Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

[garlok]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Absolutely planB,

We had "Merchant Services" in our little business, £37.50 a month for machine hire, a transaction charge of 65p per transaction plus 2.18% commission on every sale, PLUS a mobile phone call charge every time we used the machine. That was most definitely NOT the most expensive "deal" either. Its gone now, cheque, cash or PO only now. Strangely as well, tempting fate, it is very surprisinfg just how honest most of the general public are as well. We send bits out with a bill and the cheque normally coimes without trouble a couple of days later.

regards
Garlok

[Never-In-Doubt]

Finished

Right Guys

I would never normally do this publicly but feel as so many of you have read this thread, it needs to be public.

I've pondered over this and decided to make a stance, for our users and for the peace of our forum to remain as it was prior to the incident. I am therefore removing Peter from our forum, as he really has no logical (or otherwise) reason for being here.

He does not actively contribute to the forums; he does not actively assist people in helping with their debts; he deliberately causes highly-technical (and sometimes baffling) discussions to descend into anarchy and most importantly - he's the root cause of a lot of our newbies being here (must remember to thank him for that, at least!).

With all the above taken into account, I think it's only fair that we remove PB from our systems and let him carry on OTR at whatever other forums he likes, so long as he stays away from here.

Its rare that we take such a stance but I can see this will only get worse, and being we are extremely protective of our users and even more protective of them against "troll like behaviour", I feel this is in the best interests of our forum. His account will not show banned, as he has not actually been banned, however it will just vanish - in totality so all his old posts will simply read as being posted by "guest".

I know all the tricks of the trade regards to using proxies etc, listen if he wants to be that sad and join somewhere he's clearly not welcome then we'll enjoy repeatedly banning him. I do hope we can now put this idiotic viewpoint that the debtor is to blame in some way, back in the trash where it belongs and get back on track with the real issue here, of morality!

Thanks guys, for those that think we're being too harsh - sorry but it's a stance we will not deviate from, all users here will continue to be protected against bullies in any shape, form or size.

The PB issue is now finished as far as I am concerned.


Niddy :niddy

[helmsman]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

hi niddy,
Have been reading all the posts lately and there has definately been an uneasiness on the forum, a lot of posts have not been what we are use too, and for what it is worth I think the forum will be better off for your decisions.
all the best.
Helmsman

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

I think the forum will be better off for your decisions.

Hiya, thanks for this - I am, as everyone that knows me knows, totally against picking on debtors and will not stand for it. In the last week i've had no less than 100 messages JUST complaining about 2 users, both of which are no longer with us.

It was never our intention to ban people, and we hate doing it, but sometimes it's the lesser of two evils. Point is I had trusted posters showing me things that I never knew about, which also confirmed our decision to remove the posters in question.

We will not tolerate someone being a member here if they were on another forum slagging off debtors - forget it! Point is, that's our right, that's our stance and that's the way we'll remain.

* Last week my PM's were in double figures (ie less than 99) - look now!

[transformer999]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Great decison Niddy, well this is one site that PB cannot infect, lord knows he has done so many in the past.

Well done and for making that decison as that is the last thing a lot of us need right now......

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Niddy,

Yes Thank you as one fails to forget we are all not in this situation by choice indeed we were thrust into it due to unforeseen circumstances like ill health, unemployment or even a drop in income.

Given the choice I am sure we would all like to pay our dues.

You have taken that decision for the good of the site and quiet rightly so.

Regards

P.S Ill try not to send you too many PM's as that is a big inbox !!!!!!!!!!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

P.S Ill try not to send you too many PM's as that is a big inbox

OI, stop sneaking a look at my "big inbox"

[midastouch]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Not a great lover of any form of censorship but this is in effect a membership site.

You don't join the Liverpool supporters club if you're a Man Utd fan.

Well Done Niddy!

Let's get this Fred back on track now....

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

So this is my take on the 'morality issue'

Many of you will know my 'story' and my debt journey.

Like many people when I first got into financial difficulty I tried to approach my creditors and come to an arrangement where I could pay back the money I owed at a rate I could afford. I wanted to deal with my situation in a moral and responsible way.

So how many of my creditors accepted my initial proposal?

None. Diddly squat. Nadda. Nil.

What did they do instead? Heres just a brief sample:

Telephoned my continuously throughout the day to harrass me into paying more than I could afford (I was getting approx 6-8 calls an HOUR)

Threatened action (such as bankruptsy) when they couldn't legally (debt under £750)

Made claims of 'links with the police' and 'report me for fraud' and 'have me arrested at work'

Discussed my debt with my children ("tell your daddy we will keep calling until he pays back the money he owes")

Contacted my colleagues at work demanding that they ask me to call them

Contacted my HR department and tried to find out my salary (said DCA was Newmans; morons forgot to block their number!)

Added extortionate charges and interest to balances way beyond what they originally were despite knowing I was in financial difficulty

Passed accounts to DCA's who flouted every guidelines going issued by the OFT (guidelines, which, if you remember, are meant to provide a 'moral' code of conduct)

Sent letters in 'trading styles' with the appearance of being debt collectors when all they are is another internal department

Threatened court action, threatened charging orders, threatened to have my bank accounts frozen, threatened to have money taken from my wages

Reducing my wife to tears on the phone my asking her how she is going to feel when the bailiffs are taking our childrens toys which is what IS going to happen

Tried to take payments for the full account balance despite a payment arrangement being in place (which they couldn't as I had closed my old bank accounts down)

And this behaviour is not 'isolated incidents' or 'agents requiring retraining'. It is typical and endemic across the whole debt 'industry'.

So how exactly, can banks/creditors, claim any 'moral' arguement?

It was only be developing a depth of knowledge on the guidelines and laws that are there to protect the consumer that I have slowly turned the tables on my creditors by turning their actions against them to prove cases of harrassment (Amex ended up 'refunding' me over £1500 as a result of the antics of Newmans).

As it happens, the majority of my creditors have now agreed to a payment plan.

However, some still persist, almost a year since I starting down my DMP road in playing silly buggers (notably Santander, who have breached OFT guidelines, BBA Code of Conduct, BBA Lending Code)

In these cases I have effectively used the CCA and UE route as a leverage tool to put my creditors back in their place. I have had MBNA admit they do not have an enforceable agreement and will not pursue the debt in court. Capital One have buggered off and the 2 or 3 letters A WEEK I was getting threatening court action, field visits, bankruptsy, charging orders etc have all stopped.

Do I feel that I have behaved unethically? Do I feel that I am a 'debt avoider'?

Mmmmmmmm........ what do you think?

I made more than a significant effort in trying to come to an agreement with my creditors. They in turn, used every excuse they could find in their terms and conditions to screw me over.

So I have been left with no alternative but to fight fire with fire as it seems to be the only thing they listen to.

I have used the same terms and conditions that their call monkeys and template letters are so keen to quote against them.

So to anyone who states I have a moral duty to pay back my debt my simple response is you can't have your cake and eat it.

My creditors had every opportunity to deal with my situation in a reasonable and moral fashion and it could have been resolved so differently.

Instead I was subjected to the playground bullying rules of a junior school playground, not the behaviour I was expecting of big business.

Or perhaps I was being naive...............

SnV (aka Crispybacon)

[The Debt Star]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

How many times have we heard this from the FOS, DCAs, other consumer forums, banks, and even County Court judges. “You have borrowed the money now pay it back!”

Which is why the Victorians had Debtors Gaols. Fact is - and it is a fact - that for all our supposed social progress nowadays - the banks and the DCAs would throw debtors in prison (and their wives and their children) if they could get away with it. Make no mistake.

If Charles Dickens were alive today he'd be posting on here.

Now, what would that be like? Oh yeah, something like this:

``My dear banker, how are you. When will you come to see me.'' No beggars implored him to bestow a trifle, no children asked him what it was o'clock, no man or woman ever once in all his life inquired the way to such and such a place, of the banker. Even the blindmen's dogs appeared to know him; and when they saw him coming on, would tug their owners into doorways and up courts; and then would wag their tails as though they said, ``No eye at all is better than an evil eye, dark master! ''

[The Debt Star]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Crispy, what you describe is harrassment, pure and simple.

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Crispy, what you describe is harrassment, pure and simple.

Absolutely, there are other words I could use, but I try to remain polite.

Harrassment is the main tool used when you stray from the 'credit' industry into the 'debt' industry.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

And, as I say, given half the chance Crispy they'd have us in prison to pay off our debts.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

Isn't it all about: treating customers fairly (TCF)?

[Deepie]

Re: Dispensing with the "MORALITY" issue

1081[/ATTACH]

you only got 269 more then me