Jump to content
By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans. By fans, for fans.

Wonga, Beecroft, Screw the poor


matty

Recommended Posts

Did you know that this Beecroft lunatic who’s written the ‘sack at will’ report for the Tories, is also behind the cuddly 4000% interest rate horrors Wonga.com?

 

The Wonga.com who are being threatened by the OFT for aggressive chasing of debts?

 

The Beecroft who is a massive donor to the Tory party?

 

What a lovely group of people are governing us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The movement to limit the interest charges will never get anywhere under this Govt.

 

I always thought Wonga was bad but there's a couple out there charging 14,000 and 16,000 % APR. Legally.

 

**** off Blackpool FC.

Edited by Cam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heard on Radio 5 yesterday that Wonga have been commissioned by Medway Council in Kent to work with their CAB (Citizens Advice Bereau) to advise people on how to manage personal debt.

 

Could not believe it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they didn't just vote not to cap these payday loan interest rates did they? not really?

 

Yup, the government whips came out and the proposal was defeated, despite having the support of the majority of MPs. Dodgy feckers.

 

I see Beecroft has been calling Cable a "socialist" now for having a pop at his hire-and-fire crap. The cockend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, the government whips came out and the proposal was defeated, despite having the support of the majority of MPs. Dodgy feckers.

 

I see Beecroft has been calling Cable a "socialist" now for having a pop at his hire-and-fire crap. The cockend.

these things are f***ing loan sharks though. this is actually endorsing and legitimising loan sharks who prey on the poorest and most vulnerable. staggering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

these things are f***ing loan sharks though. this is actually endorsing and legitimising loan sharks who prey on the poorest and most vulnerable. staggering.

 

 

People are being driven to the lenders of last resort not least thanks to the likes of Cable putting so many restrictions on mainstream lenders. They've gone from one extreme to the other, the banks are loving it, cherrypicking under the guise of responsible lending, The FSA etc. haven't got a f*cking clue, they're showing how hard they are whilst those at the bottom of the pile can no longer get credit unless it's through these lowlifes. I agree with everything people have said by the way, f*cking shameful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are being driven to the lenders of last resort not least thanks to the likes of Cable putting so many restrictions on mainstream lenders. They've gone from one extreme to the other, the banks are loving it, cherrypicking under the guise of responsible lending, The FSA etc. haven't got a f*cking clue, they're showing how hard they are whilst those at the bottom of the pile can no longer get credit unless it's through these lowlifes. I agree with everything people have said by the way, f*cking shameful.

The main reason mainstream lenders won't lend to people on low incomes is there is no money in it at the rates they operate at, and the credit risk is high. It's even more candid now formerly high street banks have been able to live off the fruits of proprietary trading and huge expansion, now they don't want to go back to just lending to the general public and SMEs for steady if low returns. One of the trade offs for the state guaranteeing deposits will be an end to this and a return to dull and steady banking, but until then expect more Wongas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

aren't you endorsing less regulation there though murph? which was the problem the last go round?

 

 

It wasn't the problem at all Steve, it was poor policing by some lenders, but we never really had a problem in this country, certainly not on the same scale as abroad Spain and the US in particular. The big hooha about the damage done by non status lending is massively over emphasised, it wasn't a big problem in the UK. It was out of control in the states and they applied the same principles going forward. Credit scoring is actually a very effective way of assessing somebody's ability to pay in most cases.

 

The main reason mainstream lenders won't lend to people on low incomes is there is no money in it at the rates they operate at, and the credit risk is high. It's even more candid now formerly high street banks have been able to live off the fruits of proprietary trading and huge expansion, now they don't want to go back to just lending to the general public and SMEs for steady if low returns. One of the trade offs for the state guaranteeing deposits will be an end to this and a return to dull and steady banking, but until then expect more Wongas

 

 

People on decent incomes are being driven to loan sharks. If you have any credit problems at all now, regardless of reason, previous good record or of a temporary nature like illness or job loss you are totally f*cked, the door is shut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was listening to the Planet Money podcast the other day and was stunned to find that, for people who have defaulted on their mortagages in the US, nobody actually turns up to kick you out for over a year. Even then it's just some bloke who knocks on the door to see if the house is empty or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the problem at all Steve, it was poor policing by some lenders, but we never really had a problem in this country, certainly not on the same scale as abroad Spain and the US in particular. The big hooha about the damage done by non status lending is massively over emphasised, it wasn't a big problem in the UK. It was out of control in the states and they applied the same principles going forward. Credit scoring is actually a very effective way of assessing somebody's ability to pay in most cases.

i'm sure you know more about the industry than me murph but looking at it from the outside it just appeared that it was more than 'poor policing by some lenders'. perhaps i'm just old-fashioned and have a problem with people being allowed, and encouraged, to borrow more than they could afford to pay back. something that i thought proper top-down regulation of the financial services industry was supposed to discourage and avoid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the problem at all Steve, it was poor policing by some lenders, but we never really had a problem in this country, certainly not on the same scale as abroad Spain and the US in particular. The big hooha about the damage done by non status lending is massively over emphasised, it wasn't a big problem in the UK. It was out of control in the states and they applied the same principles going forward. Credit scoring is actually a very effective way of assessing somebody's ability to pay in most cases.

 

 

 

 

People on decent incomes are being driven to loan sharks. If you have any credit problems at all now, regardless of reason, previous good record or of a temporary nature like illness or job loss you are totally f*cked, the door is shut.

Agree, but the cause is the speculative decade we have just had, where just being a bank wasn't enough, every one of them wanted a trading desk and to to get as big as possible, demutualise and expand, there was the share price and the implicit guarantee from government that if you were too big to fail you had free reign to go for your life within prescribed and wrong risk parameters. You're right the FSA didn't have a clue top to bottom, from derivatives to self certs

 

 

Wider point, but by the end of this decade banks will have to go back to what they were, whilst at the same time the west will have to endure a decline in living standards and a shift back to production from consumption, which is being helped and matched along the way from the opposite trend in the East. What we had was not real or sustainable and just loosening lending restrictions and regulations isn't going to make it right, we actually need a prolonged period of deleveraging, savings and investment, not borrowing and consumption.

 

Was listening to the Planet Money podcast the other day and was stunned to find that, for people who have defaulted on their mortagages in the US, nobody actually turns up to kick you out for over a year. Even then it's just some bloke who knocks on the door to see if the house is empty or not.

There's a couple of things going on there, one is the fact that the lender doesn't have the right to chase the borrower for the debt, handing over the property is the end of the matter. Second, a lot of the properties are worth far less than the amount owed on them now, and the lender will have the amount owed on the books as it's asset rather than the market value of the property.

 

There is therefore little incentive for someone in default/arrears to move out or pay it back, they may as well save the payments up as long as they can live for free, whilst the lender is only looking at a big loss if they reclaim the property and try and sell it at the current rates.

Edited by Rimbeux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm sure you know more about the industry than me murph but looking at it from the outside it just appeared that it was more than 'poor policing by some lenders'. perhaps i'm just old-fashioned and have a problem with people being allowed, and encouraged, to borrow more than they could afford to pay back. something that i thought proper top-down regulation of the financial services industry was supposed to discourage and avoid.

 

 

It's just gone from one extreme to the other Steve. Don't forget, when people were 'borrowing 'more than they could afford' pre credit crunch, the base rate was 5%, most people saw their mortgage payments drop like a stone. The arrears record in the UK has been pretty good for many years, yes of course there was lots of nonsense going on, plenty of people getting out of their depth and people borrowing money they couldn't afford. It needed reining in for sure but it's go way past that stage now. People with interest only mortgages in particullar are suffering, what isn't being taken in in the rush to flex muscles is there are literally millions of people who are fine on interest only,have an exit plan and are comfortable, some have interest only because it's miles cheaper than renting, making them take a repayment loan is actually helping Wonga and the like with their ever increasing client bank.

Edited by Murphman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, the government whips came out and the proposal was defeated, despite having the support of the majority of MPs. Dodgy feckers.

 

I see Beecroft has been calling Cable a "socialist" now for having a pop at his hire-and-fire crap. The cockend.

 

They defeated it ? Crackers. Suspiciously crackers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the problem at all Steve, it was poor policing by some lenders, but we never really had a problem in this country, certainly not on the same scale as abroad Spain and the US in particular. The big hooha about the damage done by non status lending is massively over emphasised, it wasn't a big problem in the UK. It was out of control in the states and they applied the same principles going forward. Credit scoring is actually a very effective way of assessing somebody's ability to pay in most cases.

Of course it was the problem.

 

It wasn't 'poor policing' it was deliberate decisions by banks to shovel money out of the door, so they could re-package the debt and sell it off as Collateralised Debt Obligations etc. They were making so much money from this casino trading that the pressure was on to lend more and more so they could sell the debt.

 

Lending based on self-cert income, or lending 5 or 6 times salary, 120% of the value of the property, these weren't poor policing, they are fundamentally and obviously terrible policies. It was a major part of the problem, as was the massive open door to fraud.

 

The regulator should have been all over these products and practices, as well as the systemic risk to the banking industry and the economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it was the problem.

 

It wasn't 'poor policing' it was deliberate decisions by banks to shovel money out of the door, so they could re-package the debt and sell it off as Collateralised Debt Obligations etc. They were making so much money from this casino trading that the pressure was on to lend more and more so they could sell the debt.

 

Lending based on self-cert income, or lending 5 or 6 times salary, 120% of the value of the property, these weren't poor policing, they are fundamentally and obviously terrible policies. It was a major part of the problem, as was the massive open door to fraud.

 

The regulator should have been all over these products and practices, as well as the systemic risk to the banking industry and the economy.

 

Steve Wonder has a song about you.

 

Building societies such as Nationwide and Skipton couldn't securitise. Abbey had two arms, the greater of the two retained all business for the bank. Self cert was largely up to a 75% loan to value ceiling, very little risk to the lender (Unlike America where they were throwing money at anybody to sell their new builds). Norhern Rock were the only lender offering 125% loans and the amount of business written was relatiuvely miniscule, but it's always the example put forward to prove the bigger point.

 

5 or 6 times income is a nonsense, some people can fund a loan based on 10 or 12 times income, others would struggle on 3 times. It'd sown to affordability and disposable income after budget planning. it costs the same to heat a room or put petrol in a car whether you earn £100k or £10k.

 

There has been no great collapse in the british banking industry brought on by reckless mortgage lending, it simply hasn't happened over here. Lenders credit scoring can be unfair but it's a pretty good guide as to who should borrow what.

 

The open door to fraud I'll grant you. The underlying principle is/was, if somebody is putting a deposit of £100k in, they very likely got that from previous house sales and it's a stake they won't want to lose.

 

By far the biggest crime committed by teh banks was allowing people to continually remortgage to consolidate debt. now THAT is the real reason we had a problem.

 

So stick that up your chuff and blow it out Mr Knowitall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murph how does the bank account for future changes in interest rates when considering an ability to pay

 

It was in Ireland admittedly but we were clearly offered a loan that would have had us giving the keys back had we taken it on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve Wonder has a song about you.

 

Building societies such as Nationwide and Skipton couldn't securitise. Abbey had two arms, the greater of the two retained all business for the bank. Self cert was largely up to a 75% loan to value ceiling, very little risk to the lender (Unlike America where they were throwing money at anybody to sell their new builds). Norhern Rock were the only lender offering 125% loans and the amount of business written was relatiuvely miniscule, but it's always the example put forward to prove the bigger point.

 

5 or 6 times income is a nonsense, some people can fund a loan based on 10 or 12 times income, others would struggle on 3 times. It'd sown to affordability and disposable income after budget planning. it costs the same to heat a room or put petrol in a car whether you earn £100k or £10k.

 

There has been no great collapse in the british banking industry brought on by reckless mortgage lending, it simply hasn't happened over here. Lenders credit scoring can be unfair but it's a pretty good guide as to who should borrow what.

 

The open door to fraud I'll grant you. The underlying principle is/was, if somebody is putting a deposit of £100k in, they very likely got that from previous house sales and it's a stake they won't want to lose.

 

By far the biggest crime committed by teh banks was allowing people to continually remortgage to consolidate debt. now THAT is the real reason we had a problem.

 

So stick that up your chuff and blow it out Mr Knowitall.

 

I suspect the reason you are talking utter sh*te is because you were involved in this merry-go-round and are keen to see it all return.

 

The bit in bold above is the biggest nonsense I've ever seen. The banks didn't collapse because the taxpayer stepped in and bailed them all out.

 

I thought everyone knew that.

 

I just called to say that you are f*ckwit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...