Personal Debt, Guarantor & Debt Collector

The loans were taken out under the personal promise by the guarantor that if I should have difficulty maintaining the payments on the loan, that they would cover the payments for me until a time that I could continue paying it myself.
Click to expand...

Then, what is the problem?

Contact the guarantor and ask him to pay your debts.

If not, sue him for performance of his contract with you.

Brendan
 
AyCaramba! said:
.

I didn't take out, or spend, the money "stupidly". It was out of sheer desperation, a very much last resort, and was done in order to secure a roof over my head (rented, not bought).

I did not set out to take money and run. I was put in a position whereby I required money urgently,

If I had thought, for an instance, that when my ability to service the interest on these loans diminished, that the person guaranteeing both the payments and the overall loan would outright refuse to continue the payments until the point of default and debt collection agency involvement, then I would have never agreed to sign the loans in the first place.

I've stuck to the facts

The contracts made, how they were made, along with some of their subsequent disappearance, is something the bank itself should be made aware of and be let deal with. If I've to resolve the debt issue with the collection agency, so be it, but there's only positive outcomes to making the bank seniority aware of the conduct or dealings of its staff.
Click to expand...


Who told you that if you defaulted the guarantor would be pursued? You mention the loan was for an emergency rental situation, but the initial loan was for 5K, you know this doesn't make sense? All anyone needs to rent is one months rent and one months deposit, and in some rentals landlords are prepared to forgo full deposit if it will come later.

Why did the guarantor sign the application for the second top up, how do you know he did? Do you have a copy of it? Why did you allow him to do so? Why did you borrow a third time if you couldn't afford it, you mention you defaulted very soon afterwards.

You state that the guarantor falsified your income, why did you let him do this?

In relation to the personal promise of the guarantor. Are you saying that both of you had a side agreement wherein he agreed to pay off your loan if you couldn't? Why would he do that? What is most surprising is that the guarantor helped you out with the first loan, and knowing you couldn't live on 130 euro allowed you to continue borrowing. Did he not have to sign for the 2 top ups?

Why are you hiding your location from the debt collection agency? Wouldn't it be better if they pursue you and end up with zero from you and then it's the end of the matter? You're only delaying the inevitable, why not engage, show you have zero income and no assets. If you do that I cannot see why they would even bother going to court. And then you're off the hook, and if the debt collection agency has not been told to pursue the guarantor, maybe he too will be free of this debt. Wouldn't that be a good result for everybody.

No if there is a judgment against you it will not show up abroad. So you needn't worry about that. And if you do as outlined in the previous paragraph and deal with the debt collectors there might not even be a judgment.

Why do you find it disturbing that the bank is not pursing the guarantor. You speak as though the bank and debt collection agency are pursing you personally and this is a bad thing, but if they are so what, you took the loan, you certainly spent it, you knew you couldn't pay it back, yet you feel they shouldn't pursue you because of the guarantor. Isn't that the banks business. Why do you want to get the guarantor into trouble, he might risk losing his job. Is that a nice thing to do to someone who apparently tried to help you out. Or do you blame him for you having the loans?

You mention that you had a debt of 5 times your income before the first loan. So about 3K, is that separate to the credit card debt.

I'm completely lost as to why you'd want to hire a solicitor and even more worryingly, you have no money to pay a solicitor, so why on earth would you consider it, and to what end?

You are contradictory in this: You state you would never have taken out a loan if you thought the guarantor would never have paid it off if you defaulted, but that is always a possibility, yet you said that you had tried all routes to get money before borrowing, and it was a case of necessity and desparation. Does that not mean you would have done anything to get a loan?

I don't agree that you've stuck to the facts, there is a lot missing.
 
I am going to try to put myself in Ay's shoes to see if I could justify this.

I face losing my accommodation because I can't pay the rent.
My girlfriend says not to worry, she will organise a loan in the bank and I will only have to pay interest on it. She says if I get into difficulties, she will look after it. (She doesn't want me to lose my flat in case I move in with her)
That's fine, I borrow the money.
Then we go again some time later.
Then we go again and bring the full amount to €18k

We then split up and it's not amicable. We are not in contact.

Yeah, I would probably tell the bank to go chase the guarantor. I would probably tell them that she rode roughshod over the system and she put down the wrong salary so that I would qualify for the loan.

While I would enjoy spiting my ex, I would realise that the bank is going to get a judgment against me. But sure wouldn't it be worth it?
 
I don't agree BB, where is personal responsiblity? Fair enough one could have made a mistake on the first loan, but to dip in twice more? And they also had a large debt to service. I accept when young we can do foolish things. At least with the first loan it seems they could service the debt, I assumed about 9 euro a week, based on 5K at 10% interest only. And no accommodation needs 5K. What one would need in Dublin would be what, 1K deposit and 1 K rent. If it's a single person, it would be a lot less.
 
fair play, Brendan, for trying to play devils advocate here


Bronte - my guess is that maybe there were arrears owing? possibly money owed to family?


there is a definite sense of rolling up 'lifestyle' debt into further & further loans and some unspoken wish to see the ex-friend suffer this loss - and though we dont know the full story, i can see why posters are unsympathetic

would it help to treat it as 2 separate queries?
1) the OP should work with the debt collector, show they have no means & hopefully extract themselves from this situation
2) should the bank official be pursued? I think once step 1 is exhausted, this may happen naturally. There may be merit in the bank having an internal investigation, but I think for the OP to pursue this would just be vindictive.
 
Bronte said:
No if there is a judgment against you it will not show up abroad. So you needn't worry about that.
Click to expand...

Wonderful! thank you.

I don't agree that you've stuck to the facts, there is a lot missing.
Click to expand...
I have stuck with the facts. What yourself and some others here seem to be craving is more gritty details of personal turmoil to get your special jollies from. Hell, frustrated with not being able to pull himself off over someone else's troubles, Burgess has repeatedly resorted to very wide of the mark assumptions and making up stories that seem to be as good as mental pornography for him. It's absolutely desperate.

Why X did Y is irrelevant here and it's a shame you and others can't understand that considering you deem yourselves fit to give financial advice on what are fact based matters and indeed spend quite a bit of time and energy fulfilling this self-belief.

The quality of this site and the advice available on it has been made more than apparent here so I'll leave it at that.
 
It is the lender who has the choice to pursue either creditor or guarantor. The fact that the guarantor is a bank employee does not alter this.

In certain circumstances, a guarantee may be discharged, for instance, if there was a material change in the loan(s) agreement. In other words, the guarantor may be relieved of the debt if there was a substantial change in the agreement between creditor and lender.

I agree that some people may appear to be unfairly judgemental perhaps, but I do not think that Bronte is in that category. Her questions seem to be a genuine attempt to understand how or why you got into this situation in order to provide you with appropriate advice.

For instance, an important question would be whether you applied for the loans under duress from another party and whether proof of this was indisputable.
 
Sophrosyne said:
For instance, an important question would be whether you applied for the loans under duress from another party and whether proof of this was indisputable.
Click to expand...

You can be quite sure if there was any element of duress, Ay would have noted that in their first post.

If she had borrowed the money to pay off her guarantor's debts, it would be a completely different story.

But she borrowed the money "to keep a roof over her head".
 
AyCaramba! said:
The quality of this site and the advice available on it has been made more than apparent here so I'll leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Translate, I came onto this site knowing what it was, but I said this in my first post:

Any and all advice is greatly appreciated.

Then when everybody responded, and they responded in a fairly consistent manner as per their other postings on AAM, you criticised all those who had pertinent questions, and who might have appeared negative, from your viewpoint, and you thanked and praised those who were positive. All the while claiming that you could not divulge certain unspoken of facts because of personal turmoil.

It seems you only came on here to here to hear a certain viewpoint, that which suits you, I'm probably coming across harshly to you, but you seem to have a vindictive steak against the guarantor, and I didn't want to use that word, but another poster already did, but I did think it. You will know if you read my posts that I am no fan of bankers in particular. So in the absense of your giving us the actual reasons you have a major gripe with the guarantor, you can only expect to get the responses you have.

You are anonomous, we will never know who you are, so there is no need for smoke and mirrors. I've found on AAM that some people do not give the full story, and even those that do, well we don't ever hear the other side, and there are always two sides to every story.

And you are wrong, what X did to Y is most pertinant. It's the root of your problem. If you decide to divulge it, then maybe we can help you. No need for graffic details. Or mental pornography as you refer to it. Never knew financials was so exciting, but Fifty shades it ain't.
 
Bronte;

I am with you on this.
We can only go on a short presentation.
We will bring our own biases to bear (none of us perfect)

Sometimes we can be a bit strident, but I do not see any personal vindictiveness from posters. (sometimes home truths!)
Indeed often nuff ,posters accept they were over the Top but @ least in AAM there is forum to BLOW!
And even if a post is wrong it is still valuable to get views.
Vive La Difference!!

Most posters are anonymous , so their opinion/advice is not couched in jargon but is a short clear attempt at a genuinely held view or advice.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
You can be quite sure if there was any element of duress, Ay would have noted that in their first post.
Click to expand...

How do you know?

Some people like to portray themselves as victims, others do not.

It seems to me that those who tell a difficult back story to their financial difficulties get a more sympathetic hearing here on AAM.

We have no idea whether these stories are true or exaggerated.

I know if I had financial difficulties arising from difficult personal circumstances I would be happy to seek advice around the financial aspects, but I would not like to discuss my personal difficulties.

The person who cannot or does not want to tell a personal hardship story should receive the same hearing as someone who tells a tear jerker which may be completely untrue.
 
Very interesting case. OP does appreciate the sympathetic responses, but who can blame her for that. Falsification of signatures on documentation is an issue, but should not restrict leagl proceedings, provided that the money was issued to the OP. It was obviously both a naive and irresponsible series of transactions by all parties. Bottom line is that unless OP has a reasonable income or assets a judgement will be irrelevant and produce nothing. Any problems that arise are likely to revert back to the guarantor. The lesson to be learnt here, is don't go guarantor for a bank loan, unless you intend paying it back ultimately yourself!!
 
I see no advantage in contacting Bank over their staff actions. Remember it was senior staff who havelanded Ireland in trouble.If (am not saying it is) your reasoning is vengeful don,t do anything.

It still ends up with , what can you reasonably afford?
If you can afford nothing , show the figures and leave others to decide what to do.
From my experience ,if you havn,t funds/assets,, Banks/Debt Collectors take that on board and move onto debtors they can get funds from.

The good thing about AAM posts is that people do give opinions , some might not be kind , but no malice intended. Sometimes the harder posts are the best.
 
AyCaramba! said:
Although you said that contacting the bank would merely serve to create waves within the bank and would not provide resolution, I think I'm going to go ahead, draft a letter and make enquiries as to whom it should be directed toward.

The contracts made, how they were made, along with some of their subsequent disappearance, is something the bank itself should be made aware of and be let deal with. If I've to resolve the debt issue with the collection agency, so be it, but there's only positive outcomes to making the bank seniority aware of the conduct or dealings of its staff.
Click to expand...

Of course it depends on the wording of the letter, but with a letter like that in their hands the bank might feel inclined to make a complaint of fraud against the two of them...
 
Sophrosyne said:
I agree that some people may appear to be unfairly judgemental perhaps, but I do not think that Bronte is in that category. Her questions seem to be a genuine attempt to understand how or why you got into this situation in order to provide you with appropriate advice.
.
Click to expand...

I'm not here for personal relationship advice. Why X did Y is personal detail that has no bearing on the facts of the situation now.

Anyway, since last posting I've got my credit history from the ICB. The loan in question is marked down as "C" for "Completed", with €0 outstanding money and has been since August 2011.

Why this is, or why none of the arrears appeared on the report, or why the payment history hasn't anything negative on it I do not know but I assume this means that the business with the bank in question is done.

I'm now considering how to handle the collection agency. If they've bought the debt and aren't collecting on behalf, as the case seems to be, I'm not sure what powers they have to bring legal action against me?

If I consider the guarantor paying the guarantee to be essentially a no go, what should my next play be?
 
Ay caramba.

1. ICB showing clear does not necessarily mean Bank is finished. For whatever reason it isn,t showing ? so be it , there is still a loan you have not paid. If it was paid the DEbt collectors would not be on your case.C for completed is not necessarily (gone away). It may mean they have sold your debt.ie THEY are paid!
2. The Debt Collection Company may either be managing or probably bought the Debt from the Bank, I would think they now have ownership of it.
3. I suggest let the Debt Comp know your present circumstances , again if you have NO money they are normally ok.If you wish ,tell them there was a guarantor issue.
4.All Brontes observations I have seen on AAM are not prying , just trying to assist..
 
If the bank has sold on the debt then it's done with on their part?

I've currently got a small income. I'm considering offering the debt agency to settle for 1/3rd of the amount owed, paid over 2 years. Although I hold the guarantor almost totally responsible here, for reasons you guys will never pry from me, I just want to get this issue put to bed and get on with my life and unfortunately I think the guarantor is flaky enough that they would genuinely rather see the two of us being dragged into a court room and have judgements put against than to settle our issues privately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top