'unsecured' credit is not really unsecured

[megawatt]

The "secured" element simply means that the lender can force the sale of the property to cover any debt whilst unsecured means they cannot.

Just because someone has taken out an unsecured loan though doesn't mean they aren't responsible for paying it back and it is entirely fair for the lender to place a charge on any assets (through the courts) such that, when the assets are realised, the lender is paid.

Not sure why anyone has a problem with this really.

MW

 

[Blasphemous]

Just because someone has taken out an unsecured loan though doesn't mean they aren't responsible for paying it back and it is entirely fair for the lender to place a charge on any assets (through the courts) such that, when the assets are realised, the lender is paid.

So can we go to the government when we've run out of money and tell them they'll have to bail us out?

 

[conny]

So can we go to the government when we've run out of money and tell them they'll have to bail us out?

Only if your name is Northern Rock.

My phlosiphy in life is,

If you can't afford it don't get it!
Only ever been overdrawn once and that was a wages office error when I started a new job. The company paid the charges that month.

Credit cards should be banned. When I was young and started work I applied for an ACCESS card.
I was refused.
Eight years later I was unemployed and applied again.
I was given one with a £3,500 limit!
This was in 1980 so in todays terms it would probably be about £7.500 to £10,000 or more.
Where's the logic?

 

[megawatt]

So can we go to the government when we've run out of money and tell them they'll have to bail us out?

Probably better to go to your local hospital and tell them you've run out of brains.

MW

 

[mark vincent]

The "secured" element simply means that the lender can force the sale of the property to cover any debt whilst unsecured means they cannot.

Just because someone has taken out an unsecured loan though doesn't mean they aren't responsible for paying it back and it is entirely fair for the lender to place a charge on any assets (through the courts) such that, when the assets are realised, the lender is paid.

Not sure why anyone has a problem with this really.

MW

The problem is borrowers pay exorbitant interest rates to these lenders for the privilage of not having to have their property used as security and what about borrowers who don't own property.

 

[megawatt]

The "secured" element simply means that the lender can force the sale of the property to cover any debt whilst unsecured means they cannot.

Just because someone has taken out an unsecured loan though doesn't mean they aren't responsible for paying it back and it is entirely fair for the lender to place a charge on any assets (through the courts) such that, when the assets are realised, the lender is paid.

Not sure why anyone has a problem with this really.

MW

The problem is borrowers pay exorbitant interest rates to these lenders for the privilage of not having to have their property used as security and what about borrowers who don't own property.

Errrm ... Yes, that's what money lending is all about. Why should lenders loan money to people without security without gaining more for taking the risk?
You have the choice to use them or not so what's the problem?

MW

 

[mark vincent]

If lenders loan money on the basis that the loan is unsecured and the borrower accepts the loan on the understanding that in the event of default the lender won't seek a charge on his property, that means that the lender has forfeited any right to seekl security for the loan at a later stage.

As for choice, borrowers make choices based on whats known as terms and conditions, if the terms and conditions of the loan state the loan is unsecured then thats what it should mean.

If some one loans you £100 and you agree to pay back £150 is it fair that the lender can come back to you at a later stage and say that he wants £300 although the original agreement was for £150.

 

[WDIK]

If lenders loan money on the basis that the loan is unsecured and the borrower accepts the loan on the understanding that in the event of default the lender won't seek a charge on his property, that means that the lender has forfeited any right to seekl security for the loan at a later stage.

get real a loan is not a free gift

 

[mark vincent]

Why don't you get real mate, if lenders choose to loan money without asking for security then if they don't get paid then thats their problem.