Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Talking of RT…..

.Asset Grabbing: Small debts can put UK borrower's house at risk .

Does what it says on the tin?

Posted by techieman @ 01:43 PM (4132 views)
Please complete the required fields.



13 thoughts on “Talking of RT…..

  • Polly Boiko eha..

    Not surprise in the slightest, as the ‘older generation’ retire on a pittance they will run up unsecured debts. The government wants to encourage debt and the banks want to get paid back.

    So make all debts secured.. Next step will be debtors prison.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    Neither a borrower nor a lender be, it’s not difficult is it, I don’t see why being a “home owner” gives you some sort of hallowed status meaning you can borrow and spend with impunity and blame somebody else when you can’t be bothered to pay it back.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I have a friend who works on a finance help line for a well known charity. He can’t believe how many 60-65 year olds are calling in with large debts of well up to the 250k mark.

    How does someone of 65 run up debts like that? Bank of grandad?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Right, enough is enough. No-one is asking these people to pay off their debt – they are being asked to service it. If they can’t do that, then hasta la vista, baby!

    How many of you profligates are there? The banking system can’t wait. It’s on a knife edge (regardless of what they would have you believe).

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “Does what it says on the tin?”

    Well the tin said ‘unsecured’, didn’t it? The guy in the video has probably been a bit stupid but so were the lenders unless they knew they could change the rules later.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I thought it was always the case that an institution could get a charging order from a court against assets so that IF you ever sold your property then they would get there money,
    That’s how it is here in Ireland, I have seen quite deeds with charging orders against them – in all cases there was no pressure to sell the asset – but then it is a bit Irish here.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • stillthinking says:

    The scam is that you have to pay the (much higher) unsecured rate of interest.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Yep QG thats why it had a question mark at the end :). I think ST is right – you pay higher rates for an unsecured loan / credit card BECAUSE they are unsecured. However, if you know about this at the start then you pays your money and takes your choice. I cant see that they can retroactively apply it…… but has anyone actually read the credit card terms and conditions?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • 1000 debt can be turned straight into secured debt against property and you can be made bankrupt for 750

    dont need to study small print for that to be fact

    1000 pound new law came out recently

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    Hang about here.

    “Unsecured” doesn’t mean that the lender is prevented from taking any action to recover the amount owed if the borrower doesn’t feel like repaying.

    So the lender goes to court and gets a charging order or has you declared bankrupt (or whatever it is called, there are different systems for different types and amounts of debt) and send in a bailiff etc, if it’s a small amount, they’ll take your car or something, but if it’s a large amount, they can put a charge on the house and if borrower still does not pay, then they can force a sale of the house (in theory).

    The distinction is that “secured” debts rank first, so the bank lends you a mortgage secured on house at lower interest than “unsecured” because the bank doesn;t care too much what debts you run up after that, he will always get first share of sales proceeds of the house.

    See also what Taffee says.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • the difference is that secured debt used to be dealt with by creditor taking out a ccj against you…the amount you pay depends on income/expenditure…if you defaulted on that then back to court for charging order.

    the legislation recently introduced means creditors can go for charging order in th3e first instance.

    small,but significant change at a time of massive consumer debts…weighted towards creditors who have basically over lent

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • tafee & MW thanks for the input. I wonder what happens when Wonga starts doing this? WIll it be part of Earl’s job description?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I think they use it to bash clients heads against the wall…….the stress/breakdowns/suicides seem to occur when clients get into arrears and google where they stand

    when they find out,they fall off their chairs

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>