On 10 Oct, 15:45, abelard wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:36:09 -0700 (PDT), jobl...@... wrote:
> >On 10 Oct, 13:41, abelard wrote:
> >> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:55:05 -0700 (PDT), Mel Rowing
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Oct 10, 3:08=A0am, abelard wrote:
>
> >> >> where did this 'law' come from?
>
> >> >> this looks to me to border on fraud....
>
> >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/3168301/Debri=
s...
> >> >> "Another pointer to a collapse in solvency is the charging order. I=
t
> >> >> is a legal process, allowing creditors of unsecured loans that are =
in
> >> >> default to tie that debt to an asset owned by the defaulter. In man=
y
> >> >> cases this will be a residential property. These jumped from 9,689 =
in
> >> >> 2000 to 97,026 last year."
>
> >> >The law has always been so. Debt is debt which is always available fo=
r
> >> >recovery unless the debtor is protected by a bankruptcy order.
>
> >> >Taking out an unsecured loan does not absolve the debtor from his
> >> >obligations. If he defaults for above a statutory minimum and his
> >> >creditor finds that he has assets then he may seek an order from the
> >> >County Court and send in the bailiffs (or go in himself - =A0not
> >> >advised!) with one important caveat. He has no more right to seize
> >> >those assets than has any other creditor. It is therefore strictly he
> >> >who gets there first!
>
> >> >That is why if a loan is secured it carries a lower interest rate. Th=
e
> >> >lender in return for his loan assigns rights to the collateral
> >> >conditional upon the lenders default. This assignment protects the
> >> >collateral against other creditors.
>
> >> looks like at least sharp practice to me....
>
> >> you give an unsecured loan....you charge far higher interest...
> >> =A0 =A0 that is insurance against the proportion that fail to fully
> >> =A0 =A0 service the loan
>
> >> you take a secured loan against 'your' house...you get far lower
> >> =A0 =A0interest rates...
>
> >Not so; a quick check suggests secured and unsecured loan are on offer
> >at about the same interest rate (7.5% - ish).
>
> wow....however, i don't believe that undigested....
>
> there is a considerable credit checking industry......
>
> perhaps they're using this 'law' to check whether the borrower has a
> =A0 =A0 =A0property they can potentially attach as part of the checks...
> imv that also would be dubious practice....
> ie misrepresenting a secured loan as an unsecured loan
>
> credit cards tend to run nearer 20%...
>
> maybe you'll post your comparisons or comment on the details
> =A0 =A0 of the alleged offers...
Sure.
Secured loans: http://www.netloans.co.uk/ details two secured loan at
7.9%; http://www.uswitch.com/loans/secured-loans/ has one at 7.8%
fixed for 5 years.
Unsecured loans: Asda finance http://www.asdafinance.com/personal-loans.htm=
l
offers unsecured loans from 7.9%, also fixed for 5 years;
http://www.money.co.uk/loans.htm lists loans at 7.8% and 7.9%
Certainly credit card rates are much higher than either. |