The "Official Offer" Letter To Banks

MarkAnthony

The Mustard wrote: »

Let's be clear about this. You were asked to produce a legal citation for a case which shows that this 'official offer' carry on actually works in court.

You failed to produce anything of any relevance whatsover.

Now you are banging on about proof of substantial performance and advising me to ask 'my boss' about it.

You don't know what you are talking about, you can't back up what you say, and now you are just posting inane drivel.

He's talking about Robbo obviously :pac:

Pat Mustard

Ah yes, the Dear Leader.

I wonder what he would think of all of this?

Ken.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPpv9lAtr8M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fnmhj58o0k

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Ken.

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Lets set up our own cult, with hookers and blow and blackjack.

Beano

ken wrote: »

Lets set up our own cult, with hookers and blow and blackjack.

the blackjack should be optional.

FreudianSlippers

kitser wrote: »

I see that the gauntlet has been thrown down to a select few of the posters to this thread by peoples internet radio. i've seen his request for you guys to come on air and discuss the merits of this thread. are you going to take up the offer??

We get anonymity on this site just as everyone else does. I'd debate them in a heartbeat, if it wasn't potentially damaging to my career and to my own safety. Not to mention, as it has already been pointed out, that there is no winning in a "debate" with freemen.

Robbo

hullaballoo wrote: »

Well, you've marked your card now, Tom!


Can anyone else remember electing Robbo as our cult leader?

I'm obviously a ****e cult leader because I haven't yet managed to extract any filthy lucre out of my accolytes. Perhaps I should run a cash-for-paper scam or raise money for a "legal challenge" that will never happen. Seems to work well for other cult leaders...

FreudianSlippers

Froststop wrote: »

Oops!! Livingrobot is probably more legaly informed than those you refer too!! lol

Livingrobot is probably more legally informed than those to whom you refer. :cool:

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Gutted that I didn't make this list :pac:

I hate the way the 's' in my name drops down a line. FreudianSlipper just doesn't make sense... who only has one slipper?!

Robbo wrote: »

I'm obviously a ****e cult leader because I haven't yet managed to extract any filthy lucre out of my accolytes. Perhaps I should run a cash-for-paper scam or raise money for a "legal challenge" that will never happen. Seems to work well for other cult leaders...

Our leader has arrived!

FreudianSlippers

Froststop wrote: »

I agree Mark, however as I said, it's not to be used as a get out of paying your debt. It's to keep a roof over your head and prevent eviction provided you prove you can't afford to pay the full loan. You must prove you can only pay the "maximum" you can afford after paying the bills required to survive and not the "miniscule amount" as suggested by the OP. If the loan contract requires a repayment of e.g €600/m and you can only afford €100/m after necessities to live. By paying €25/week you prove four fold to perform on the debt and no judge will rule against you unless he thinks your pulling a fast one. When writing the official offer to the bank, staple a cheque for the first payment to the letter, if the cheque is cashed, it is taken that the bank accepted the offer. If they return the cheque, send it again and again as this can be understood as refusal to accept payment.

That's my take on the Official Offer. I feel the wording (miniscule amount) could put someone in an undesirable position and is unfair to allow anyone to unknowingly offer a bank €10/week if they can afford more per week.

What you're advocating is negotiating with your bank, not some magic bullet and certainly not the doctrine of substantial performance at work.

littlemac1980

Haha - I made the list. hahahahaha!!!!!

:cool: