Passports: HOME | EUROPE | AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA and OCEANIA | ASIA | AFRICA | OTHER DOCUMENTS
National Anthems:[ www.national-anthems.net ] ++
Travel:[ Europe ] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ more ]
[ Australia legal ] [ U.K. legal ] [ U.S. visa ] [ Immigration ] [ Marriage based U.S visa ]



Subject: Re: is this dubious practice? issue unsecured loans at high interest and when it goes wron Posted on: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:37:45 +0200

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:26:17 GMT, John Anderton
wrote:

>On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:13:26 +0200, abelard
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:51:42 GMT, John Anderton
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>As an aside, just how many people are there out there that think that
>>>an unsecured loan is one you don't have to pay back if you don't want
>>>to ? (which is what you seem, to me, to be implying an unsecured loan
>>>is) Why would *anyone* ever pay it back and why would anyone lend
>>>under those terms ?
>>
>>now now...i just feared someone would take that line.....
>>but i'm implying no such thing....
>
>But you seem, to me, to be implying that if someone doesn't keep up
>payments on an unsecured loan but has assets that could be sold to
>re-pay the loan, the lender shouldn't be able to take legal action to
>gain access to those assets. If that's not accurate, what are you
>saying should happen when somebody doesn't repay an unsecured loan but
>has assets ?

i've just been looking at a form subsequent to job's post....
it seems to me there are not 'unsecured' in any real meaning...

much worse...imv...they're not stating clearly just what the security
is....is it your earning power?...is it your stamp collection?
is it the pound of flesh nearest your heart?...is it your spare
kidney...or the equity in your house....or renting out 'your'
spare wife...or the baybee feed in your fridge...or your
fridge....

as you question me this looks more dubious......not less....

>>meanwhile i have in the back of my attic that homes have special
>> status in law...or did...
>
>Could be but I don't think so.
>
>
>>
>>if lawyers use words with highly non-standard meaning
>
>A secured loan is one which is secured on a specific asset (like a
>house). An unsecured loan is one which isn't secured on a specific
>asset. Is that really a highly non-standard meaning ?

imv yes...if you're dealing with the uneducated...

regards

--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1559623. Re: How Brown was repeatedly warned about the economic crisis to come
1559624. Re: Reason 34 to despise the police 1559624
1559625. Re: MI5 Torture Addicted Horror Fags Update 1559625
1559626. Isnt it lovely watching the UK sharemarket fold up and..... 1559626
1559627. Re: Man killed by smoking ban. 1559627
1559628. Re: Consent cuts compo 1559628
1559629. Re: Daily Mail - you couldn't make it up - but could they? 1559629
1559630. A saint meets a dying pom on the street next to a wounded cobra 1559
1559631. Lets be honest globalisation and the EU has failed......the reason 1
1559632. Re: Daily Mail - you couldn't make it up - but could they? 1559632
1559633. Re: Question Time Tonight 1559633
1559634. Re: Head Master threatening Parents 1559634
1559635. Re: Esther Rantzen: Fear of paedophiles is harming children 1559635
1559636. Re: Daily Mail - you couldn't make it up - but could they? 1559636
1559637. Re: Unsuitable CRB check? 1559637
1559638. Re: Man killed by smoking ban. 1559638
1559639. Re: Daily Mail - you couldn't make it up - but could they? 1559639
1559640. Re: Daily Mail - you couldn't make it up - but could they? 1559640
1559641. Re: Head Master threatening Parents 1559641
1559642. Re: 1 in 5 teachers are 'child abusers'. 1559642