Skuldsaneringstråden

[Dickazzo]

Då var det inte tidsaspekten du skrev först utan skadeståndet. Misstänkte det.
Kämpa på. -

Nä men varför jag trodde det var för att när jag fick beskedet över telefon så läste dom bara upp första stycket, och där står det att "personen ska inte ha möjlighet betala sina skulder inom överskådlig tid". That's it.

Jag blev ju så klart väldigt fundersam på hur dom kan motivera det så. Så jag ringde istället direkt till handläggarna på skuldsanering istället för den allmänna kundtjänsten. Då klarnade allt och jag fick en helt rimlig förklaring till bedömningen. Och i brevet finns mer bedömningar än det som lästes upp i början. Så jag förstår faktiskt hur dom tänkt, men jag tycker man kan tänka på ett annat sätt också, vet inte om ni förstår hur jag menar

Dom är rätt trevliga faktist om man är det själv, jag har som tur är uppnåt en stabilitet i mitt mående som gör att detta avslag inte påverkar mig med fruktansvärda konsekvenser. Kan tillägga att så har det inte alltid varit.

Det är bara på't igen! Glad för Er som lyckats.

 

[Ny2018]

Nä men varför jag trodde det var för att när jag fick beskedet över telefon så läste dom bara upp första stycket, och där står det att "personen ska inte ha möjlighet betala sina skulder inom överskådlig tid". That's it.

Jag blev ju så klart väldigt fundersam på hur dom kan motivera det så. Så jag ringde istället direkt till handläggarna på skuldsanering istället för den allmänna kundtjänsten. Då klarnade allt och jag fick en helt rimlig förklaring till bedömningen. Och i brevet finns mer bedömningar än det som lästes upp i början. Så jag förstår faktiskt hur dom tänkt, men jag tycker man kan tänka på ett annat sätt också, vet inte om ni förstår hur jag menar

Dom är rätt trevliga faktist om man är det själv, jag har som tur är uppnåt en stabilitet i mitt mående som gör att detta avslag inte påverkar mig med fruktansvärda konsekvenser. Kan tillägga att så har det inte alltid varit.

Det är bara på't igen! Glad för Er som lyckats.

Förstod att du inte fick helheten för det lät helt orimligt med avslag med de uppgifterna du angav.

 

[Loppan]

Men mina borgenärer får också tillbaka 95% av det jag är skyldig dom. Om det har något med det att göra att jag hade turen och få behålla den.

Mina borgenärer får tillbaka ca 54%, och jag fick behålla min skatteåterbäring på 44000kr förra året då jag precis fått beslut (slutet av feb)

 

[Cootje1976]

Det är väl något av beneluxänderna som har det så om jag minns rätt. Man får nej på låneansökan för risken att det vips blev skuldsanering i stället för betala enligt plan

I hope I can and can respond to this in English since my Swedish is not as good yet;


I am from one of the Benelux countries, and I have read your reply, and from my experience as a Dutchman first, and a resident in Sweden, I think that the notion that banks are not lending because they are afraid that people will get insolvent is incorrect; that is the deregulation nonsense that the financial institutions try to shove down our throats in the Benelux.

1: we have a simple law that the lender (the bank) needs to make sure that the borrower has the means to pay the loan back in full. Here in Sweden the law shoots all the blame back to the borrower at all times. No exception. As a consumer in Sweden, you are always on the hook, whereas in the Netherlands at least, the both lender and borrower are equally responsible; the lender has to make absolutely sure that at the moment of the loan application, the borrower had the means and ability to repay the loan.

2: we have an institution in the Netherlands like UC, BKR (Bureau of Credit Registration). The role of which is to make sure that no one borrows more than they can pay back, and every loan gets registered there (every loan above 200 Euro is registered!). There is, based on income a cap (private loans can be in total approx. 1,5 times the yearly income!) on how much money individual can borrow, and that can not be ignored by the banks or financial institutions; one may say it is overreacting, but the state does not want people to be overwhelmed and over-indebted, so there are protections in place.

3: there is an actual interest rate cap in the Netherlands for private individuals; there are firm caps in place to curb predatory lending.
On https://www.actuelerentestanden.nl you can see the effect on private loans, our rates are lower on the highest interest rates compared to Sweden.
We have no payday loans with rates as high as here. Ferratum for instance is also active in the Netherlands and if you check their interest rates, you can clearly see the cap in effect 13.99% is the absolute top they can ask.
We have 2 stipulated interest rates in the Netherlands, 2% which is the base rate based on the market rate for banks (the rate at which banks lend money to other financial institutions), and a firm cap around 13 and 15% based on the type of loan for consumers.

4: on the contrary to popular belief, the rates we have in the Netherlands for debt restructuring are low, and extremely hard to get, and it is the old way; you get an administrator assigned, and it is issued through a judgment by a judge. 3 years of the absolute minimum, but after that you are free, and after 5 years you can take a loan again. The reasons for it being rare and hard to get is because there are so many fail-saves in place to prevent over-indebtedness, and the fail-safe usually gets triggered earlier, resulting in a proper payment plan so the borrower and the lender are planning and protecting their mutual agreement.

What I have seen in my 4 years here and reading this forum is 2 things, maybe 3;
People are massively indebted here, because of the financial deregulation in the 90's;
High unsustainable interest rates on consumer lending;
In all cases the borrower is at fault if things go south.

The thing is after reading and seeing how people in Sweden are generally treated as cattle when they can't afford to make payments by the very system that is supposed to protect and care for them. Well, no government should let people be indebted until their expiration; having a person paying off to what is referred to as the Crown Guard for more than 10 years is a fault of the system, and not the person's stuck in it.

And besides of all the regulations in the Benelux, the banks are fine and lending money to consumers. And making a ton of profit nonetheless.

Had to change some things after proofreading the text.

 

[Kronofogden]

4: on the contrary to popular belief, the rates we have in the Netherlands for debt restructuring are low, and extremely hard to get, and it is the old way; you get an administrator assigned, and it is issued through a judgment by a judge. 3 years of the absolute minimum, but after that you are free, and after 5 years you can take a loan again. The reasons for it being rare and hard to get is because there are so many fail-saves in place to prevent over-indebtedness, and the fail-safe usually gets triggered earlier, resulting in a proper payment plan so the borrower and the lender are planning and protecting their mutual agreement.

Precis. Att få skuldsanering i andra EU-länder är svårt. I England MÅSTE man ha blivit satt i personlig konkurs och ha ett jobb som ger max 500 pund i månaden för att få skuldsanering.

Även i Holland finns det folk som belånar sig över öronen och sen blir av med jobb, sjuka, fastnar i missbruk eller dylikt och hamnar i skuldfällan. Av dem är det nog många som skulle föredragit den svenska modellen.

 

[Kimsan72]

Precis. Att få skuldsanering i andra EU-länder är svårt. I England MÅSTE man ha blivit satt i personlig konkurs och ha ett jobb som ger max 500 pund i månaden för att få skuldsanering.

Även i Holland finns det folk som belånar sig över öronen och sen blir av med jobb, sjuka, fastnar i missbruk eller dylikt och hamnar i skuldfällan. Av dem är det nog många som skulle föredragit den svenska modellen.

Tror inte gemene Holländare hade velat ha vårt skattetryck dock

 

[Mirakel]

Hmm... om inte jag missminner mig helt så har folk här ute som skickade in ansökningar i december fått besked nu om inledande alternativt avslag...
Tror bland annat att @Mirakel skickade väll in sin ansökan vid juletid, eller?!
@Bridget och @caroline likaså...

jag skickade in 5 december fick inledande 12/4.

 

[Cootje1976]

Precis. Att få skuldsanering i andra EU-länder är svårt. I England MÅSTE man ha blivit satt i personlig konkurs och ha ett jobb som ger max 500 pund i månaden för att få skuldsanering.

Även i Holland finns det folk som belånar sig över öronen och sen blir av med jobb, sjuka, fastnar i missbruk eller dylikt och hamnar i skuldfällan. Av dem är det nog många som skulle föredragit den svenska modellen.

Yes you are correct; it 'seems' harder to get debt restructuring abroad for instance in the Netherlands (I have no idea how that works in the UK though, so my reference is the Netherlands, and prefer to keep it there), and yes the problem of people lending more than they can chew is not just a problem here, but everywhere there are individuals that have that issue. I was however referring to the height of the indebtedness to begin with that is usually if properly regulated different. In the Netherlands we do believe that everyone deserves a second chance, and that is paramount in the application. Also we have seen such a drop in the applications there due to the fact that there are less people getting in trouble, and on the 17.08 million people (2017) over there we've had only 8300 (2017) people that went into the debt restructuring, due to the fact that we also have a step before the debt restructuring that involves both the lender and the borrower to come to an agreement for a payment plan that is reasonable, which needs to work for both parties but should be aimed to lessening the burden on the borrower; usually at that step it leads to a write-off of interest and a part of the loan to make it work for both. Banks usually agree to that due to the fact that we have not that many defaults on loans in the Netherlands per capita.

If that is not agreed, then the Judge usually will award the debt restructuring for 3 years, and that is definite so the lender might lose more than the interest and the principal. Usually when that happens the lender is lucky if he gets 20% of the principal at all.
In the end it looks more difficult to obtain, but thanks to the presteps there can be solutions for both lender and borrower to have a mutually satisfying agreement, since both can loose out if they do not agree. And that step is legally binding. There is more emphasis on helping the borrower as the weaker party than the lender, they usually lose out in court, and since the term is 3 years for the settlement, they lose more than if they agree in the mutual negotiations.

Also people with unsustainable loans (extremely over indebtedness) usually get approval quicker; the caps on loans that we have and the caps on the interest rates are based on a EU recommendation, and that is usually leading there. A person that earns 20.000 Euro after tax a year should not be able to loan more than 30.000 Euro (excluding mortgage!). If a person has double that, then the banks that loaned out the money after the cap basically loose everything, since they have a fiduciary duty to also take care of their customer. There is where the strict regulation comes in.

In that case for people from the Netherlands (or the Benelux for that matter) or even Swedes that get into trouble here financially due to unforeseen circumstances, it makes sense for them to just pick up and leave and go back and apply for debt restructuring there, including the loans from Sweden. Due to the regulation there it would be approved, unless there can be an agreement set up that lenders in Sweden would never agree to... And then after 3 years the person is considered debt free. Since it will then be valid EU wide for the included loans, theoretically you'd have a blank slate.

 

[Mirakel]

D

Skickade in 11/10 2018 inledande 7/3 2019 godkände betalplanen igår.

Det var snabbt beslut! Grattis!

 

[Cootje1976]

Tror inte gemene Holländare hade velat ha vårt skattetryck dock

Agreed!