# Bank is trying to defraud me!



## ShelaghD (5 Feb 2012)

Ok, let me just first say, I am in no way seeking legal advice. I would just like to get people's reactions to this scenario, and would like to know if any similar cases have happened before.

Anyway, my story. In August 2010 I got an 8,000 euro loan from the bank for college. As far as I can remember, I never signed a credit agreement, but I agreed orally with the bank manager to come back in to the bank in August 2011 to agree a repayment schedule. In hindsight, that sounds crazy, but that's what happened. I didn't know the bank manager at all. The reason the general manager dealt with the loan was because the loans manager was on holidays.

I received the 8k into my current account and spent it over the course of the year on college. Fast forward to August 2011, the bank contacted me saying I am in default of my loan and need to bring my repayments up to speed. I replied saying no problem but I don't know what the situation is. I asked what are the terms of my loan repayment, because I don't have a credit agreement, if one was ever signed in the first place. The bank responded that there was a credit agreement signed but they are unable to locate it for the moment but will look for it and get back to me. For the next 6 months more or less, the bank kept sending me letters telling me I'm missing payments, and each time I asked them what the situation is with the existence of a credit agreement, they told me they will let me know. For the duration of these exchanges, I've been living in Germany, and I still am.

They eventually let me know that they are unable to locate a copy of our credit agreement and asked me to call in to the bank when I can to arrange a repayment schedule. I called in at Christmas just gone when I was back home. Before I did, I got legal advice from 2 different solicitors. They both told me that in the absence of a written credit agreement, the bank will have severe difficulties enforcing the loan agreement in court. They also told me it is a bizarre set of circumstances and a severe oversight on the part of the bank. 

So when I went into the bank to arrange a repayment schedule, I told them I was willing to pay back the principal of the loan but I wasn't prepared to pay back any interest. I know some people would see that as very cheeky, but that's a different discussion. The loans manager told me that she doesn't have the authority to agree to that but will pass on the request to her superiors. We didn't sign anything on that day or come to an agreement. We agreed that further co-operation would be through the post as I was going back to Germany after Xmas.

Fast forward to Friday when I get a letter from the loans manager. She tells me they have located my credit agreement, and lo and behold a copy of it is attached. This is where it gets interesting. The credit agreement is signed on behalf of the bank by the loans manager, even though I'm 99.9% sure she wasn't involved in my loan application process back then because she was on holidays, it was the general manager who I met with everytime.

Also, the credit agreement states that the 8,000 euro is to be repaid within 1 year of drawing down the money. So in other words, the money is to be repaid before my college year was up (it was a full calendar year in college). The repayment details state that it is to be repaid in one instalment of 8,000 to repay the capital, and then 4 quarterly instalments of the interest applicable. It is then signed both by myself, and by my father as a guarantor. I am 99.9% sure my father never came into the bank with me about that loan.

Now, I am 100% sure I never signed that credit agreement. It would defeat the purpose of me asking for a loan for college, to have to pay it back when I was still in college, and not working.

The signatures of both myself and my father on the credit agreement look genuine. I suspect they copied and pasted them from a previous credit agreement I had with them in 2008 where my father went guarantor for a much smaller loan. 

So, what are your thoughts on this? I seem to remember a similar case where AIB fraudulated a married couple's mortgage agreement about a year or so ago. Does anyone have any experience of similar stories?

Regards,
Shelagh.


----------



## johnnyjb (5 Feb 2012)

I have absolutely no expertise in this field - but if you didnt sign a contract to pay back the loan (if im reading your post right) you cant be expected to pay back the money.

OP 1  - 0 Bank


----------



## Brendan Burgess (5 Feb 2012)

johnnyjb said:


> I have absolutely no expertise in this field - but if you didnt sign a contract to pay back the loan (if im reading your post right) you cant be expected to pay back the money.
> 
> OP 1  - 0 Bank



Why not? 

She got the loan? There is no dispute over that.

The only dispute is over the repayment terms. If they are reasonable, she should repay the loan. 

Of course, there should be a written contract. But she applied for a loan and agreed the terms, orally, with the manager. 

The heading is misleading. It seems to me that the OP is trying to defraud the bank.

Brendan


----------



## ShelaghD (5 Feb 2012)

cashier said:


> Is that possible? Surely one would know the difference between a genuine signature written with a pen from one that is photocopied.



I would think the same thing. They sent me a photocopy of their version, apparently. I haven't been able to see their original copy, if indeed they would show it to me.



johnnyjb said:


> I have absolutely no expertise in this field - but if you didnt sign a contract to pay back the loan (if im reading your post right) you cant be expected to pay back the money.
> 
> OP 1  - 0 Bank



That is effectively what I've been told by 2 solicitors, 1 specialising in banking issues, and also several people working in credit unions/banks. That's not why I'm posting this here though.



Brendan Burgess said:


> Why not?
> 
> She got the loan? There is no dispute over that.
> 
> ...



Come off it, I'm not trying to defraud the bank. If you can point to a relevant section of a criminal Act and show me where I am in breach, I will accept your point. Until then, I think the bank is trying to defraud me.

As I said, I've obtained legal advice from a few sources. I didn't have to play ball, I could have gone down the strict legal route and refused to pay back anything. I offered to repay the capital without interest, that clearly irritated the bank and so they've produced this false document. Yet, you think I'm the one who is committing fraud? 

Anyway, I'm trying to focus this thread on the issue of a fraudulent credit agreement. I think it's quite shocking.


----------



## muffin1973 (5 Feb 2012)

You've only seen a photocopy of the agreement?  You need to see the original, it might help determine if they are your actual original signatures or photocopied ones.  You're in Germany, would your father be able to go in and look at the original?


----------



## johnny1234 (5 Feb 2012)

The courts have already set a precedent in a Court Case against the BoI where a customer's signatures were Digitised and the Court ruled against the Bank and made the Bank write the Loan off. I have a case with another Bank for a larger amount where the Bank suddenly said I requested an Interest Only Mortgage which I did not. They state as in your case, that the original form has gone missing and is not countersigned. It has cost me 000s, but I refuse to be defrauded either.


----------



## AlbacoreA (6 Feb 2012)

Why don't you tell the bank, you never signed one, neither did your father, and not for one year.


----------



## horusd (6 Feb 2012)

You are right. It seems highly implausible that the bank would lend you the money without any T&C's other than a rough agreement to return at the end of college and agree terms some repayment schedule. You also don't strike me as a person who would have agreed to such a loose arrangement where no interest amount even got a mention at the outset. By accepting the money into your current account you entered into some contract to repay it. Rationally I would imagine a court would feel the onus was on you to repay it, and as such loans always attract interest it is reasonable and credible  that the bank apply it.You might have difficulty with a court in any event on this alone. They are likely to find for the bank.  Can both you and your father swear that no such loan agreement were ever entered into? You could take your chances in court, but morally and legally it sounds like a road to nowhere.


----------



## ClaireM (6 Feb 2012)

If there was no written agreement surely the loan is in breach of the Consumer Credit Act?

I would ask to see both the agreement in question and the previous agreement which was signed by your father. You should be able to see if it is a cut and paste job.


----------



## bullworth (6 Feb 2012)

horusd said:


> By accepting the money into your current account you entered into some contract to repay it.



without an agreement then how is it any different from when someone gifts money into your account which they can do without your consent so long as they fill in a lodgement slip etc  or for example if someone lodges money into your account accidentally ? There have been a few threads in the past concerning the case where money is accidentally lodged into an account with a similar account number.


----------



## 44brendan (6 Feb 2012)

The original question posed by OP is was the Bank trying to defraud him/her.
The allegation of fraud is based on an agreement which the OP disputes was signed by him/her and by the guarantor. I.e. that both signatures were forged.
The Bank will likely deispute that claim. 
As I would see it thre are 2 possible solutions to this issue.
1. OP to persist with the claim that the agreement is a forgery, in which case the matter is likely to go to Court. This is a risky strategy as the allegation of forgery against the Bank is a very serious matter & if case goes against the Bank will have severe consequences for all concerned. I.e. If the Bank are not fully sure that this document is genuine they are unlikely to progress to Court. However, if they are confident that the document is genuine, then they have the capability to defend this case and both OP and guarantor will be substantially out of pocket.

2. Attempt to reach an agreement with the Bank that is fair to both parties; This will probably entail putting in a formal compliant to the Bank, specfying the exact details of the case and the protracted Bank response to requests for a copy of the loan agreement. Dispute over the genuineness of the loan agreement can also be raised. You can well make the point that you are agreeable to pay back the capital amount of the loan but not the interest. If the Bank come back with a reasonable agreement then you can consider it. If you feel that their proposed solution is not equitqble, you can complain to the FSO.
However, if the case does progress to Court the main loser could be your father, if the case goes against you, as he is resident here and would be held jointly liable for the loan plus interest, plus costs. Make sure that you keep him fully informed of your intentions re this issue.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Feb 2012)

> The signatures of both myself and my father on the credit agreement look  genuine. I suspect they copied and pasted them from a previous credit  agreement I had with them in 2008 where my father went guarantor for a  much smaller loan.



Does your father remember signing the agreement? 

Did you ask your father at the time if he would sign the agreement or guarantee it? 

Forgery of your signatures would be very serious. 

It still doesn't exempt you from paying the loan and reasonable interest on it.


----------



## ShelaghD (6 Feb 2012)

muffin1973 said:


> You've only seen a photocopy of the agreement?  You need to see the original, it might help determine if they are your actual original signatures or photocopied ones.  You're in Germany, would your father be able to go in and look at the original?



That might be an idea, thanks.



johnny1234 said:


> The courts have already set a precedent in a Court Case against the BoI where a customer's signatures were Digitised and the Court ruled against the Bank and made the Bank write the Loan off. I have a case with another Bank for a larger amount where the Bank suddenly said I requested an Interest Only Mortgage which I did not. They state as in your case, that the original form has gone missing and is not countersigned. It has cost me 000s, but I refuse to be defrauded either.



Was this the AIB case about the property as security on a loan? I just read the article today. Do you have any more info on the case? Even the name of it?



44brendan said:


> The original question posed by OP is was the Bank trying to defraud him/her.
> The allegation of fraud is based on an agreement which the OP disputes was signed by him/her and by the guarantor. I.e. that both signatures were forged.
> The Bank will likely deispute that claim.
> As I would see it thre are 2 possible solutions to this issue.
> ...



This is the thing. I am genuinely of the belief that the bank faked this document. But because I am a mere individual, and they are a bank, they have the upper hand, to say the least. There is no balanced playing field here. I'm forced to put everything on the line and risk incurring huge expense just to _try _and expose the truth. It's a sad state of affairs.

Yes, I would not drop my father in it without letting him know what I will do.


----------



## ShelaghD (6 Feb 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Does your father remember signing the agreement?
> 
> Did you ask your father at the time if he would sign the agreement or guarantee it?
> 
> ...



No, he doesn't remember signing it, but I wouldn't really use that as a basis for believing it's fake, even if he signed it, it was a couple of years ago and he wouldn't be 100% certain.

As regards me being exempt from paying the loan and reasonable interest on this, a handful of people have said this to me. That is a different question which I didn't want to discuss here. Anyway, now that we're on it, none of these people who told me I was still legally obliged to pay the loan back could point to any legal source i.e. a relevant section of an Act, previous case law or anything like that to back up their assertion that I was still legally obliged to repay the loan. Can you? 

As I've said, I have been told my solicitors and some people working in financial institutions that a bank has great difficulties in enforcing an alleged credit agreement in court without written evidence of such. I've been told of specific examples where credit institutions have decided not to pursue an outstanding debt in court because of the absence of a written credit agreement.

Again, I stress, that's not why I'm posting here. I'm only looking for opinions on the related fraudulent document.


----------



## ShelaghD (6 Feb 2012)

ClaireM said:


> If there was no written agreement surely the loan is in breach of the Consumer Credit Act?
> 
> I would ask to see both the agreement in question and the previous agreement which was signed by your father. You should be able to see if it is a cut and paste job.



It's also in breach of the Statute of Frauds I believe. What part of the Consumer Credit Act is relevant here?


----------



## 44brendan (6 Feb 2012)

You can be sure that "the Bank" did not fake the document. However, it is possible that some misguided individual in the Bank did produce a faked document to cover up the fact that an original could not be located. No Bank would countenance this action and there would be severe consequqnces for any official if it was discovered that such a action had been perpetrated.
You seem genuine in your belief that this document is not genuine and you should therefore address your concerns to the Bank. They, in turn will need to take your complaint seriously and the complaints procedure should ensure that appropriate action is taken to address your concerns.


----------



## Jim2007 (6 Feb 2012)

ShelaghD said:


> Anyway, now that we're on it, none of these people who told me I was still legally obliged to pay the loan back could point to any legal source i.e. a relevant section of an Act, previous case law or anything like that to back up their assertion that I was still legally obliged to repay the loan. Can you?



Have you checked the bank's terms and conditions, which you accepted when you became a customer?  These often contain a catch all designed to cover such a situation as this and the terms are usually not very favourable!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Feb 2012)

Sheelagh

You are missing the point.

You borrowed the money - you are not denying it. The bank did not give you a gift.

You agreed some terms, at least, orally - you are not denying it. 

You presumably did not think that you were getting an interest free loan? 

So you have a moral obligation to repay the loan. 

I am not sufficiently familiar with the CCA. I hope it doesn't say that the penalty for the bank being unable to find the original loan agreement is that the loan is not enforceable. 

Brendan


----------



## mark27 (6 Feb 2012)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Sheelagh
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Who cares if she has a moral obligation ,once she hasnt got a legal one


----------



## ClaireM (6 Feb 2012)

ShelaghD said:


> It's also in breach of the Statute of Frauds I believe. What part of the Consumer Credit Act is relevant here?




I am not a solicitor but wouldn't sections 30 and 31 be relevant. Credit agreement and guarantee has to be in writing and signed by the parties. Cooling off period, apr etc


----------



## Time (6 Feb 2012)

Correct.

There may be a moral obligation but a court is not interested in morals.


----------



## Gekko (6 Feb 2012)

mark27 said:


> Who cares if she has a moral obligation ,once she hasnt got a legal one


 
Some incredible opinions in this thread.

The OP borrowed the money and should therefore repay the money.


----------



## Purple (6 Feb 2012)

gekko said:


> some incredible opinions in this thread.
> 
> The op borrowed the money and should therefore repay the money.



+1


----------



## Time (6 Feb 2012)

Should is the word. Ultimately if the bank has messed everything up they will have to suffer the loss. They won't be able to enforce.


----------



## yerraboy (6 Feb 2012)

Firstly, I'm not in a position to give you legal advice, and from your post, you don't need it.
Secondly, I have my own moral base, it's mine and I won't be imposing it on anyone. The same can be said for you - it's your private concern.
Cars parked.

You need to write to your Financial Instution (FI) and ask them for all relevant personal information about you under the Data Protection Acts_ 1988 and 2003 dataprotection-dot-ie_ ..click .. 'for individuals'....  'know your rights'. As well as giving you access to all off your personal information (documents signed by you) it can include 'cctv' images i.e. if you know when you went into your FI - as in the date on the Credit Agreement (CA). Everyone can access their own personal information, your Father can (& should) do the same.

You should be given copies of your CA and older agreement. Check if they are look identical (hold one over the other up to a window). If you think the do engage the services of a respected forensic expert (legal circles should point you to 1 individual in Eire, you won't find him on google).

Once you get your personal information from your FI and you think you have a forgery on your hands, make an official complaint to your FI. Do not do this before your have the evidence in your hands. Information about this is at nca-dot-ie/nca/financialcomplaints (my 1st post here so can't post url's, workaround OK moderator?)

Stop communicating verbally with your FI.
It is your FI's right to enforce their rights as they see fit, i.e. legal. That's their decision, you will not be able to influence this in any way, nor should you. If they choose this course, as is their right, it sounds like you MAY (caveat, read my 1st sentence)  have a possible defense under the Consumer Credit Act, and the potential forgery. Get legal advise at that point, the loan sum is relatively small so the legal expense won't be huge. As far as I am aware, you do not have any counterclaim against your FI, unjust enrichment etc.
If you don't pay, don't be under any illusions that they won't try and enforce their actions. Find a copy of the March 2011 'financial measures programme' online, go to page 24 under the heading 'asset quality review' and contemplate the words '...potential ability to remediate...'
Yes I know, different size and class of loans etc, but... think institutional mindset.

This is not advise or a recommenddation per se... but if I were in your shoes I would be getting some hard cold facts as opposed to "I'm, fairly sure" etc. you've got nothing until then.


----------



## bullworth (6 Feb 2012)

Gekko said:


> Some incredible opinions in this thread.
> 
> The OP borrowed the money and should therefore repay the money.



Why when ordinary tax paying citizens are paying money to banks which the banks borrowed ? Why the double standard ?

Borrower citizens are not in general financial experts. If they are not given a clear explanation of their loan agreement in writing and in black and white consumer friendly terms then the bank should be morally obligated to take some kind of hit (assuming we were not already in a through the looking glass economy) and never ever to penalize the borrower with unexpectedly high interest rates and repayment schedules which they never agreed to , never had in writing and hence could never have hoped to budget for. The bank mis-sold a loan. They cant just hand out money and then make up the rules, interest rates and repayment schedules as they go along. Thats no better than an illegal moneylender. Now there is even an allegation of fraud which given past behaviours in the banking system wouldn't surprise me one bit if true.


----------



## beffers (6 Feb 2012)

> Who cares if she has a moral obligation ,once she hasnt got a legal one



The tax payer, whose hard earned money was given to banks to bail them out after they made crappy lending decisions?


----------



## mark27 (6 Feb 2012)

Gekko said:


> Some incredible opinions in this thread.
> 
> The OP borrowed the money and should therefore repay the money.



Why are they incredible opinions .Just because you have a holier than tho attitude on everything doesnt mean we all do.

You must of been on the radio today aswell,They were talking about people getting away with penalty points and not getting fined .Callers were ringing up saying they knew they were speeding but got away with it .

What would you have them do,call in to the local garda station and say please take my money , I have sinned


----------



## mark27 (6 Feb 2012)

beffers said:


> The tax payer, whose hard earned money was given to banks to bail them out after they made crappy lending decisions?



Yes they made crappy decisions ,and wrong ones and seem to have with the OP also havent they


----------



## mark1 (6 Feb 2012)

The whole situation is very odd, however as you say uyou got the money lodged into your account so there will be records there as to where it was transferred from, who it was transferred to and all the relevant details, having said that if the bank forged any paperwork that is another serious issue. You say you are 99.9% sure you didn't sign and your 99.9% sure your dad didn't I also find that a bit odd, If by chance you decide not to pay it and play hardball with the bank they will return the compliment and there will be legal costs, interest costs and all the stress and hardship related with it. If you stand up in court you have both your word and your dads word of how the transaction took place, the bank will have a record of the money transferred into your account, your admission of having received it and used it AND a written agreement with both you and your dads signatures on it ( forged or otherwise that will be up to a judge ) i have a feeling you already know what way you are going to deal with it and this is a fishing expedition and the only piece of advice I would have is make your own decision and leave your dad out of it.


----------



## ShelaghD (9 Feb 2012)

44brendan said:


> You can be sure that "the Bank" did not fake the document. However, it is possible that some misguided individual in the Bank did produce a faked document to cover up the fact that an original could not be located. No Bank would countenance this action and there would be severe consequqnces for any official if it was discovered that such a action had been perpetrated.
> You seem genuine in your belief that this document is not genuine and you should therefore address your concerns to the Bank. They, in turn will need to take your complaint seriously and the complaints procedure should ensure that appropriate action is taken to address your concerns.



I think that's a very naive view of the way some banks operate, whether we like it or not.
You say that "the bank" did not forge the document, but some employee did. That may be the case. But the official line of communication from them was that they didn't have a credit agreement, then one appears. Someone must have sanctioned the forgery, someone in a position of authority. I'm sure it wasn't some desk clerk on his lunch hour fiddling around with the photocopier.



bullworth said:


> Why when ordinary tax paying citizens are paying money to banks which the banks borrowed ? Why the double standard ?



Yes, that's a fair point.



bullworth said:


> The bank mis-sold a loan. They cant just hand out money and then make up  the rules, interest rates and repayment schedules as they go along.  Thats no better than an illegal moneylender. Now there is even an  allegation of fraud which given past behaviours in the banking system  wouldn't surprise me one bit if true.



Yes, this is the crux of what I'm saying. Some people on the thread are missing the point.

Anyway, thanks for your reactions. I will keep you updated on developments.


----------



## Bronte (10 Feb 2012)

I don't see how a bank would be able to enforce a loan unless they have the original written agreement. This kind of stuff is currently going on with Nama and the banks as plenty of LARGE loans we are paying for seem to be unenforceable. 

If it were me I'd want to see the original, ask the bank for a meeting where you can see the original document. Personally a bank doing a forgery would not surprise me based on my life experiences with banks and the dirty tricks they pull. 

What is quite surprising is that this was 2010 and banks were not as easy going as during the boom.  Also surprising is that OP is not sure if she signing something and neither she nor her father know if he signed a guarantee, it's only less than 2 years ago.


----------



## Guns N Roses (10 Feb 2012)

44brendan said:


> You can be sure that "the Bank" did not fake the document. However, it is possible that some misguided individual in the Bank did produce a faked document to cover up the fact that an original could not be located. No Bank would countenance this action and there would be severe consequqnces for any official if it was discovered that such a action had been perpetrated.


 
I would not be so sure. Five of America's largest lenders fraudulently reproduced mortgage documents to foreclose on properties where the original documents were mislad.

Check out the recent extract from the CBS website below.

(CBS News) 
Five of the nation's largest lenders reached a $25 billion settlement with the federal government Thursday over fraudulent and abusive lending practices leading up to the financial crisis.

One of those abusive practices was the use of "auto-pens" and signature mills, where workers signed thousands of documents each day paving the way for bank foreclosures. Drawing a small hourly wage, those workers were signing documents as high-level bank executives. Dozens, perhaps hundreds -- including men -- signed off as "Linda Green."


----------



## Bronte (10 Feb 2012)

Not for this thread but that's very interesting Guns n Roses.  What an alien concept, a government has found that a bank has used 'abusive' practices to diddle customers/innocent borrowers and must pay them compensation.  We'll just stick with our marvelous new concept of moral hazzard for the little people but not the big boys.


----------



## Sue Ellen (10 Feb 2012)

Gekko said:


> Some incredible opinions in this thread.
> 
> The OP borrowed the money and should therefore repay the money.



Exactly.  Its this type of attitude (OPs) that has the world in the financial mess that its in at the moment. All types of excuses, looking at loopholes etc. and blaming this person and that person. If you owe the money just pay it because the bottom line is if you don't the rest of us will have to in the long run


----------



## spreadsheet (10 Feb 2012)

I have to say it sounds to me like the OP signed the agreement and has simply forgotten.

I would take excellent advice from Yerraboy above if you want to take it further. It sounds very far fetched that the bank would verbally agree and throw €8000 your way with nothing on paper.


----------



## 44brendan (10 Feb 2012)

I agree that the indications are that a loophole is being exploited in order not to repay this debt.
However the Banks do have a duty to comply with Consumer regulations and if they don't a borrower is within his/her rights to look for some measure of redress. 
If the Bank have provided forged documentation to support their contention that all Consumer requirements have been met (which current remains unclear) then OP should progress the matter further. 
These protections are there to cover all of us against unscruplous lending practises and forgery by a Bank employee would be a serious issue (if it is the case).


----------



## Ann1 (10 Feb 2012)

spreadsheet said:


> I have to say it sounds to me like the OP signed the agreement and has simply forgotten.
> 
> I would take excellent advice from Yerraboy above if you want to take it further. It sounds very far fetched that the bank would verbally agree and throw €8000 your way with nothing on paper.


Totally agree....what bank clerk in back office is going to transfer €8000 into an account without the relevant paperwork to back up their actions....They bank in question may not have had the agreement in house two years after the loan was initially made..they probably had to have it pulled from off site security storage....thus the delay in producing the agreement....


----------



## nlgbbbblth (10 Feb 2012)

Bizarre sequence of events.

It's 2010 not 2000 - I find amazing to believe that the funds could have been drawn down in the absence of a signed loan agreement.

Yerraboy's post about asking for "all personal information" does not mean that the bank will give you everything. They won't - as is their entitlement.


----------



## Time (10 Feb 2012)

They can't ignore their obligations under the DPA.


----------



## nlgbbbblth (10 Feb 2012)

Time said:


> They can't ignore their obligations under the DPA.



No they can't.

However that does not mean you get to see the entire contents of your file.


----------



## nlgbbbblth (10 Feb 2012)

see this post and that post for an idea of what one would get.


----------



## Time (11 Feb 2012)

They would get a copy of the loan agreements which is that is at issue here.


----------



## Perplexed (11 Feb 2012)

Ann1 said:


> Totally agree....what bank clerk in back office is going to transfer €8000 into an account without the relevant paperwork to back up their actions....They bank in question may not have had the agreement in house two years after the loan was initially made..they probably had to have it pulled from off site security storage....thus the delay in producing the agreement....



I think this is the most likely explanation as to delay in producing the document. The OP seems to have forgotten that her father as guarantor of the loan is liable for repayment if it's not paid. That's the reason why Student Loans are easier to obtain.

I think the title of the thread should have been reversed !


----------



## wbbs (11 Feb 2012)

Totally agree with above, having spent the best part of my life working in banks it is highly unlikely there is nothing signed.   Even before the present crisis the amount of paperwork and signing off that is needed for anything to be drawn down makes it unlikely there is no credit agreement.   Would require more than one person to be stupid and break audit guidelines, can't see why anyone would do that.  (I am of course talking about ordinary branch bank employees, yes we know there were some very funny big loans given out on high without paperwork!)


----------



## ShelaghD (11 Feb 2012)

Sue Ellen said:


> Exactly.  Its this type of attitude (OPs) that has the world in the financial mess that its in at the moment. All types of excuses, looking at loopholes etc. and blaming this person and that person. If you owe the money just pay it because the bottom line is if you don't the rest of us will have to in the long run



To the inhabitants of the world, I sincerely apologise for my actions which have caused the global financial mess!

Ok Sue Ellen, please understand this. The bank mis-sold me a loan. They can't simply give out money and then make up the rules, interest rates and repayment details afterwards as suits them. I tried to meet them half way, offering to pay back all of the principal without interest. This is something I was not legally obliged to do, as I was informed by 2 different solicitors. The bank weren't happy with this and so committed a criminal act by forging a document in an attempt to defraud me. And you think _my_ attitude has the world in a financial mess? What a skewered and biased view you have of the world.


----------



## Ann1 (11 Feb 2012)

So what you are saying is that you took out a loan from a bank not knowing whether the interest rate you were being charged by the bank was 1% or 27% or even 50%. Your father went guarantor and he also did not sight or sign any documentation protecting you or himself.


----------



## ShelaghD (11 Feb 2012)

Ann1 said:


> So what you are saying is that you took out a loan from a bank not knowing whether the interest rate you were being charged by the bank was 1% or 27% or even 50%.



Yes.



Ann1 said:


> Your father went guarantor and he also did not sight or sign any documentation protecting you or himself.



What? I don't understand what you're saying.
My father did _not_ go guarantor on the loan, that's precisely the point, the document was fraudulated. 

He did not sight? What the hell does that mean, he did not see?
He did not sign any documentation protecting himself or me, what the hell does that mean?


----------



## Ann1 (11 Feb 2012)

ShelaghD said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes you do understand what I am saying and that is why you have replied in such a rude fashion. I think you should employ yourself a solicitor.


----------



## irishmoss (11 Feb 2012)

I actually couldn't believe that my son got a loan of 2k a few weeks back and could have got up to 6k with NO Guarantor, repayments to be made after he graduates. He didn't ask for the loan, he was making a lodgement and was asked by the cashier if he was interested in a loan!

This is with Bank of Ireland in 2012 !!!




Perplexed said:


> I think this is the most likely explanation as to delay in producing the document. The OP seems to have forgotten that her father as guarantor of the loan is liable for repayment if it's not paid. That's the reason why Student Loans are easier to obtain.
> !


----------



## ShelaghD (12 Feb 2012)

Ann1 said:


> Yes you do understand what I am saying and that is why you have replied in such a rude fashion. I think you should employ yourself a solicitor.



I don't understand your 2nd point, that is why I asked. Anyway, grammatically, your 2nd point doesn't make sense. 

I have consulted 2 different solicitors already, I won't hesitate to contact another.


----------



## ShelaghD (12 Feb 2012)

I've found Bank of Ireland absolutely woeful in the past for students. I left them because they were so hypocritical. Their ad goes - "We offer students more because when you start making it, we do too". Then I was told I couldn't have an overdraft because my account was a student account, if I had a normal current account, I could have applied. Such hypocrisy prompted me to leave and take my custom elsewhere.


----------



## huskerdu (12 Feb 2012)

In my opinion, this post has gone beyond being useful in answering the OPS question. Most posts are opinion, not useful information. 

The advice given below, is the best sensible advice about what the OP 
should do now. 

To reiterate what yerraboy has said, if you wish to pursue this legally, you need cold hard facts. 




yerraboy said:


> Firstly, I'm not in a position to give you legal advice, and from your post, you don't need it.
> Secondly, I have my own moral base, it's mine and I won't be imposing it on anyone. The same can be said for you - it's your private concern.
> Cars parked.
> 
> ...


----------



## roker (12 Feb 2012)

Going by some of the comments and the poster, it is pity that the society we now live can forget what is morally correct and try to get out of a payment through a legal loophole. You must pay it back, if you want to borrow without interest ask a relative.


----------



## Perplexed (12 Feb 2012)

wbbs said:


> Totally agree with above, having spent the best part of my life working in banks it is highly unlikely there is nothing signed.   Even before the present crisis the amount of paperwork and signing off that is needed for anything to be drawn down makes it unlikely there is no credit agreement.   Would require more than one person to be stupid and break audit guidelines, can't see why anyone would do that.  (I am of course talking about ordinary branch bank employees, yes we know there were some very funny big loans given out on high without paperwork!)



I still work in banking and every credit agreement is printed in duplicate with one copy given to customer and the other held on file.

The Guarantee form has a section in it suggesting Guarantor getting legal advice to understand what he/she is signing and requiring a signature to waive this.

Unless the bank official in question is working with you to defraud the bank there is no way that the documentation is not on file.

Why post on here if OP has already gone to 2 solicitors?  Did they not give the answer you wanted to hear?   I suggest that you're the one that will end up paying a hell of a lot more than the original loan in legal costs etc and then still have to pay off your loan.

I'll be interested to hear what the outcome is!


----------



## ShelaghD (12 Feb 2012)

Perplexed said:


> I still work in banking and every credit agreement is printed in duplicate with one copy given to customer and the other held on file.
> 
> The Guarantee form has a section in it suggesting Guarantor getting legal advice to understand what he/she is signing and requiring a signature to waive this.
> 
> Unless the bank official in question is working with you to defraud the bank there is no way that the documentation is not on file.



Are you saying that it never happens that a loan is drawndown without the necessary paperwork being done? And it has never happened before?
Because I have a friend in a Credit Union and another in a bank, and they tell me it happens, not often, but it does still happen.


----------



## bullworth (12 Feb 2012)

ShelaghD said:


> Ann1 said:
> 
> 
> > So what you are saying is that you took out a loan from a bank not knowing whether the interest rate you were being charged by the bank was 1% or 27% or even 50%. Your father went guarantor and he also did not sight or sign any documentation protecting you or himself.
> ...



Was that the first loan you ever took out in your life or were there loans ever taken out before ? I am asking this because it is reasonable for a private citizen, especially a novice at such matters not to be aware of requirements for paperwork etc. I remember when I took out my first loan. They could have given me 20 pieces of paper or they could have given me one  and I could have walked away not knowing any difference, more worried about doing the things I need to do in order to earn the actual money to repay the loan than worried about the paperwork itself. However it is extremely careless, dare I say it even ignorant not to be aware of what kind of legal obligations you enter into ( concerning repayment terms and interest rate etc) when you enter into a loan agreement. And if your father went as guarantor then he would have had to signed an agreement somewhere which makes your story even more confusing. No paper signed by him = he is not the guarantor.


----------



## ajapale (12 Feb 2012)

This thread has run its course.

The OP has asked her question and at this stage she appears to  have received some relevant advice and comments.

Thread Closed.

aj
moderator


----------

