more information on there, alterntively, PM me. Which banks have committed frauds in these cases? Edited 20 March, 2009 by benjii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Just because this may not be your 'thing' doesnt mean to say thatit cant and wont be a vital tool in helping others. I would imgaine the majority of people who poo poo this and call the people who do it 'pikeys' are people who have never really been swamped in debts and struggling. Euthanasia isn't really my thing, but there is an industry for it, does it make it right :smt102 As for poo pooing it, you're right, I've never been swamped in debt and struggling, for the simple reason that I either have never : a) Spent more money than was in my bank account / pocket b) On the rare occasions that I've borrowed money, I've never borrowed more than I could comfortably repay. It's not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 You are presumably on commission for this yes? So you would be nothing more than a dirty cheating pikey scumbag and lower than a snake's belly IMO. Two wrongs don't make a right so the bank misbehaviour argument is a non-argument. People borrow money from others who lent it in good faith, and they spent and enjoyed it - it is up to them to pay back. No question. On the "people will want it" argument, some people (like your client in fact) want child p*rn, this doesn't make it right. Complete b*llocks again I'm afraid Crouchie's Nonce. Frankly this thread smacks of encouraging already p*ss taking gyppos to take the p*ss some more and is probably some sort of commercial/advertising thread that ought to be banned from here anyway. Have I ever been "swamped in debts and struggling"? No I haven't because I have never borrowed or spent more than I can afford. I have also never been a pikey, but that's probably the same point. In conclusion, you are talking utter sh*te and should be put down. Infraction issued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 21 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 March, 2009 This just goes to show what sort of a morally bankrupt person Crouchie's Lawyer is. Coming from a rascist that cuts likea knife. What a pony reasoning... There is also an industry for drugs, prostitution and guns, you ok with that too? They are illegal, so no. What I am advertising is not illegal. You are presumably on commission for this yes? So you would be nothing more than a dirty cheating pikey scumbag and lower than a snake's belly IMO. It is a job which pays Rattlec*ck, Im sure you dont do your job for free. And it is well within the law so I am no cheat eiether. hth Have I ever been "swamped in debts and struggling"? No I haven't because I have never borrowed or spent more than I can afford. I have also never been a pikey, but that's probably the same point. Well done you. I doubt you have ever had cancer either, but doesnt mean that people are not unlucky enough to find themselves in a position where they are immune from it! You cannot say that all the people in the world struggling from debt deserve it. As for the payment protection arguement, thats carp too as most policies only pay out after a defer period and only pay out for a limited time. What pays the bills until the policy pays out? Or after it stops? What about people who get made bankrupt? And suffer for the rest of their lives due to bad credit? I know people who have been previously made bankrupt and have come out the other side worked their asses off and become millionaires but cannot get credit because of their credit records. Given the choice Im sure they would takethis option over bankruptcy. ! You're a ****, and if i met you i would ****ing cut you, you sy,!!!! Big words Barto. Very lounge-esque. If you cannot join in the big boy conversation and add merit to it, then dont bother at all. At the end of the day, I know this is not everyones cup of tea. People will be dead against it and others will see it as a saving grace. But it is not illegal and there are people out there who will take advantage of it. I am merely passing the information on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 What I am advertising is not illegal. It is a job which pays Rattlec*ck, Im sure you dont do your job for free. And it is well within the law so I am no cheat eiether. hth What about people who get made bankrupt? And suffer for the rest of their lives due to bad credit? I am merely passing the information on. Merely passing the information on, or advertising your [somewhat dubious] 'services'? And what about the people that get made bankrupt? It's not random, people's names don't just get pulled out of a hat and then made bankrupt! Generally it occurs because they haven't paid their creditors, and most likely their biggest creditor will be the inland revenue. They knew what would happen when they borrowed the money / stopped paying the money back, so they only have themselves to blame! And all your other arguments are complete hogwash too, because nobody forces a gun to people's heads and MAKES them spend way beyond their means, it is a personal choice, and people are ALWAYS made aware of the consequences before they signed on the dotted, if they choose not to believe the consequences that is their problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 as someone who had a huge amount of debt after leaving uni and worked has arse off to clear it, i feel I can comment on it. Of the points you made above, none still mean that a person who has debt should be allowed to wipe some or all of it off. Someone who has lost a job and had a large amount of debt should have had the sense to take out some payment protection. If someones partner has left them, then why cant they get a job themselves to pay the debt off? If they have kids and cant work then the errant partner can be made to pay towards the debt. There is no reason why my bank charges, tax or anything else should increase to bail out someone that has failed to plan for the future in a sensible manner. People need to start taking personal responsibility for their financial actions, not rely on the latest sneaky way to drift through life ignoring the important things... not anymore! have you ever tried getting anything from the CSA (or what used to be) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadeem Hardison Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Thanks for this CL! I followed the link last time you posted it and was able to clear £12,000 worth of debt (debauched early 20s). It really saved me the time and effort of getting a job - jobs are for losers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesaint sfc Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Fcking Pikey! Let me guess how the country got in this sh11tty mess in the first place, which is now affecting normal hard working people who are intelligent enough not to borrow more money than they can afford to repay... Agreed. Those who don't pay their money back are basically robbing it off everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 It is indeed a moral issue, just like tax avoidance. There is a law out there. If companies loaning money do not comply there are many who will take advantage just like there are those who find loopholes to avoid paying their taxes. A football club or any other business going into Administration just so they can wipe the slate clean and start again meaning many who are owed money lose out. It is legal but morally wrong. Don't knock those trying to legally avoid paying. It is those who make the laws and those who are too incompetent to apply them who are at fault. From a moral point of view I find it reprehensible that someone, whether it is an individual or a company, can get away with not paying back something they owe but that is just the way I was bought up and I am lucky enough not to be in debt. I have always been able to pay as I go through life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iowsaintsfan Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 I would like to add my agreement to the above statement. me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 It is a job which pays Rattlec*ck, Im sure you dont do your job for free. And it is well within the law so I am no cheat eiether. hth You are in my opinion and I think most honest people would consider you to be a dirty cheat and a horrible scumbag on the basis of the evidence provided by this thread. You are unquestionably trying to cheat people out of getting their money back. Disgusting. Well done you. I doubt you have ever had cancer either, but doesnt mean that people are not unlucky enough to find themselves in a position where they are immune from it! You cannot say that all the people in the world struggling from debt deserve it. As for the payment protection arguement, thats carp too as most policies only pay out after a defer period and only pay out for a limited time. What pays the bills until the policy pays out? Or after it stops? My god I think you must be some kind of retard. This is not something that strikes you down by complete chance, like cancer. What a ridiculous analogy. And what are you on about with the payment protection (non) argument? Completely irrelevant to the moral issues being discussed. What about people who get made bankrupt? And suffer for the rest of their lives due to bad credit? I know people who have been previously made bankrupt and have come out the other side worked their asses off and become millionaires but cannot get credit because of their credit records. Given the choice Im sure they would takethis option over bankruptcy. If this is true, and I seriously doubt it is given the lowlife cacker circles you are likely to mix with, presumably the millionaires wouldn't need to take this option unless they, like you, were lowest of the low. Finally, it makes me laugh that you said "There was a thread on here some time ago...". Yes there was and it was posted by you you immoral advertising whore. Can't find it? What a load of b*llocks. When will this thread be locked/deleted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Just had a look at your website and immediately noticed how apt your surname was. "Ben Rogers..." Frankly, the website reads like a Nigerian scam - pay us at least £50 please (for now) etc... Morally bankrupt is exactly the right phrase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Just had a look at your website and immediately noticed how apt your surname was. "Ben Rogers..." Frankly, the website reads like a Nigerian scam - pay us at least £50 please (for now) etc... Morally bankrupt is exactly the right phrase. No idea how you managed it, because according to Google the account for the debt fairy has been suspended.... http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=the+debt+fairy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a Maybe we aren't the only ones that think this is crossing the line :smt102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 No idea how you managed it, because according to Google the account for the debt fairy has been suspended.... http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=the+debt+fairy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a Maybe we aren't the only ones that think this is crossing the line :smt102 Lol. Got it working now. What a scam! Have you seen those fees :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 So, let me get this straight.... Your fees are £450 initially and a further £150 for every other agreement processed. £1000 'completion' fee. No win no fee which ONLY relates to taking action in a court - despite the fact that the 'client' would have already paid a MINIMUM fee of £450!!! You don't actually guarantee to 'clear' the debt, but the most likely outcome is to reduce it by 30%. So, taking the initial fee and completion fee, totalling £1450, this [very dubious] service is only worthwhile if someone owes AT LEAST £5000 on any one card!!! Do you have no morals at all? All you are doing is preying on people who owe lots of money, to make yourself some easy cash! I wonder how much you REALLY care about the position of these people :smt102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 21 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Just had a look at your website and immediately noticed how apt your surname was. "Ben Rogers..." Frankly, the website reads like a Nigerian scam - pay us at least £50 please (for now) etc... Morally bankrupt is exactly the right phrase. Then how is it that over £1m of debt has been cleared. If it doesnt apply to you then your opinion means squat to me. No idea how you managed it, because according to Google the account for the debt fairy has been suspended.... http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=the+debt+fairy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a Maybe we aren't the only ones that think this is crossing the line :smt102 I havent got a clue what you are pointing out here? The company name is credit issues. My personal website is http://www.thedebtfairy.co.uk which is in affect a redirect to the credit issues site. The company is not called the debt fairy. :confused: So, let me get this straight.... Your fees are £450 initially and a further £150 for every other agreement processed. £1000 'completion' fee. No win no fee which ONLY relates to taking action in a court - despite the fact that the 'client' would have already paid a MINIMUM fee of £450!!! You don't actually guarantee to 'clear' the debt, but the most likely outcome is to reduce it by 30%. So, taking the initial fee and completion fee, totalling £1450, this [very dubious] service is only worthwhile if someone owes AT LEAST £5000 on any one card!!! Do you have no morals at all? All you are doing is preying on people who owe lots of money, to make yourself some easy cash! I wonder how much you REALLY care about the position of these people :smt102 Right, the fee's are £450 for the first agreement you want to challenge yes, with a further upfront fee of £150 for every other agreement you have. If once the agreements have been looked over they are deemed to be enforcable, you get all the upfront fee's back other than £50 per agreement which covers the solicitors time spent so far (to be honest it doesnt even cover that so CI would be making a loss). You would also get that back if you cancel within the allotted time period or it is deemed that you will be no better off with proceeding (for example if your balance was minimal). You are only charged the £1000 when your first challenged agreement is successfully wiped or reduced and you only pay this once. So if you had 3 credit cards and they were all successfully wiped you would pay a total of (£450 + £150 + £150 + £1000) £1750. If the case doesnt go to court it is because they have deemed it to be enforcable which means you will get your refund anyway so I fail to see why you think they are just taking the upfront fee's. The only reason the upfront fee's are charged is to get the clients commitment to credit issues, otherwise credit issues would do all the hard work and the client could be using 3 or 4 companies at the same time with the idea of only finalising with the quickest one, meaning there would be a lot of costs and time incurred for no reason, so the upfront fees are to protect against this. And in regards to your last comment, how can (ignoring your moral views on it) reducing someones debt be a bad thing? Or deemed not caring for the client??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 And in regards to your last comment, how can (ignoring your moral views on it) reducing someones debt be a bad thing? Or deemed not caring for the client??? So potentially you are asking people to pay £750 UP FRONT? Where do you expect them to get this money from? If they had that sort of cash kicking around they probably wouldn't be in debt would they! So, what do they do, they borrow more money - but this is 2009 now and all the lending companies are clued up, so there's no way of getting out of this new debt.... You're a parasite that is perpetuating the credit crisis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 21 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 March, 2009 So potentially you are asking people to pay £750 UP FRONT? Where do you expect them to get this money from? If they had that sort of cash kicking around they probably wouldn't be in debt would they! So, what do they do, they borrow more money - but this is 2009 now and all the lending companies are clued up, so there's no way of getting out of this new debt.... You're a parasite that is perpetuating the credit crisis! How the client gets the upfront fee is not up to me, whether they borrow it from friends and family, put it on a different credit card, use savings or pay in 3 monthly installments - there are options. And lets say that person who is paying £750 upfront has 1 loan of £7500 at £200 p/m and two credit cards totalling £7500 (presuming a minimum payment of 3% per month would equate to £225 p/m for the two credit cards) they will be possibly clearing £15k of debt which they pay a combined £425 on and reducing it to £1750 which on a credit cards would work out at £52.50 per month. I think that significantly improves their finances, so if they want tobe in that position, they find the upfront fees. Again WSS, you are not interested in it so I dont really care about your opinion, it makes no difference to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 How the client gets the upfront fee is not up to me, whether they borrow it from friends and family, put it on a different credit card, use savings or pay in 3 monthly installments - there are options. And lets say that person who is paying £750 upfront has 1 loan of £7500 at £200 p/m and two credit cards totalling £7500 (presuming a minimum payment of 3% per month would equate to £225 p/m for the two credit cards) they will be possibly clearing £15k of debt which they pay a combined £425 on and reducing it to £1750 which on a credit cards would work out at £52.50 per month. I think that significantly improves their finances, so if they want tobe in that position, they find the upfront fees. Again WSS, you are not interested in it so I dont really care about your opinion, it makes no difference to me. After reading the whole thread I've come to the conclusion that you're a scum sucking cu nt who deserves a slow painful death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 21 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 21 March, 2009 After reading the whole thread I've come to the conclusion that you're a scum sucking cu nt who deserves a slow painful death. You came to that conclusion all by yourself you big boy you :rollyeyething: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Is this family clients of yours Crouchies lawyer? http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/kelvin_mackenzie/article2327575.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Steve Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 So many self rightous perfect people on this board, but at the same time advertising to make money off those already in trouble is out of order. If you want free advice (as it should be) go to the Martin Lewis website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 Again WSS, you are not interested in it so I dont really care about your opinion, it makes no difference to me. It probably wasn't prudent to post it on a message board if you didn't want to garner the opinion of others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 So many self rightous perfect people on this board, but at the same time advertising to make money off those already in trouble is out of order. If you want free advice (as it should be) go to the Martin Lewis website. Or C.A.B. It's free AND impartial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_stevo Posted 21 March, 2009 Share Posted 21 March, 2009 so glad rattlemong is back..... I would happily wipe out some debt, why the f*ck not, if i did it would make no difference to anyone on ere, so hows about some of you get off your high self righteous horses for a second Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 so glad rattlemong is back..... I would happily wipe out some debt, why the f*ck not, if i did it would make no difference to anyone on ere, so hows about some of you get off your high self righteous horses for a second And therein lies the problem with this me, me, me fiscal policy, and mongers that don't understand it! You say it won't affect anyone here, but how exactly did the banks end up in so much trouble? Basically because pikeys borrowed money they couldn't / wouldn't pay back. You think that isn't going to affect anyone else, then I'll happily remind you of that when the Chancellor - whoever that may be - puts the taxes up next year to pay for all the money the Gov't has borrowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 22 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 22 March, 2009 So many self rightous perfect people on this board, but at the same time advertising to make money off those already in trouble is out of order. If you want free advice (as it should be) go to the Martin Lewis website. You could go on that site but it is occupied by some of the most financially arrogant people in the world. They all think they know it and and presume that because they do, everyone else must. All they will do is say it is easy to do yourself, however, would I would question if anyone without a strong law background specific to the consumer credit act could spot many (let alone all) the floors in a credit agreement which could get your debt wiped or reduced. It probably wasn't prudent to post it on a message board if you didn't want to garner the opinion of others I posted it to give people information. I said in the original post that I didnt care for the people who are going to morally poo poo it but it didnt stop you :roll: I was not after peoples opinion on it. Its not an idea I am considering or want views on. Or C.A.B. It's free AND impartial. Given by amateurs who are not qualified in any way and more often than not people who do it on a voluntary basis or as something to do part time after retirement. The CAB have default answers to most generic questions and if you think they could help you and spot the floors in a credit agreement then you are wrong. Again, it will be 'here is how you do it yourself'. so glad rattlemong is back..... I would happily wipe out some debt, why the f*ck not, if i did it would make no difference to anyone on ere, so hows about some of you get off your high self righteous horses for a second Cheers Stevo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 I posted it to give people information. I said in the original post that I didnt care for the people who are going to morally poo poo it but it didnt stop you :roll: I was not after peoples opinion on it. Its not an idea I am considering or want views on. You should have put it in 'Buy and Sell' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 Fcking Pikey! Let me guess how the country got in this sh11tty mess in the first place, which is now affecting normal hard working people who are intelligent enough not to borrow more money than they can afford to repay... Ultmately, the Government has to be to blame. The deregulation of markets allowed uneducated, unwise and stupid people to take out huge loans, without and proper checking. On top of that, multi-million pound industries sprung up around credit card companies, which have the sole purpose of praying on people who are statistically more likely to make stupid financial decisions. Read about this here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2007/feb/10/creditcards.debt On a related matter, would you say the same to businessmen who use limited liability to go bankrupt, owing thousands of pounds to honest and hard working people, only to restart another business with a wife or friend as managing director? These entrepreneurs are apparently the bedrock of capitalism, yet too many of them take advantage of the loose laws and end up screwing lots of people for lots of cash. It happens in every town in the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 22 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 22 March, 2009 And the majority of people who are morally above something like this would take full advantage of any tax loophole to save them paying extra tax. Which is no better in my opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 Completely different again, you really do seem to have issues working out what is wrong and what is right. Also, I assume you meant "flaws" rather than "floors" above but maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 22 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 22 March, 2009 Completely different again, you really do seem to have issues working out what is wrong and what is right. Also, I assume you meant "flaws" rather than "floors" above but maybe not. Thank you dic*ionary. How is it completely different? Looking at it from your view point, its getting out of something you should be paying. How is that different? Both are not illegal. Both rely on technicalities, they are very similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rattlehead Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 This is about the principle of actually requesting and taking money from someone else, spending and enjoying it and choosing to simply not pay it back. This is tantamount to theft and is wrong wrong wrong. Surely that is not so hard to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jawillwill Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 Thanks for this CL! I followed the link last time you posted it and was able to clear £12,000 worth of debt (debauched early 20s). It really saved me the time and effort of getting a job - jobs are for losers! You really are a morally bankrupt old c*nt aren't you. Only morally though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 22 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 22 March, 2009 This is about the principle of actually requesting and taking money from someone else, spending and enjoying it and choosing to simply not pay it back. This is tantamount to theft and is wrong wrong wrong. Surely that is not so hard to understand? See little snake, this is where you are wrong. It is not tantamount to theft as it is completely legal. If the bank has failed to draw up a correct agreement then the whole basis of the borrowing is based in wrong information. How would you like it if you took out a fixed rate mortgage and 3 months into the fixed rate, the rate went up? Or you wanted to cancel at a certain point after being told that you could but you noticed the original agreement didnt have your cancelation rights on? Is that fair? That is certainly not legal which is why the debt can be cleared legally in a court of law (or settled out of court early if the lender has any sense). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crouchie's Lawyer Posted 22 March, 2009 Author Share Posted 22 March, 2009 There really are some sad little children on this thread. Im sure you know who you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 (edited) Some of the text on that site is hilarious. If I was going to instruct someone to do some legal work for me I would want someone capable of stringing a coherent sentence together. Most local solicitors will have an initial interview with you for free. I would recommend investigating that if you have genuine legal concerns. It looks to me as though you are paying £450 for a non-lawyer to conduct a tick-box exercise on a loan agreement. If they find something naughty and if the lender refuses to come to some sort of settlement with you, only then does a qualified lawyer get involved. That's my reading of it anyway - is that right? Still waiting to hear which banks have committed fraud in relation to Consumer Credit Act claims as well. Edited 22 March, 2009 by benjii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 22 March, 2009 Share Posted 22 March, 2009 If everyone did this the country would be fooked. You can't just make money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now