Hattie does the bank take into account how much someone has when deciding if they can pay the loan back?

Aren't we getting a lot of SCAMMERS and SPAMMERS at present.

======= Date Modified 02 Apr 2009 09:19:00 =======
============= Edited by a Moderator =============
Bad credit History takes into account how much someone has when deciding if they can pay the loan back and the referred debt .

Content removed - advertising.

This might not be a popular thing to say but...

If you have £2000 worth of bad debt, should you really be taking out more loans? Particularly in the current economic climate when the job market isn't very healthy? Your comment:

suggests some degree of obliviousness to the current situation. You are aware of the state of the economy, right?

How about working for a year to wipe out your debt and build up some savings? Or doing your Masters part time so that you can work alongside?

Urm, the original poster posted this in August 2007 and last logged in in September 2007. I think it is safe to say that they probably didn't get their career development loan.

Sometimes a career development loan is the only way for some to fund their MA. Sometimes the advice to work for a year and somehow save the money to do it is quite misplaced. If one is to save the money - what is one to live on for a year? Part-time might be possible but still the fees need to be paid?

Oops! Didn't notice the date of the original post! Still, I stand by what I say about adding big debt to existing bad debt.

I'm not saying that career development loans are always a bad thing. But I do question the culture that has developed in society that says "I want X, and I want X as soon as possible, so if I can't afford it I will go to any lengths to borrow money". It's that culture, and the banks' oh-to-willing compliance with it (and nurturing of it) that has contributed to the current situation.

I dunno, maybe I'm just old-skool but I've been brought up with an attitude of not living beyond your means, and keeping debt to a minimum.

Sorry to add to a clearly archaic thread, but Hazyjane your attitude is appalling. How on earth is someone from a less-than-wealthy background ever supposed to get a Masters without massively stalling their career; if at all, unless these loans are available?? The logical conclusion to your argument, is that education is for the wealthy only who do not need to take out debt. I don't know what discipline you are in, but many disciplines have minimal Masters funding, and most students pay their way through a Masters.

I cannot believe that people can be so elitist and ignorant nowadays. Truly awful.

thats a bit harsh sleephead. I think she is just making the point that loans are not always the answer. Clearly the original poster had no means of paying off their original loans which is why they found themselves in the current awkward situation. Getting another loan is not going to help that. I dont want to spend the rest of my working days paying back loans sending my taxes to pay unpaid loans. Im not being elitest having this opinion....Im being realistic. Banks should not give money to people who will not be able to pay it back - if they had been more sensible in this regard the world would not be in such financial turmoil today. I understand that putting ones career on hold by a year can be a downer, but if the person really wants to do a masters then a year should not make a difference either way

No-one wants to take out loans, of course; and no-one can deny the fact that banks have made mistakes. But given that in this country there is no other way fo fund postgraduate study (especially Masters courses), then people do need to take loans and they should not be condemned for that fact. The CDL banks do insist that you explain exactly how and why the course will improve your career prospects, they don't simply issue them. Furthermore, I doubt it is the £8000 CDLs that have led to the banking crisis, it is mortgages and investment bank practices that have led to that. In addition, we do not know why the OP has a poor credit history - it could be due to reckless spending, or something more unfortunate.

I would just like to know how people are meant to pay for Masters without these loans. As Chrisrolinski said, saving and/or doing a Masters part-time is almost impossible, unless you have a ridiculously well-paid job (and there aren't too many of those about). Should I be forced to end my education just because my family are poor? If you agree with that, then you are elitist.

======= Date Modified 02 Apr 2009 12:11:13 =======

It is some sleight of hand to compare a £8,000 CDL with a fixed four year repayment term to the ridculous 100% 25 year mortgage (and culture of home ownership) lending that has contributed greatly to the economic climate. Only those with well paid jobs can ever 'save' enough to do a MA (since they must eat and pay rent at the same time) and this would take a lot longer than just a year or two. In reality a recent graduate in a service sector job could never hope to save the £8,000 -£10,000 required to do this. And if they did, they would be delaying their career progress by years.



So how is anybody from a low income family ever to do this? There was absolutely no hope of saving money to do an MA, nor could my parents afford to help. I couldn't afford to have a "I don't like debt" attitude.



I don't want to rant on or develop a two year old thread into a flaming ground - I just want to make it clear that



a) since education (sadly) in our society is a commodity and must be bought, those without purchasing power must acquire it somehow i.e. with credit.



b) nobody choses debt. Not everybody with debt has spent it on Fendi bags and booze. Many use their credit cards to pay bills, rent or buy food.



Clearly we don't know anything about the original posters debt. But I doubt they would have ever been in any position to save for a MA.

======= Date Modified 02 Apr 2009 12:51:05 =======
======= Date Modified 02 Apr 2009 12:49:58 =======

I'd take you point except that
1. I was state educated
2. I've had various jobs since I was 17 and paid my way for things I wanted since that point.
3. I took a gap year before my *undergraduate degree*, not to backpack around the globe but to work in an office so that I could afford to go to university. I knew that the standard student loan was insufficient to live off of, that my parents could not support me financially (and why should they have to - my degree was for me) and I didn't want to go into a degree not knowing whether I could realistically meet the financial demands and risk the stress of spiralling debt. It was boring and tedious and I envied my friends who were doing interesting things, but it had to be done. The situation for undergrads is actually in some respects better now than it was - if the current rules had applied when I was studying then I might have been able to get by.
4. I am starting a Masters degree this September, for which I desperately hope to get funding, but if I don't, I will get by thriftily on savings. If I didn't have those to fall back on, I would give some very careful thought as to how I would approach this *in the current economic climate* as I would not want to finish my degree with a pile of debt and not be able to find work.
5. In the past I've had to alter my career plans/lifestyle choices in order to support family members in ill health and defer things I've wanted to do until other times.

I have been fortunate in that circumstances have given me the opportunity to save, and I do realise that isn't always an option at all times for people. And, as I said, I'm *not* saying that a career development loan is a bad thing. If I were approaching Masters study a couple of years ago and didn't have enough savings, I would probably take one out. But to get into debt when you already have bad debt, at a time when there really is no guarantee of a job at the other end when the repayments kick in (which is what I thought was the situation of the opening poster) is, to my mind, Not Smart. Nor is contemplating even riskier kinds of debt. That is the specific point I was making when I replied to the opening post. Not that loans are a totally no-go area.

As a slight tangent...
I am going to do a Masters degree because I *want* to do one, and it is important for my career. But I haven't lost sight of the fact that even having the opportunity to do a Masters is a luxury. I'm not going to get jealous about people who just ask Mummy and Daddy for cash to do whatever they like. Cos the fact that I have been accepted onto a course, that I live in a country where, as a women, I am free to pursue as much education as I want, and there are courses worth doing, is enough for others to envy. Much as this is the path I want to follow, I freely acknowledge that there are perhaps other more useful ways in which I could serve society without pursuing any further education, and that I am bloody lucky to have even had the education that I have.

sleepyhead, do you still think I'm an elitest snob?

Firstly, I did not at any point use the word snob, so I'd prefer it if you did not erroneously state that I had.

Regardless, you have chosen to delay education (through getting jobs, taking years out etc). Although you don't detail how you did this, you must acknowledge that this is not an ideal situation for anyone, yourself included. It may have been the case that you were able to live at home (with a family member/partner) in order to be able to save for your degrees - again you don't say specifically so this is speculation - others may not have the ability to do that.

My annoyance at your previous post was not implying that you had not worked hard for the things you have achieved; it was the condescending way in which you (and still do) refer to people who have had to take CDLs. Yes, you did state that they were not always a bad thing; however you overtly criticised the 'culture' of borrowing, and the implication was that those who took credit were reckless. Yes the OP is in a specific situation of a poor credit history, but your post was far far more general than that in its indictment of loans, so please do not hide behind that argument. The fact is that surely it is preferable for a person to take credit to get a better education (and hopefully better career), than to work in a dead-end lowly-paid job for years in the hope that they will be able to pay for that education.

And to answer your last question... yes, you have not given any reason to think that you are not elitist. Anyone who believes education should be based on money is elitist, whether they are wealthy or not.

======= Date Modified 02 Apr 2009 14:39:08 =======

"I am free to pursue as much education as I want"



Really? If so you are one of the few and lucky in our society. Personally I think it is a ridiculous ideology to believe that in our society one is free to pursue as much education as they want.



Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to have taken the CDL, and now have PhD funding - but I don't kid myself that this is proof of some kind of freedom to pursue as much education as I want. If I hadn't recieved the loan or funding then I would not have been free to pursue my education this far.



Think of all those who are trapped in jobs they don't like and can't retrain because they have family, financial and other obligations. Or those that had to leave schoopl early etc etc Or those that got their MA but didn't get funding for their PhD - they aren't free to carry on...



The notion that we are all able to somehow choose to educate ourselves if we want is the logical product of a society which shifts responsibility to individuals for things that should be collective. IMHO.



Surely the sacrifices that you've personally made for your educations (delaying, working, saving etc) are self evident that many people are not free to choose as much education as they want....

I think that the sense of entitlement many people have to education is fairly disturbing.

However, conversely, I think the loan-situation is going to be come more and more prevalent for Masters students (in particular) in the Arts and Humanities as an increased proportion of funding goes to Doctoral Students and it's assumed that they can get to this stage without assistance.

In the grand scheme of things 2k is not A LOT of debt. I think ending up in a situation where we're ashamed about debt again has the potential to be as shambolic as the pre-credit-crunch scenario. As such, I think for the vast majority of people WHERE A MASTERS IS A NECESSARY CAREER MOVE it makes perfect sense to take out a loan. Especially at the moment. The types of jobs on offer to many graduates at the moment are low paid and may well take a couple of years to save up for a Masters (and living in relative hardship at the time). Long-term, two years of pay when you're qualified is going to be worth a lot more than two years work trying to save up for a Masters..... even when you factor in interest payments....

I find statements like this very confusing. Surely everybody is entitled to an education - and should be as a right. Why should somebody having a sense of entitlement to an education be disturbing?

What is the opposite to having a sense of entitlement? Being a citizen who is grateful for anything that is chucked their way, which they might have to pay for or sacrifice more for than others? How is that in any way acceptable. Because if people aren't entitled to an education then the only available alternative is an obvious one....one in which access to education is restricted, and normally on ability to pay.

I don't see why having a sense of entitlement should be disturbing at all. Then, I guess I'm just uppity. :tongue in cheek: