Borrowers face repossession over unsecured debts

[pzz76077]

Absolute commonsense. If only our HMG could be so sensible.

Well they will have a lot less cash coming in over the next few years and will have to be a bit more prudent just as Gordon Brown has been doing lately with him practicing what he has been preaching for so many years (not).

PZZ

[Gonzo]

<snip>

Lenders have always been able to do this to you if you default on your repayments.

It gets messy and concentrates the lenders' minds when the value of the assets falls below the borrowing that is secured against them (negative equity), that will do more to see the withdrawal of credit from the economy than the "credit crunch". You must remember the first half of the 1990s Brillo?

That aside, is there any evidence to say that people are having their homes repossessed yet in order to repay this "unsecured" borrowing, or is it just scare-mongering by the Telegraph?

[NickFitz]

Absolute commonsense. If only our HMG could be so sensible.

If it's HM's G then it can't be our G too. The phrase "our Her Majesty's Government" makes no sense.

[Doggy Styles]

If it's HM's G then it can't be our G too. The phrase "our Her Majesty's Government" makes no sense.

Perhaps he meant 'as opposed to someone else's Her Majesty'.

[Shimano105]

It is ingrained in our culture because kids are expected to 'max-out' on debt before they even get a job i.e. at university.

Then they get their moral cues from how the Government behave and the damage is done.

Try to tell them it is wrong and it is 'la la la... back off, daddio'

[SueEllen]

Lenders have always been able to do this to you if you default on your repayments.

It gets messy and concentrates the lenders' minds when the value of the assets falls below the borrowing that is secured against them (negative equity), that will do more to see the withdrawal of credit from the economy than the "credit crunch". You must remember the first half of the 1990s Brillo?

That aside, is there any evidence to say that people are having their homes repossessed yet in order to repay this "unsecured" borrowing, or is it just scare-mongering by the Telegraph?

All the broadsheets have carried this story, some even beat The Torygraph to it (like The Times and The Guardian.)

[minestrone]

Same old story- don't borrow money unless you are 100% certain beyond any doubt that you will be able to easily meet the repayments.

I dont blame lenders for ensuring that their clients meet the contractual obligations that they signed up to. It seems to be the culture these days to not honor your commitments.

Better still, dont borrow money at all - save up to buy what you need and sleep easy at night.

PZZ

It's all very nice and wholesome to say that they should only borrow money if it can be repaid but the average family taking in 30 grand a year with 1.5 jobs have to buy a house and live somewhere. Taking a mortgage for most people is a leap of faith on the assumption that they will have continued employment. The banks know this and do not ask to see a 25 year contract from your employers.

Some people on here have to get off their high horse and stop pontificating to the average man.

[gingerjedi]

Poor little bleeders... no-one is safe in this recession.

[NotAllThere]

If I take out a loan at 10%, because it's unsecured, and then they convert it to a secured loan, I want that additional 9.5% I've been paying, refunded!

[BrilloPad]

I dont think anyone on cuk would argue that people should borrow willy nilly. But to suggest no-one should ever borrow (except mortgage) is, IMO, a tad purist. Life is not perfect and I dont like being judgemental.

Hang on : what am I saying? This is cuk. I have to be a troll and take one extreme posture or the other.........