Can't pay or we take it away

Mr Bump

Mr Bump

From under the bridge
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,944
Name
Sophia aka Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
But they all have massive flat screen tellys iphones and half decent cars.
 
Bit stuck for a context here?
 
So. It's not just poor people that can go bust.

I'm in business and have a house full of nice things, but if circumstances changed, my business could fail
 
ecoleman said:
So. It's not just poor people that can go bust.

I'm in business and have a house full of nice things, but if circumstances changed, my business could fail
Click to expand...
If you are registered as a LLC then whilst you can indeed go 'bust', any debt is against the company and, unless your house full of 'nice things' are registered as company assets, they are not at risk of seizure. The only debtors you cannot 'ignore' are HMRC and Companies House who are aggressive in recovery, the rest of the debtors are down the pecking order list.

I had some problems getting paid by some very large well known companies who were quite happy to go beyond 120 days in paying my invoices for work done. Court action was a complete runaround.

I am still puzzled at the context and point of this thread.
 
I am still puzzled at the context and point of this thread.
Click to expand...

I think it relates to a very nasty looking TV programme I have seen trailers for, appears to be about bailiffs removing goods from debtors

Along the lines of equally sordid episodes depicting benefit recipients and other unpleasantness that now passes as entertainment.

Some I have seen advertised look to be similar to Victorian freak shows, what are we becoming to enjoy watching others pain and misery

Anyway Autumnwatch is on this week, much more pleasing on the eyes
 
Last edited:
They all have flat screen TVs and iPhones etc, all on credit, which they never pay and court comes along and they just offer a small amount.
 
Thanks Tijuana and B1ts - I rarely watch TV and the types this thread is about is really of zero interest to me. There is enough crap going on outside my front door as it is, I do not need to bring it inside too.

I do listen to radio - The Reith Lecture is just starting.......

Steve
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Hugh Jarse said:
If you are registered as a LLC then whilst you can indeed go 'bust', any debt is against the company and, unless your house full of 'nice things' are registered as company assets, they are not at risk of seizure. The only debtors you cannot 'ignore' are HMRC and Companies House who are aggressive in recovery, the rest of the debtors are down the pecking order list.

I had some problems getting paid by some very large well known companies who were quite happy to go beyond 120 days in paying my invoices for work done. Court action was a complete runaround.

I am still puzzled at the context and point of this thread.
Click to expand...

Not everybody has a limited company. Many, including myself are sole traders.
Forgetting business owners, how about those that have good jobs and are suddenly made redundant and can't pay their bills?

Are they not allowed all the luxuries they purchased when they were earning?


Pretty sure the context is the TV program and the fact that whilst the bailiffs are their to collect debts, the debtors always seem to have luxuries, that they apparently shouldn't have.
 
Last edited:
ecoleman said:
Not everybody has a limited company. Many, including myself are sole traders.
Forgetting business owners, how about those that have good jobs and are suddenly made redundant and can't pay their bills?

Are they not allowed all the luxuries they purchased when they were earning?


Pretty sure the context is the TV program and the fact that whilst the bailiffs are their to collect debts, the debtors always seem to have luxuries, that they apparently shouldn't have.
Click to expand...
Depends on who 'owns' the items and how they are 'purchased'.

At the end of the day, the sole trader has very little real protection from those he/she owes money to.

in the case of goodies in the home, again it comes down to who has ownership.

seizure of goods depends on ownership, so if a rental purchase (the Bright house model) is used, the ownership is the suppliers not the renter's.

If the sole trader is taken to court for outstanding debt to a supplier, then seizure and sale of goods in the home can be ordered. The Limited Liability Company model has it's protection in it's very title. Debt is enshrined in the company and unless a contrivance to defraud or illegal trading is identified, the owner has protection from debtors going to seizure of property outside of what are 'company assets'.

So if the TV programme is about unemployed/benefits people losing 'their' goods, the hint of what the seizure of goods is actually about, is likely to be the rental end of the market and the enforcement of signed agreements.

The canny will avoid letting the recovery agents into their homes through open doors and windows so recovery then goes to court action. all messy as there is a tiered process .

Everything sits in the method of the primary debt. Secured or unsecured.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Depends on who 'owns' the items and how they are 'purchased'.

At the end of the day, the sole trader has very little real protection from those he/she owes money to.

in the case of goodies in the home, again it comes down to who has ownership.

seizure of goods depends on ownership, so if a rental purchase (the Bright house model) is used, the ownership is the suppliers not the renter's.

If the sole trader is taken to court for outstanding debt to a supplier, then seizure and sale of goods in the home can be ordered. The Limited Liability Company model has it's protection in it's very title. Debt is enshrined in the company and unless a contrivance to defraud or illegal trading is identified, the owner has protection from debtors going to seizure of property outside of what are 'company assets'.

So if the TV programme is about unemployed/benefits people losing 'their' goods, the hint of what the seizure of goods is actually about, is likely to be the rental end of the market and the enforcement of signed agreements.

The canny will avoid letting the recovery agents into their homes through open doors and windows so recovery then goes to court action. all messy as there is a tiered process .

Everything sits in the method of the primary debt. Secured or unsecured.
Click to expand...


Yes, I know how it works and I'm not say goods should not be seized if a debt is owed.

My response is to the OP who seems to be offended by the fact that somebody in debt may have a large TV or other luxuries.
 
oh i am not offended im amused, in my world if times are hard your money goes on essentials it seems in this world its luxuries first essentials later.

yes its the TV program
 
It's not always a case of Can't Pay, on many occasions it is Won't Pay. In some cases it is down to hardship, but others it is down to subletting property or just not paying up at all for as long as possible before moving onto the next property and doing it all over again to another "greedy" landlord.
 
Some of the debts on it are just insane things like people just constantly ignoring and the fees just pile up. £1000's on top of the origonal debts.
just wow, yet last night some people were evicted when the landlord correctly asked for his house back to live in and they refused.
 
Mr Bump said:
Some of the debts on it are just insane things like people just constantly ignoring and the fees just pile up. £1000's on top of the origonal debts.
just wow, yet last night some people were evicted when the landlord correctly asked for his house back to live in and they refused.
Click to expand...
the guy complaining to his partner on the phone that the bailiffs were making him miss the horse racing and that it'd cost him money.. he deserves all he gets..
 
neil_g said:
the guy complaining to his partner on the phone that the bailiffs were making him miss the horse racing and that it'd cost him money.. he deserves all he gets..
Click to expand...

yeah spooky
 
Mr Bump said:
the context is discussion hence the name of the forum really.
Click to expand...
Which is fine IF the reader (me) can actually read your mind as you assume that everyone reading your thread opener actually watches TV and, if they do, actually watches programmes made to feed those whose lives are so narrow that they sit and relish and tut at how others live their lives. What I call Daily Mail fodder.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Which is fine IF the reader (me) can actually read your mind as you assume that everyone reading your thread opener actually watches TV and, if they do, actually watches programmes made to feed those whose lives are so narrow that they sit and relish and tut at how others live their lives. What I call Daily Mail fodder.
Click to expand...

i assume nothing thats the whole point its just discussion, if you didn't get it you should habe just not bothered i suppose.
most of the stuff in this sub forum is stuff and nonsense and daily mail fodder.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Which is fine IF the reader (me) can actually read your mind as you assume that everyone reading your thread opener actually watches TV and, if they do, actually watches programmes made to feed those whose lives are so narrow that they sit and relish and tut at how others live their lives. What I call Daily Mail fodder.
Click to expand...
The irony is that the Jeremy Kyle/Vine fan club looks very much like a circular ar$$-kicking contest to those looking in from outside it. One part of the audience poking sticks at another part of the same audience.

If you're watching Can't Pay Or We'll Take It Away you're probably doing so on a super-sized flatscreen tv whilst texting on the latest iPhone with a council racing white VAG or Ford Asbo on the driveway. Odds are the TV's paid for but the phone's on contract and the car's on the never-never.

TV audiences tend to gravitate towards shows portraying people like them (or portraying people that look like how they see themselves).
 
Mr Bump said:
i assume nothing thats the whole point its just discussion, if you didn't get it you should habe just not bothered i suppose.
most of the stuff in this sub forum is stuff and nonsense and daily mail fodder.
Click to expand...
Which, when necessary, I choose to challenge or inform a different take on matters.

HAD you contextualised you post at the very first instance then I should have, and would have, taken the view of the subject as being by knuckle draggers about knuckle draggers and by-passed the whole thing.

Enjoy your 'discussion'......
 
Does it matter? If someone owns (or whatever) some nice stuff - then more fool the companies who gave them the means to purchase them. They credit they presumably can't repay to appeR on the program. Doesn't hurt you of I
 
boyfalldown said:
Does it matter? If someone owns (or whatever) some nice stuff - then more fool the companies who gave them the means to purchase them. They credit they presumably can't repay to appeR on the program. Doesn't hurt you of I
Click to expand...
A lot of the time it is a case of them being able to have nice things because they haven't paid other bills. Ie they have a big TV, top of the range phones, games consols etc all paid for, but they haven't paid rent for six months and have dragged their heels through the court process when the landlord wants them out.

What I found suprising was that debt collectors cannot take away your only TV. If you got into debt, had a great big flat screen in the lounge and a cheap small tv in your bedroom, they can only take one, and would obviously go for the more expensive to cover costs. However if you had a £5000 TV and it is your only one, they can't touch it. Bonkers.
 
Alastair said:
The irony is that the Jeremy Kyle/Vine fan club looks very much like a circular ar$$-kicking contest to those looking in from outside it. One part of the audience poking sticks at another part of the same audience.

If you're watching Can't Pay Or We'll Take It Away you're probably doing so on a super-sized flatscreen tv whilst texting on the latest iPhone with a council racing white VAG or Ford Asbo on the driveway. Odds are the TV's paid for but the phone's on contract and the car's on the never-never.

TV audiences tend to gravitate towards shows portraying people like them (or portraying people that look like how they see themselves).
Click to expand...
I watch it from time to time if nothing else is on. The TV is a 32" flatscreen. Ford is Race Red not Asbo Orange, phone is a Samsung and not on contract. All bought outright at point of sale so I'm intrigued to know where you got your probability.
 
I love it.

I'm sure the Scottish lad is one of the forum's not so vocal (these days) members
 
Not my sort of programme. IMO seems akin to watching a public hanging of a starving person who stole some bread.

Also, I know if someone owed me money I would want it back, nonetheless I can't help thinking you have to be some sort of a **** to be a bailiff. ( I am aware this is an emotional rather than a rational view)
 
bass_junkie83 said:
A lot of the time it is a case of them being able to have nice things because they haven't paid other bills. Ie they have a big TV, top of the range phones, games consols etc all paid for, but they haven't paid rent for six months and have dragged their heels through the court process when the landlord wants them out.
Click to expand...

Firstly how do you know that? For sure? And secondly as per my original post how does it hurt you?

bass_junkie83 said:
What I found suprising was that debt collectors cannot take away your only TV. If you got into debt, had a great big flat screen in the lounge and a cheap small tv in your bedroom, they can only take one, and would obviously go for the more expensive to cover costs. However if you had a £5000 TV and it is your only one, they can't touch it. Bonkers.
Click to expand...
Surprising and wrong.
 
boyfalldown said:
Firstly how do you know that? For sure? And secondly as per my original post how does it hurt you?
Click to expand...
Because I have seen the program. Although I'm not an avid follower I have seen a few episodes and in fairness to them, and in contrast to most of these types of programs, they do seem to be really quite balanced and provide a back story as to why the situation has gotten to this point. They seem to show a pretty even split between people who have genuinely screwed up and those that simply try to get through life paying as little as possible. Not that it needs spelling you to which is which, it's clear by the way the different debtors handle the situation.

And it doesn't hurt me in the slightest. From your original post it comes across that you have not seen the program but was of the understanding it is about reclaiming the very goods they hadn't paid for. I was merely explaining how the back stories are often a little more convoluted than that.
 
I think it's a great program! And I don't owe anybody anything!
 
Alastair said:
If you're watching Can't Pay Or We'll Take It Away you're probably doing so on a super-sized flatscreen tv whilst texting on the latest iPhone with a council racing white VAG or Ford Asbo on the driveway. Odds are the TV's paid for but the phone's on contract and the car's on the never-never.

TV audiences tend to gravitate towards shows portraying people like them (or portraying people that look like how they see themselves).
Click to expand...

i was watching it on my 10 year old (paid for) average size plasma tv, while using my £300 android phone (again paid for with SIM only deal), with my average size german plus size hatchback on the driveway (you guessed it, paid for).

what do i win, other than proving you're talking out of your rectum?
 
boyfalldown said:
I really would like you to quote where I said that. Can't? Didn't think so
Click to expand...
I can't believe I'm being drawn into this but ok.


boyfalldown said:
If someone owns (or whatever) some nice stuff - then more fool the companies who gave them the means to purchase them. The credit they presumably can't repay to appear on the program.
Click to expand...

bass_junkie83 said:
. From your original post it comes across that you have not seen the program....
Click to expand...

So no, I can't quote where you said that, but then as you can see from my own quote, I never said that you hadn't watched the program. I clearly said that it came across that you hadn't, based upon the fact that statement you made on what the show is about is not quite right. From that I made the assumption you had not seen it.

Now I know this is an internet forum, but there really is no need to be quite so highly strung. Save that s*** for mumsnet. :D
 
Didn't watch it in my paid for house on my paid for normal widescreen TV , think it's 32in, payg (10 quid top up every few months) non smartphone and eighteen year old very paid for Japanese car at the back of the garden under the sycamore trees

No idea what any of that means, but do know these reality programmes are cheap to make nonsense​
 
Last edited:
bass_junkie83 said:
I can't believe I'm being drawn into this but ok.






So no, I can't quote where you said that, but then as you can see from my own quote, I never said that you hadn't watched the program. I clearly said that it came across that you hadn't, based upon the fact that statement you made on what the show is about is not quite right. From that I made the assumption you had not seen it.
Click to expand...


Assumptions make you look an arse don't they ;) ?
 
Mr Bump said:
But they all have massive flat screen tellys iphones and half decent cars.
Click to expand...
Wow, that is really spooky, you mention TVs and there is actually a daytime TV program with exactly the same name. The coincidence astounds me.
 
Can't decide between watching the latest instalment, or the second half of the Manchester derby
 
nickEnackEnoo said:
Can't decide between watching the latest instalment, or the second half of the Manchester derby
Click to expand...

The third alternative is painting your radiator and watching that dry. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top