MODERN BANKS WORSE THAN SHYLOCK – COURTS FAIL THE HOME OWNING PUBLIC

It is abundantly clear to me that the mortgage lending market is completely crooked.

Not unnaturally, I want to do something about it. I want a class legal action against these thieves and maximum publicity. I want them destroyed – completely.

It is already the case the major banks are under fire and most likely be broken up in the UK and the USA as a direct result of their behaviour irritating public opinion and irritating both governments which are publicly announcing legislation to deal with the banks.

But the full scale of the subprime scandal has not been properly brought into the public arena.

If it was, the we might see some real action.

We need to get together to do something about it.

The famous Shakespeare story of the ‘Merchant of Venice’ quoted now for centuries and used as a yardstick to describe the evil behaviour of moneylenders and how they might be dealt with is interesting.

The story accepts that a contract for money lending was made and that the contract must be adhered to because contracts are a cornerstone of society’s functionality.

But Shylock is clearly mis-using and abusing his power over the borrower having difficulty re-paying Shylock’s loan. It is clear Shylock is being evil and vindictive in insisting on the absolute letter of the contract which allows Shylock to take a pound of flesh from his victim from any part of the victim’s body he chooses.

Shylock wishes to take his ‘rightful’ pound of flesh from nearest his victim’s heart – which would obviously kill him. But Shylock could choose to take the pound of flesh from, say the victim’s calf muscle or backside or somewhere where it would cause a minimum of damage and certainly not kill him.

The Venetian Court has to recognise the validity of the contract. There is no dispute about it. Shylock is correct; he has his rights under the contract.; the borrower has broken the contract and Shylock wants his redress under the law; Shylock is entitled to it.

The Venetian Court can see Shylock is being unnecessarily vindictive in wanting to kill his victim mostly because Shylock just hates him for some previous insult directed by the borrower at Shylock.

So, the court tells Shylock that the contract must, indeed, be upheld and Shylock must have his pound of flesh; BUT, as the contract mentions nothing about any blood being taken with the flesh, the court forcibly reminds Shylock that while taking his flesh, he must take care not to take even one drop of blood because it is not due under the terms of the contract.

Shylock can take only flesh – not blood.

The Court tells Shylock that he will be punished by the full weight of the law if any harm comes to Shylock’s victim as a result of him losing any blood.

So, Shylock finds he cannot take his flesh at all. He ends up losing his own property and being banished ( if I remember correctly).

This story is universally used to illustrate that lenders should be reasonable when dealing with loan repayment difficulties. The story also forcibly points out the injustice of lenders insisting on adhering to the letter of devious contracts and exploiting the weaknesses of borrowers.

The story also shows in no uncertain terms just how grasping, nasty, unfair lenders should be treated.

This principle needs to be quoted brought into every court room and to public attention. That our courts are currently completely ignoring all principles of reasonableness and fairness and are behaving in the precise opposite way the Venetian Court did. The courts should be asked why.

Our dim witted, politically correct jobsworth courts would have allowed Shylock to take his pound of flesh from nearest the heart, shed as much blood as he liked in the process and kill the victim in the process.

It goes completely against the grain of common decency that our courts should so ruthlessly support the wickedness of the subprime mortgage lenders.

They don’t have to, and they could easily use the law to minimise repossessions or even stop them almost completely.

It is a fact that the banks, and their subprime subsidiary mortgage lenders, have dishonestly used the law to deliberately construct manipulative, unfair, unreasonable and positively wicked mortgage contracts that no borrower could properly understand.

The banks have taken over the entire mortgage market and trashed it by turning fairly straight forward building society loans for the purpose of putting a roof over your head ( with few repossessions ever necessary) into a nightmare of greasy manipulative impossible to understand or even avoid sorry excuses to rip off every single home loan borrower in the country in as many ways as the grasping banks can imagine.

The banks, not happy enough with creating the raft of enormous extra charges they inflict on ‘normal’ ordinary non subprime borrowers, deliberately designed a system of subprime lending into which they contrived to push ever increasing numbers of ordinary, credit worthy, reliable citizens to enable the banks to milk ludicrous sums of money from them.

Are we all just going to lie down, roll over and let these vile banks do this and get away with it ?

Or are we actually going to bothered to make a bit of an effort to fight them ?

Do let me know folks.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: