Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

[Riz]

Re: F & F Settlement Offer Accepted - what next?

It's exactly the same, as sending someone to National Debtline.

Not in the slightest way the same.

In fact, getting advice from NDL that stuffs the people who may pay their wages has a delicious irony all it's own.

A bit like when CCCS advises someone to go bankrupt.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: F & F Settlement Offer Accepted - what next?

Who said anything about satisfying a legal argument?

It's about backing up opinions on a forum by asking the advice of a professional debt advisor.

The legal argument being "is the letter suitable for F&F purposes and legally sound".....

NDL aren't "professional" anything mate, employees are guided and coached into taking NVQ's for debt guidance but it is not a requisite for employment.

I could work there, you could - damn - half the posters here could get a job there, it's a nominal salary for a nominal job. I know a couple of staff that work there and we have one as a user here as well, who I note has not been online today!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: F & F Settlement Offer Accepted - what next?

lol

CAG is whole other thread.

They banned me for daring to object when they allowed Lowells their own account to post on the forums where they asked people to "contact them privately by email".

You never got banned? Surely not?

That was contentious and a half, I cannot believe they did that - however it was their downfall in a lot of ways - not least when they changed the site into this ugly thing we see today - trying to even view a user is impossible, let alone search things!

As you say, CAG is an altogether different prospective.... it's unfortunate as they used to be great, and I myself used to refer to them when I posted on on the green site

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: F & F Settlement Offer Accepted - what next?

In fact, getting advice from NDL that stuffs the people who may pay their wages has a delicious irony all it's own.

A bit like when CCCS advises someone to go bankrupt.

Yea ok I see what you mean, I love the irony

[Riz]

Re: F & F Settlement Offer Accepted - what next?

We are going to have to agree to disagree regarding NDL.

As said, I've found the advice they give out to be very good over the years.

Nowhere is perfect.

Lawyers give legal advice, but even then it's an opinion, and quite often flawed.

Same with judges (lawyers after all). Same with forums. Same with debt advice agencies of any flavour. Same with anyone.

This is not about getting cast iron legal advice on a letter. No such thing exists.

It's about getting a range of opinions from the best sources available, which someone can them use to make their own considered judgement.

NDL have been a good source of reliable advice in this area in the past, so I am not going to hesitate to suggest people take advantage of that whatever you may think.

[oscar]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Sorry Niddy, but I am going to have to agree with Rizzle slightly.

I can see the ppoint behind referring them to somewhere else for advice. Being anti bank, maybe we are unable to offer them completely what they need? I dunno, just guessing I suppose until such a situation may arise.

And while I can see the arguement that other places are funded by banks / DCAs etc, people dont have to accept what they are told by such places, but may see it as a flip side of a coin so to speak

[jen_br]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

I feel advice is only as good as the person giving it.. the CAB has people working for them that are from banks etc. Or who have banking background.

As long as the advice being given was factual and accurate then it shouldn't matter what side of the tracks it comes from.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Ok, leave this with me and i'll go dig up some news articles that will show you the horrors of listening to companies with a vested interest!

I cannot bring myself to ever sit here and openly admit that I would refer someone to a bank because it would be in their best interests, thats an oxymoron in itself, no?

At the end of the day, lets use the CAB as an example; you cannot tell me for one moment that a member of staff at CAB (volunteer) that is normally employed by a bank would sit there and advise someone NOT to reimburse their own company, it wouldn't happen! To expand on this, lets say I go to CAB and say I owe Carlsberg bank £20k, and unbeknown to me that CAB volunteer works for Carslberg Bank and is volunteering to help debtors at CAB.

The volunteer is likely to tell me to do what, the moment they hear it is their own bank? I bet they would either give inaccurate info and/or arrange to meet the bank to discuss matters further or they'd get me to consolidate - write off would not be an option. That member of staff would still have to go back to work, and imagine the shit they'd get for suggesting a person never paid £20k but instead told them it'd be unenforceable based on the fact Carlsberg Bank never keep agreements....

It doesn't take much to see the blatant conflict of interest which is what I am trying to say - management are told to do X and it is passed down the departments to the end user on the phone who will be biased toward their main sponsor, jesus we all work like that (ie when the big boss comes we behave, we don't piss around like you would the rest of the week, etc etc)....

That's my point of view anyway, I firmly believe the relationship is compromised if the banks have anything to do with debt related companies.

[Silverback]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

No.

Silverback

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

No.

Silverback

short n sweet

[confused76]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Without wishing to get too involved in this debate, i think this just highlights the necessity to take advice from more than one source, and then weigh your options up.

I took advice from the CCCS (i believe they have a vested interest in IVA's?) NDL (who i felt gave me straight advice) and CAB. Perhaps i would have taken advice from further sources had my options not been so glaringly obvious...

I agree that taking advice from someone funded by banks is slightly dubious, which is why i'd always get a second opinion and would suggest that others do the same.

Are their any advice sources where there is no link at all to a bank?

[Silverback]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Are their any advice sources where there is no link at all to a bank?

Yes, here.

Silverback

[caspar]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

Well I'm proud to admit I post on CAG

I'm also proud to admit that most users I help end up being referred to different sites without them knowing!

[oscar]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

you cannot tell me for one moment that a member of staff at CAB (volunteer) that is normally employed by a bank would sit there and advise someone NOT to reimburse their own company,

. That member of staff would still have to go back to work, and imagine the shit they'd get

I know someone who used to do just that (ok it wasnt CAB but you get the drift) ........ but you are correct - the shit soon followed!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Should we be referring users to sites funded by banks?

I know someone who used to do just that (ok it wasnt CAB but you get the drift) ........ but you are correct - the shit soon followed!!

You were an exception mate, you have morals!