More Money-saving Loonies

[bambam]

Ho hum:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=283371

The sister's mentally ill, borrowed loads of money, and now it's apparently the bank fault she spent loads of cash on enjoying herself, and she wants the debt knocked off because

er

welll

not sure really.

But it's definitely all somebody else's fault.

Edited October 16, 2006 by bambam

[DabHand]

She told our Mum that it was a choice of either killing herself or telling Mum.

Not exactly a 'daddy or chips' one that...

[time_and_tide]

I don't usaully have any time at all for people who borrow money to have a good time and get into massive debt they can't possibly repay.

Perhaps this woman does deserve some sympathy, however. She seems to have a genuine mental illness and can't be held 100% responsible for her actions. The people in this story who really deserve our contempt are the organisations which leant her this money without caring a damn whether she was fit to borrow or not. If they didn't know of her condition, they damned well should have.

I really hope that these completely immoral, utterly greedy and despicable lenders are not allowed to walk away from the wreckage scot free. A lot of lives are going to be completely wrecked by these cynical b*****ds, and I'm sure they are fully aware of the fact.

[sikejsudjek]

As I posted on here a while back my aunt was offered a credit card by Nat West a few years ago. My father informed the bank that she was mentally ill and about to be sectioned. Nat West refused to take the card back. Result a £10,000 debt built up in about three months.

Banks deserve all the stick they get. They have no morals.

[thom123]

Ho hum:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=283371

The sister's mentally ill, borrowed loads of money, and now it's apparently the bank fault she spent loads of cash on enjoying herself, and she wants the debt knocked off because

er

welll

not sure really.

But it's definitely all somebody else's fault.

I think that's harsh, bambam. Over-spending is a recognised symptom of bipolar disorder - I don't think her behaviour is as reckless as your 'cash on enjoying herself' comment suggests. Of course, she could be faking it, but as she has attempted suicide several times and self-harms, she's doing a good job of pretending.

If the bank are lending irresponsibly (according to the post, they knew of her condition) then I believe they're in breach of the regulations.

I've worked in a building society and a bank and know that they target those on low incomes, the financial illiterate and now, seemingly, the mentally ill. In short, the weak and the desperate. Over the last few years, the situation seems to have worsened to the point where they're on a par with the doorstep debt peddlers. Wasn't there a story about a homeless guy who was given a CC? And did you see the Panaroma prog which talked of people who'd killed themselves because of high debt? I'm all for personal responsibility, but in cases like this the banks are failing in their legal obligation to lend responsibly. Sir Poncenby-Smythe of High St Bank is undoubtedly worldly-wise enough to know that this is going on, yet in the search for profits, they don't care if a few weak, desperate or ill-educated people get killed along the way. Could you honestly sleep at night if you thought that your business was causing that level of trauma to people? If you ran a pub, would you stop serving someone who'd had a few too many or deliberately target the depressed alchy?

As much as anything, banks are obliged to be reposnsible for the good of all their customers. If lots of debt does get written off, we'll all have to pay for it anyway.

One last thing: "loonies". Not nice or fair.

[jonewer]

The people in this story who really deserve our contempt are the organisations which leant her this money without caring a damn whether she was fit to borrow or not. If they didn't know of her condition, they damned well should have.

What do you recommend? 100% of all applicants get a visit from a panel of psychologists?

As I posted on here a while back my aunt was offered a credit card by Nat West a few years ago. My father informed the bank that she was mentally ill and about to be sectioned. Nat West refused to take the card back. Result a £10,000 debt built up in about three months.

How do you propose NatWest should have verified your father's info? Should banks have access to all our medical records in addition to all the other stuff they can see? What would happen if a complete stranger phoned in false info telling a bank you were mental and scuppering a CC/Mortgage application? You'd probably want to sue the bank, non? So what do you suggest?

Edited October 16, 2006 by jonewer

[SarahBell]

I think if your partner has bipolar disorder and you allow them to spend then you are responsible.

You cannot spend heaps of money without (a) being a devious and unmad person if you're hiding it

( bringing loads of stuff home.

Someone should notice. Someone should be able to think about this rationally and stop the person spending.

There is too much leniency on bad debt and it needs stopping now.

You spent it, its your problem to unspend it.

I wonder how many of the new debt cases are people who half-read stuff on being a card tart and now have masses of debt on cards because they couldn't resist the lure of spending.

[TheJudge]

Not stuffing credit down people's throats might help.

Pointing out that frittering thousands of pounds on rubbish now is no good if your current income and outgoings mean you can't afford it now and it would take years to pay the debt off.

Financial advice I think they call it.

(My partner knows someone with bipolar. It's not funny.)

[jonewer]

(My partner knows someone with bipolar. It's not funny.)

I never said it wad funny. But how are Credit Companies supposed to know the person they are lending to is non compos mentis?

Again- Is it the proposition of some people on this board that a panel of psychologists should be sent round to interview every applicant? Or should medical files be made available?

[StainlessSteelCat]

I think if your partner has bipolar disorder and you allow them to spend then you are responsible.

You cannot spend heaps of money without (a) being a devious and unmad person if you're hiding it

( bringing loads of stuff home.

Someone should notice. Someone should be able to think about this rationally and stop the person spending.

Not as easy as all that.

Friend of mine (paranoid schizophrenic) managed to give away lots of cash and most of his worldly goods several times over while disappearing for weeks during particularly bad spells. Sometimes you just couldn't get him sectioned in time.

In some respects you couldn't fault his logic as a) he always gave stuff to people worse off than himself and even when he'd given everything away he still considered himself well off as he had friends and family. Poor sod ended up topping himself nearly two years to the day (realised he was getting sick again and didn't want to put his girlfriend through it anymore).

[LivingTheDream-JustLikeLeedsUtd]

I never said it wad funny. But how are Credit Companies supposed to know the person they are lending to is non compos mentis?

Again- Is it the proposition of some people on this board that a panel of psychologists should be sent round to interview every applicant? Or should medical files be made available?

I think the story is quite clear that this person had a history with LTSB, and therefore it was entirely irresponsible of LTSB to extend further lines of credit.

[billy-g]

People do get cured of mental illness you know. Gross stigmatisation to assume they dont.

As the face of the lender (i.e. the call centre operative) is unlikely to be medically trained, why should they have that onus of responsibility?

If you read on in that post, they had a fine old time of it buying cars, refitting bathrooms and scoffing takeaways, so you know what, pay it back.

Edited October 17, 2006 by billy-g

[SarahBell]

Not as easy as all that.

Friend of mine (paranoid schizophrenic) managed to give away lots of cash and most of his worldly goods several times over while disappearing for weeks during particularly bad spells. Sometimes you just couldn't get him sectioned in time.

In some respects you couldn't fault his logic as a) he always gave stuff to people worse off than himself and even when he'd given everything away he still considered himself well off as he had friends and family. Poor sod ended up topping himself nearly two years to the day (realised he was getting sick again and didn't want to put his girlfriend through it anymore).

The case in question was a married woman who I assumed lived with her husband who should have noticed the spending and dealt with it. Maybe he was too busy enjoy the life of luxury to give a &^$% though.

[DEATH]

Couldn't someone's family member or a their psychiatrist get the mental person to sign off on having a notice of correction put on their credit file to say:-

"I am mentally ill. Do not lend to me please."

You can't get any real credit these days without the file being checked. Then all they would be able to do is take their Bush stereo down to the cash converter for £5.

[Objective Developer]

(My partner knows someone with bipolar. It's not funny.)

Well, half the time it's not funny....

Sorry sorry sorry sorry sorry....

[Guest Alright Jack]

I don't usaully have any time at all for people who borrow money to have a good time and get into massive debt they can't possibly repay.

That statement includes many people.

The problem I have with that remark is none of us (or very few) really know for sure how much our jobs are predicated on other people borrowing money and spending it. If this issue were confined to the margins then I wouldn't find fault with what you say but given our current predicament I don't think it's thought through very well.

It's the trade deficit you see.

Collectively, we don't have much money of our own (because we no longer have as many of the jobs that create real wealth - and thus real income) so we have to borrow it to keep our so called economy moving. If credit conditions change violently, the ramifications for places like the UK are severe.

We do not want to work for the kind of pay that would make us competitive so our manufacturing continues to go elsewhere.

What made the UK wealthy (the ability to produce the abundance of products and manufactured goods we have come to rely upon for everything we call modernity and comfort) is leaving and making nations like China wealthy instead. What we have is an illusion of wealth - which amounts to little more than a large overdraft.

The final piece of the puzzle is when this debt is no longer rolled over and extended indefinately - say, when these countries feel they have all the capital (which is infrastructure - not money) and a real wage earning middle class to 'go it alone'. At this point the artificial currency pegging situation is abandoned by those governments and the real exchange rates will be discovered by the market process. If I am correct in what I say then this process will be quite a spectacle!

[Als]

Not exactly a 'daddy or chips' one that...

Lol!