• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Just In...OFT wins

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    Originally posted by Jog On View Post
    Typical of the irresponsible lending culture that has resulted in the sub prime fiasco



    It's their duty to shackle them into a downward spiral of unmanageable debt they can't get out of any time soon.





    Sorry Baggy - they will end up making people like you pay for this so they can maintain their margins. It's not fair I know.

    Why can't life just be fair??!!

    I think the fairness/blame culture applies the other way around with the fheckless the ones shouting unfair. You are advocating a system more akin to new Labour's socialism, i.e. those with money should be taxed to pay for those without. The ones being charged 100s were the persistant offenders, you choose to live beyond your means then you suffer the consequences, there have always been solutions for those willing to try. We will have to agree to disagree on this one I'm afraid.
    The court heard Darren Upton had written a letter to Judge Sally Cahill QC saying he wasn’t “a typical inmate of prison”.

    But the judge said: “That simply demonstrates your arrogance continues. You are typical. Inmates of prison are people who are dishonest. You are a thoroughly dishonestly man motivated by your own selfish greed.”

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by Bagpuss View Post
      I think the fairness/blame culture applies the other way around with the fheckless the ones shouting unfair. You are advocating a system more akin to new Labour's socialism, i.e. those with money should be taxed to pay for those without. The ones being charged 100s were the persistant offenders, you choose to live beyond your means then you suffer the consequences, there have always been solutions for those willing to try. We will have to agree to disagree on this one I'm afraid.
      I completely agree that those with money shouldn’t be taxed to pay for those without, I believe the banks should pay for this without passing costs on to the consumer, although we all know they won’t even though they can and still make a healthy profit.

      I’m happy to agree to disagree as since those dark days ‘in the hole’ I have passed over to the other side of the fence.

      I’ll still claim my charges back though – I’m working the 0% system to pay off all my bad debt ASAP and a nice windfall like that will speed things up somewhat
      "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon Musk

      Comment


        #43
        I have no problem with banks making a "fair" charge for their services, be it bank accounts, credit cards, overdrafts etc. What is being (or should be) debated here is what people consider "fair".

        I consider a charge of £30+ for going over your overdrdraft by as little as 1p far too excessive and the banks etc should be prevented from just dreaming up a figure they're going to charge and applying it.

        Why not link the charges to the base bank lending rate in the same way that loans are (should be), as what the over-limit amount is, is technically a loan?
        It's Deja-vu all over again!

        Comment

        Working...
        X