Why don't we see "Lawrence and Kev" doing work like this as they are also High Court Enforcement Officers - they only seem to deal with Individuals claiming against companies.
Also they are not kitted up with stab vests and are a lot younger
programme dedicated to mike who passed away. Wonder what happened to him?
I noticed that too but couldn't relate to who he was in the episode. Anyone know?
Some folk are their own worst enemies with little or no sense of money management. I'm referring in particular to the daft guy with the Jaguar. What possesses anyone to buy an expensive 'up market' car on finance?
Don't they realise a very decent used car can be bought for as little as £1500 cash? Ahh....it might not be one that will 'impress the neighbours', but at least it will be paid for!
I noticed that too but couldn't relate to who he was in the episode. Anyone know?
Some folk are their own worst enemies with little or no sense of money management. I'm referring in particular to the daft guy with the Jaguar. What possesses anyone to buy an expensive 'up market' car on finance?
Don't they realise a very decent used car can be bought for as little as £1500 cash? Ahh....it might not be one that will 'impress the neighbours', but at least it will be paid for!
I believe Mike was the guy who was talking to the woman at the door, the one who had just come out of hospital and was having for Ford Galaxy reposessed.
Thats always the thing though isn't it? They cry poverty "i can't afford to pay rent" yet oh they have massive or X Box's if they wanted to pay rent they'd sell all these things
Why bother paying though, the council will have to rehouse them even though they made themselves intentionally homeless, because they have Kids. They will probably end up giving them a deposit for a private rental and the whole merry go round will start again.
Why bother paying though, the council will have to rehouse them even though they made themselves intentionally homeless, because they have Kids. They will probably end up giving them a deposit for a private rental and the whole merry go round will start again.
Those two should have been deported back to wherever they came from. >:(
Ample warning and notice was given which they chose to ignore - wherever they originate from I doubt they would be eligible for "emergency housing" or anything else come to that.
These are the sort of freeloaders that give immigrants a bad name.
Thats always the thing though isn't it? They cry poverty "i can't afford to pay rent" yet oh they have massive or X Box's if they wanted to pay rent they'd sell all these things
The problem is with this is, yes they would get money for them, you don't get a massive amount, and then you would have to replace them with cheaper versions, meaning the amount of money they had would be reduced. If your debts are that high, selling goods like that will make little difference anyway.
People talk this on the Benefits threads, but in reality is doesn't solve anything.
It's a short term gain, with no long term benefit.
If you like watching TV then yes. If you are in debt you aren't exactly going to have an expendable income to be able to fill your time with hobbies, meaning TV is about the only thing left to do. Well other than one thing, but that leads to children, which require money.
This doesn't take into account that the sale with have little effect on the debt either if it is that large.
The problem is with this is, yes they would get money for them, you don't get a massive amount, and then you would have to replace them with cheaper versions, meaning the amount of money they had would be reduced. If your debts are that high, selling goods like that will make little difference anyway.
People talk this on the Benefits threads, but in reality is doesn't solve anything.
It's a short term gain, with no long term benefit.
They shouldn't have bought them in the first place. IIRC there were at least 4 large screen TVs. Why did they need that many?
They shouldn't have bought them in the first place. IIRC there were at least 4 large screen TVs. Why did they need that many?
They may have bought them prior to getting into financial trouble.
The sale of personal goods bring little money, that why even repossession of goods rarely covers the debt, unless of course the person has high value things.
They shouldn't have bought them in the first place. IIRC there were at least 4 large screen TVs. Why did they need that many?
With 1 TV i can understand selling it wont solve anything but 4 is stupid , who needs 4 TV's no one. They could have paid the rent , if they can afford 4 TV's then its no problem. The TV's would have paid most if not all of the rent arrears anyway.
Also i read the post from the son of mike and i think i am hormonal or something because i just burst into tears. I was reading out the post to my fiance & was choked up for some reason. You see dedications on shows but never get to read first hand from a relative the affect. I did watch the episode and wasn't entirely sure who it was , i wasn't paying much attention last night with i regret a it now. Of what i did catch i remember commenting to my fiance he seemed a nice guy helping out the woman.
With 1 TV i can understand selling it wont solve anything but 4 is stupid , who needs 4 TV's no one. They could have paid the rent , if they can afford 4 TV's then its no problem. The TV's would have paid most if not all of the rent arrears anyway.
Also i read the post from the son of mike and i think i am hormonal or something because i just burst into tears. I was reading out the post to my fiance & was choked up for some reason. You see dedications on shows but never get to read first hand from a relative the affect. I did watch the episode and wasn't entirely sure who it was , i wasn't paying much attention last night with i regret a it now. Of what i did catch i remember commenting to my fiance he seemed a nice guy helping out the woman.
The tv's could have been years old. I have got lots of big tv's and consoles in my house, but If i lose my job they won't pay the mortgage will they?
I'd thank Channel 5 for giving me an obvious idea I should have thought of, if legalised thugs are coming to take your stuff, such as your car and you actually can't prevent them from doing so, just smash it all up, it gets one over on them.
Alternatively I would make sure that friends and relatives get hold of various things to safeguard them for me whilst my home is not safe from being "burgled".
I always always side with the "little guy" in this trumped up society that is up its own arse frankly in terms of the strict rules it allows predatory capitalist companies to use to suppress ordinary people.
Logically I would have smashed the car up far more than the man in the Liverpool estate did, if I was going to get done for criminal damage anyway, the more damage it sustains the less that the bailiffs/finance company can get back for it after being legally able to go out and harrass people, he could have easily took the mirrors off, put each window in, let down the tyres, snapped the windscreen wipers off and put a lot of dints all over it and then the car would have been worthless and not worth the while of being taken away.
He only smashed one window, which would be one repair they had to make, the rest was fine. But he had plenty of time pacing about in the street which could have been used to create more irrepairable damage.
As for the morality of the whole situation, how about laws preventing these awful pay day loans and high interest rates predating on people who are likely to turn to them, they then use their heavy handed bailiff system and blame their victims when they can't pay it back. Eg that man in the Midlands about to be made homeless didn't really owe as high an amount as £30,000, it was all immoral inflated charges.
The tv's could have been years old. I have got lots of big tv's and consoles in my house, but If i lose my job they won't pay the mortgage will they?
Same here, sort of, CRT's anyway. It['s a vindictive and mean spirited way of thinking that people have, that debts should be solved with recourse to peoples possessions which to me have a value apart from the money they may be worth.
Bailiffs really should be outlawed for the "theft" (don't know why I'm bothering with the speech marks actually because it IS theft) that they are legally able to carry out, it's always good to point out, they aren't allowed to take people's things in Scotland. It would be one less programme for Channel 5 if we could get rid of them here in England.
You say the taxi driver didn't bother to move out in his notice period? Who was helping them, no one, they had no solutions.
He should be getting supported living because the programme revealed he had pneumonia.
As an aside he had a copy of "Dance 93" on CD which I've still got.
What would happen if he couldn't get everything out on time?
For people here on DS that predictably side with authority on the bailiffs (shudder), what do you value more, money or people?
The problem is with this is, yes they would get money for them, you don't get a massive amount, and then you would have to replace them with cheaper versions, meaning the amount of money they had would be reduced. If your debts are that high, selling goods like that will make little difference anyway.
People talk this on the Benefits threads, but in reality is doesn't solve anything.
It's a short term gain, with no long term benefit.
Yes, it's such a crap argument I hate seeing it, you cannot sell a few possessions just to get one months rent or something it's ludicrous.
Those in debt and know the bailiffs are coming fall into two types, the savvy ones who transfer assets, cars etc into wife's/relatives names and move possessions away from their address, and if the debt is huge then declare themselves bankrupt that lasts for a year, as did the fella who owed the solicitor 12grand ( which he told the solicitor he would do, take repayments or I go bankrupt and you get nothing, the solicitor gambled and Lost along with the bailiffs)
Then the non savvy ones who are usually the unfortunate general public like the woman with the people carrier who had fell behind with the repayments from being in hospital it was hinted, where debt is a one off time and not deliberate.
I'd thank Channel 5 for giving me an obvious idea I should have thought of, if legalised thugs are coming to take your stuff, such as your car and you actually can't prevent them from doing so, just smash it all up, it gets one over on them.
Alternatively I would make sure that friends and relatives get hold of various things to safeguard them for me whilst my home is not safe from being "burgled".
How exactly are they 'legalised thugs'? If you buy something then don't pay for it what exactly do you expect to happen?
I'd thank Channel 5 for giving me an obvious idea I should have thought of, if legalised thugs are coming to take your stuff, such as your car and you actually can't prevent them from doing so, just smash it all up, it gets one over on them.
Alternatively I would make sure that friends and relatives get hold of various things to safeguard them for me whilst my home is not safe from being "burgled".
so no one should bother paying for stuff they've bought then
How exactly are they 'legalised thugs'? If you buy something then don't pay for it what exactly do you expect to happen?
I thought the guys were very nice and gave the people more than enough chances. Like the guy whose sister was meant to move after 6 months, they faffed about longer than needed and i sure wouldn't give them as long if their contracted lease ended yet they refuse to go
I'd thank Channel 5 for giving me an obvious idea I should have thought of, if legalised thugs are coming to take your stuff, such as your car and you actually can't prevent them from doing so, just smash it all up, it gets one over on them.
Alternatively I would make sure that friends and relatives get hold of various things to safeguard them for me whilst my home is not safe from being "burgled".
Burgled of possession that arent technically yours in the first place? You buy something on credit, you pay for it. You owe someone money, you pay them back or deal with the consequences. These people get plenty of warning and gettig bailiffs/ sheriffs in is the last resort usually.
Or shall I just cancel the Direct Debit on my sofa, mortgage, etc and save myself a few quid?
I thought the guys were very nice and gave the people more than enough chances. Like the guy whose sister was meant to move after 6 months, they faffed about longer than needed and i sure wouldn't give them as long if their contracted lease ended yet they refuse to go
Those people deserve zero sympathy, where exactly was the housing benefit going for the last 12 months? On televisions by the looks of it.
Comments
Also they are not kitted up with stab vests and are a lot younger
Some folk are their own worst enemies with little or no sense of money management. I'm referring in particular to the daft guy with the Jaguar. What possesses anyone to buy an expensive 'up market' car on finance?
Don't they realise a very decent used car can be bought for as little as £1500 cash? Ahh....it might not be one that will 'impress the neighbours', but at least it will be paid for!
Why bother paying though, the council will have to rehouse them even though they made themselves intentionally homeless, because they have Kids. They will probably end up giving them a deposit for a private rental and the whole merry go round will start again.
Those two should have been deported back to wherever they came from. >:(
Ample warning and notice was given which they chose to ignore - wherever they originate from I doubt they would be eligible for "emergency housing" or anything else come to that.
These are the sort of freeloaders that give immigrants a bad name.
People talk this on the Benefits threads, but in reality is doesn't solve anything.
It's a short term gain, with no long term benefit.
This doesn't take into account that the sale with have little effect on the debt either if it is that large.
They may have bought them prior to getting into financial trouble.
The sale of personal goods bring little money, that why even repossession of goods rarely covers the debt, unless of course the person has high value things.
With 1 TV i can understand selling it wont solve anything but 4 is stupid , who needs 4 TV's no one. They could have paid the rent , if they can afford 4 TV's then its no problem. The TV's would have paid most if not all of the rent arrears anyway.
Also i read the post from the son of mike and i think i am hormonal or something because i just burst into tears. I was reading out the post to my fiance & was choked up for some reason. You see dedications on shows but never get to read first hand from a relative the affect. I did watch the episode and wasn't entirely sure who it was , i wasn't paying much attention last night with i regret a it now. Of what i did catch i remember commenting to my fiance he seemed a nice guy helping out the woman.
The tv's could have been years old. I have got lots of big tv's and consoles in my house, but If i lose my job they won't pay the mortgage will they?
Alternatively I would make sure that friends and relatives get hold of various things to safeguard them for me whilst my home is not safe from being "burgled".
I always always side with the "little guy" in this trumped up society that is up its own arse frankly in terms of the strict rules it allows predatory capitalist companies to use to suppress ordinary people.
Logically I would have smashed the car up far more than the man in the Liverpool estate did, if I was going to get done for criminal damage anyway, the more damage it sustains the less that the bailiffs/finance company can get back for it after being legally able to go out and harrass people, he could have easily took the mirrors off, put each window in, let down the tyres, snapped the windscreen wipers off and put a lot of dints all over it and then the car would have been worthless and not worth the while of being taken away.
He only smashed one window, which would be one repair they had to make, the rest was fine. But he had plenty of time pacing about in the street which could have been used to create more irrepairable damage.
As for the morality of the whole situation, how about laws preventing these awful pay day loans and high interest rates predating on people who are likely to turn to them, they then use their heavy handed bailiff system and blame their victims when they can't pay it back. Eg that man in the Midlands about to be made homeless didn't really owe as high an amount as £30,000, it was all immoral inflated charges.
Same here, sort of, CRT's anyway. It['s a vindictive and mean spirited way of thinking that people have, that debts should be solved with recourse to peoples possessions which to me have a value apart from the money they may be worth.
Bailiffs really should be outlawed for the "theft" (don't know why I'm bothering with the speech marks actually because it IS theft) that they are legally able to carry out, it's always good to point out, they aren't allowed to take people's things in Scotland. It would be one less programme for Channel 5 if we could get rid of them here in England.
You say the taxi driver didn't bother to move out in his notice period? Who was helping them, no one, they had no solutions.
He should be getting supported living because the programme revealed he had pneumonia.
As an aside he had a copy of "Dance 93" on CD which I've still got.
What would happen if he couldn't get everything out on time?
For people here on DS that predictably side with authority on the bailiffs (shudder), what do you value more, money or people?
Yes, it's such a crap argument I hate seeing it, you cannot sell a few possessions just to get one months rent or something it's ludicrous.
Then the non savvy ones who are usually the unfortunate general public like the woman with the people carrier who had fell behind with the repayments from being in hospital it was hinted, where debt is a one off time and not deliberate.
How exactly are they 'legalised thugs'? If you buy something then don't pay for it what exactly do you expect to happen?
so no one should bother paying for stuff they've bought then
I thought the guys were very nice and gave the people more than enough chances. Like the guy whose sister was meant to move after 6 months, they faffed about longer than needed and i sure wouldn't give them as long if their contracted lease ended yet they refuse to go
Burgled of possession that arent technically yours in the first place? You buy something on credit, you pay for it. You owe someone money, you pay them back or deal with the consequences. These people get plenty of warning and gettig bailiffs/ sheriffs in is the last resort usually.
Or shall I just cancel the Direct Debit on my sofa, mortgage, etc and save myself a few quid?
Those people deserve zero sympathy, where exactly was the housing benefit going for the last 12 months? On televisions by the looks of it.