Mate one young whipper snapper ended up in court over a fender bender. He didn't have insurance, which on it's own isn't so bad, but when his mother got involved and stopped the young lad from paying (purely an emotional action) HE was the one that ended up in a small claims court...and when his mother instructed him not to front the court, HE was the one that had his credit rating downgraded...and HE was 19 years old. All the claimant paid/payed (sp?) was the $300 bucks to have the fender bender repaired, it didn't even warrant an excess claim for the insurance....the court did the rest, he even got his $12.50 small claims court processing fee reimbursed. On a side note...if you've ever been to small claims courts you can see/here the other cases going on around you. Half of them are individuals chasing large building companies for the dodgy houses they've built and the other half are divorces.... the language and actions of the latter can be quite vitriolic. I overheard one guy say "Then I'll sell the house for a dollar...I won't get any money but neither will she!"... If you're after a bargain...hang around a small claims court.
That poor kid, what on earth was his mother thinking. It's shows how easy it is to take for granted a normal upbringing. Only been to a court once for jury duity, small claims sounds like a good day out, I'll bring the popcorn!
It is misleading bcos you associate that specific car brand w that type of behavior. it can happen to any car and it is up to the behavior of the person. Case in point, I have a Beamer and I bought it fully paid. So at the end of the day if you are responsible then go ahead buy a Beamer and you would still be ok. If you are not responsible then even a hyundai is not for you as you could still default.
Yeah, but if you plot New Car Purchased ( by Make ie. Audi, BMW, TOYOTA, Hyundai, etc ) VS % of those who are now being pursued by the company for unpaid debts. You should find that the BMW buyers are more chased after than TOYOTA buyers ( in percentage terms ) ! But hang on, most TOYOTA buyers used debt too in order to buy these cars !! But TOYOTAS are usually bought by workers/producers whereas the BMW is bought by the other category within our economic caste. So once the fluff has evaporated those ' marketing managers ' or the like found themselves without the cashflow, inability to refinance, and they are going under. I dont have the figures to back above up..
The assumption you used is very flimsy as it can also be argued 'marketing managers' or people from a higher economic caste (I am using your own words as an example) who are financially responsible have the means and the motive to pay of the vehicle they purchased without having to 'loan' the money while workers/producers do not have that ability thus if they lose their jobs they have no extra resources to service a loan. It is shallow to think that just because a BMW is an expensive car automatically it means that those who own one have to loan in comparison to cheaper cars. It is such outright generalisations that shift the financial responsibility from the person to the object. The whole point of the matter is that if people are financially responsible and buy things within their means then they will be ok irregardless of the item whether it is the expensive or cheap is secondary.
Dont apologise as I know your not singling any particular person but my main point was you can buy all the toys you want (as long as you can afford it), if you cant then dont.
What this article illustrates though is how debt can literally ruin your life if you're not knowledgable on the details. Even this thread is raising a few eyebrows on just how far lenders can go to get back their pound of flesh and more - and are more than willing to do so. Debt in the context of a business function or to secure an essential need like shelter we can certain debate the merits of, but this notion nowadays of using debt for every frivilous purchase is really what's dragging people down into the mud. Now there's a strong case for misinformation in the arguement, where lenders are failing in their duty of care to properly educate borrowers on the risks associated with debt - or you can look at it purely as an educational issue of the masses who live under this constant ideal of entitlement as the status quo. But there is no mistaking that predatory lending exists and is thriving across not only Australia, but the entire world. Uneducated people with an itch and debt are like fire and petrol and sadly, most of the world is ablaze at the moment. I'm content to remain debt free and own 100% what little I have and simply work and save hard for what I want. Strangely, many folks (even on this forum) find such a notion foolish and that if you're not using leveraged debt to 'get ahead' you deserve to stay stuck in a life of mediocrity. That's a different arguement altogether, but you can see where this leads in the discussion between debtor ideology and saving ideology. For all the virtues of debt being expoused by the debtors, there's no denying that as we move ahead, more and more people are learning through bitter experience that walking into debt without being very careful and cautious is simply exposing yourself to financial ruin.
touch wood, my 1993 car with 320,000-odd km on the clock is going great. It's too handy to let go. It looks like it's seen better days but the engine is just fine. Why get another one when this one will do. I'm not out to impress anyone... although i wish the inside was cleaner.
I don't like demonising debt. In my eyes debt is bad only because it is dishonest debt created from nothing. Otherwise being debt free is great; though its sometimes just philosophical. When you rent, you know that you are indebted to the degree you take out a lease. If you don't pay then you end up booted out on your bum. So while you don't pay interest directly you are in a debt of sorts.
I tend to group my financial outgoings as debt, obligations, or expenses. The rest is for entertainment and stacking. I'd say a lease is an obligation, whereas month-to-month an expense. I wouldn't consider rent as debt.
That'd be a huge fail. I do believe that assets are required to be sold for fair market value (or more). My mate went through a messy divorce where the wife spent 15 years wages trying to destroy him (they saved one wage lived off the other)
