Cashtoday/Cash2day4u/Heathmill accuse Debtcc of Antisemitism

Bravo, thats the way to go. We should never be afraid of anything when we are going on the right track.

Vikas we all are there for DebtCC

I would like to know what exposure of illegal practices of payday loans has to do with anti-semitism....

We're all here for ya,Vikas! :) No worries.

Wow!! All I have to say is get real!!! They should know by now that anyone on this forum already realize how awful they are and every other payday loans and we have the freedom to say whatever we want. You have my support!!!!

hmmmm, as far as demand letters go this is pretty weak. Of course, this makes sense because their case is weak as well. Their supposed pattern of messages is very small in comparision to the total number if ones in the thread.

It is interesting that they threaten to file suit in england, betting no n doubt that you would not bother to come across the pond and fight it.

Also of interest is that they do not dispute the illegality of any of their actions, only the comments made by supposed people in the know...such as ex and or current employees.

This tells me that they are basically peeved that someone from within is grinding their axe in public...

I wonder about a threatend counter suit in US court arguing that their threats/suit are an using isolated posts from disgruntled former employees to prevent the us fronm exposing their questionable and maybe illegal practices...

It might be time to have an attorney fire back a response letting them know we stand strong, resolute and together...

Very good point, JJ. It seems the focus is on the ex-employees. Maybe people are just coming here and making things up about them? LOL! Get real is right. People share their experiences here and this company has been exposed. That is what it really boils down to for them. From what I've read about this company, they are a total nightmare to people. I'm grateful for this forum. :)

You know the phrase....The truth hurts. :)

Since joining this forum,one thing Im not scared of anymore is collectors and payday loan sharks.You have my support and always will.
TWOKID

That just blows my mind. I cannot recall anyone ever making any comments about anyone based on anything other than their conduct. Certainly never race or religion!

hmmmm I failed to see anything which was anti semitic in nature. True some people were posting rather strong opinions of the management at Cash 2day. AS with the Riscuity post, those opinions are protected under the the US Constitution, particularly the bill of right as freedom of speech. I think they will have a rather hard time proving their case in any court, as the internet is not regulated by any international organization, and some rather serious charges have been leveled in some of those posts, which if they persue a case in British courts will likely result in one or more governmental investigations.

And in continuing to ponder this issue, HOPEFULLY it is true, that this forum has resulted in a decline in business for them. However, the decline in business is likely from people giving careful thought to whether or not they should take a short term or pay day loan from ANY BUSINESS, be it Cash2day, ICS, Heathmill or any other payday lender, and realizing that its a bad idea. in that case it is not that this forum has damaged their business specifically, but the industry as a whole, and that no one can sue for, just because consumers choose to educate them selves and seek advice from other IS not illegal, or defamatory, and certainly not Anti-Semitic.

right on clay, they have a pretty weak case to be able to establish that the statements in question impacted their business.. as you said its the awareness of their practices that is causing it. I showed the posts to one of my friends, who is Jewish and a member of the Antidefamation league and a civil rights attorney with the USDOJ.. his response was.. huh... nothing derogatory or defaming about jews in his mind.

OK, what sort of CRACK are these folks on?

Previously, weren't they denying any affiliation at all to Cash Today Limited?

Reading through this I cannot see where they are denying that The Heatmill Village Ltd, is the parent company of Cash Today Ltd.

I do not see how someone pointing out that an individual is Jewish can be construed as anti-semitic. If I point out that the owner of this board Vikas is Black or White, whatever the case might be, am I racist?

I find this to be offensive, purely because Racism is a very deep global issue. My children have been called N*&%R. Now that is RACISM! For someone to point out, as a matter of fact that my children are Black, is not racism, and for someone to say that it is trivilaizes a very real epidemic.

Now to my next point. I am an AMERICAN CITIZEN. There is this little thing that I am entitled to which is called FREEDOM OF SPEECH. So the folks at Skyes Anderson LLP., Harris Holdings Ltd., The Heathmill Village Ltd., and Cash Today Ltd., CAN BITE ME! :twisted:

Cash Today is breaking laws in the UK and the US.

The UK Consumer Credit Act of 1974 states:

"53 Duty to display information
Regulations may require a person who carries on a consumer credit business or consumer hire business, or a business in the course of which he provides credit to individuals secured on land (other than credit provided under an agreement which is an exempt agreement as a result of section 16(6C)), to display in the prescribed manner, at any premises where the business is carried on to which the public have access, prescribed information about the business."

"20 Total charge for credit
(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations containing such provisions as appear to him appropriate for determining the true cost to the debtor of the credit provided or to be provided under an actual or prospective consumer credit agreement (the ???total charge for credit???), and regulations so made shall prescribe???
(a) what items are to be treated as entering into the total charge for credit, and how their amount is to be ascertained;
(b) the method of calculating the rate of the total charge for credit.
(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may provide for the whole or part of the amount payable by the debtor or his relative under any linked transaction to be included in the total charge for credit, whether or not the creditor is a party to the transaction or derives benefit from it.
60 Form and content of agreements
(1) The Secretary of State shall make regulations as to the form and content of documents embodying regulated agreements, and the regulations shall contain such provisions as appear to him appropriate with a view to ensuring that the debtor or hirer is made aware of???
(a) the rights and duties conferred or imposed on him by the agreement,
(b) the amount and rate of the total charge for credit (in the case of a consumer credit agreement),
(c) the protection and remedies available to him under this Act, and
(d) any other matters which, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, it is desirable for him to know about in connection with the agreement.
(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may in particular???
(a) require specified information to be included in the prescribed manner in documents, and other specified material to be excluded;
(b) contain requirements to ensure that specified information is clearly brought to the attention of the debtor or hirer, and that one part of a document is not given insufficient or excessive prominence compared with another.
63 Duty to supply copy of executed agreement
(1) If the unexecuted agreement is presented personally to the debtor or hirer for his signature, and on the occasion when he signs it the document becomes an executed agreement, a copy of the executed agreement, and of any other document referred to in it, must be there and then delivered to him.
(2) A copy of the executed agreement, and of any other document referred to in it, must be given to the debtor or hirer within the seven days following the making of the agreement unless???
(a) subsection (1) applies, or
(b) the unexecuted agreement was sent to the debtor or hirer for his signature and, on the occasion of his signing it, the document became an executed agreement.
(3) In the case of a cancellable agreement, a copy under subsection (2) must be sent by post.
(4) In the case of a credit-token agreement, a copy under subsection (2) need not be given within the seven days following the making of the agreement if it is given before or at the time when the credit-token is given to the debtor.
(5) A regulated agreement is not properly executed if the requirements of this section are not observed.
Amendments to the Act
2.???(1) The Act shall be amended as follows:
(2) In section 61 (signing of the agreement), in paragraph (b) of subsection (2) (unexecuted agreement to be sent to debtor or hirer by post for signature), for ???by post??? substitute ???by an appropriate method???.
(3) In section 63(3) (duty to supply copy of executed agreement), for ???by post??? substitute ???by an appropriate method???.
(4) In section 64 (duty to give notice of cancellation rights), for ???by post???, in each place where it occurs, substitute ???by an appropriate method???.
(5) For section 69(7) substitute???
Citation, commencement and interpretation
1.???(1) This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 and shall come into force on 31st December 2004.
(2) In this Order, the ???Act??? means the Consumer Credit Act 1974(b).
???(7) Whether or not it is actually received by him, a notice of cancellation sent to a person shall be deemed to be served on him???
(a) in the case of a notice sent by post, at the time of posting, and
(b) in the case of a notice transmitted in the form of an electronic communication in accordance with section 176A(1), at the time of the transmission.???.
(6) In section 176 (service of documents), in subsection (2) (permitted methods of service), for ???by post??? substitute ???by an appropriate method???.
(7) After section 176 insert???
???176A Electronic transmission of documents
(1) A document is transmitted in accordance with this subsection if???
(a) the person to whom it is transmitted agrees that it may be delivered to him by being transmitted to a particular electronic address in a particular electronic form,
(b) it is transmitted to that address in that form, and
(c) the form in which the document is transmitted is such that any information in the document which is addressed to the person to whom the document is transmitted is capable of being stored for future reference for an appropriate period in a way which allows the information to be reproduced without change.
(2) A document transmitted in accordance with subsection (1) shall, unless the contrary is proved, be treated for the purposes of this Act, except section 69, as having been delivered on the working day immediately following the day on which it is transmitted.
(3) In this section, ???electronic address??? includes any number or address used for the purposes of receiving electronic communications.???.
(8) In section 189 (definitions), in subsection (1), insert the following at the appropriate places???
??????appropriate method??? means???
(a) post, or
(b) transmission in the form of an electronic communication in accordance with section 176A(1);??????.
??????electronic communication??? means an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Act 2000 (c.7)??????.
(9) In that subsection, in the definitions of the expressions ???give??? and ???serve on??? for ???by post??? substitute ???by an appropriate method???.
Amendments to the Consumer Credit (Termination of Licences) Regulations 1976
3.???(1) The Consumer Credit (Termination of Licences) Regulations 1976(a) shall be amended as follows:
(2) In regulation 7, for ???by post???, in each place where it occurs, substitute ???by an appropriate method???

Nevada law states;
Sec. 21.8. 1. As used in this chapter, unless the context
otherwise requires, the following terms have the meanings
ascribed to them in the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z:
(a) ???Amount financed.???
(b) ???Annual percentage rate.???
(c) ???Finance charge.???
(d) ???Payment schedule.???
(e) ???Total of payments.???
2. For the purposes of this chapter, proper calculation of the
amount financed, annual percentage rate and finance charge for
a loan must be made in accordance with the Truth in Lending Act
and Regulation Z.
Sec. 29. 1. A person, including, without limitation, a
person licensed pursuant to chapter 675 of NRS, shall not operate
a check-cashing service, deferred deposit loan service, short-term
loan service or title loan service unless the person is licensed with
the Commissioner pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
2. A person must have a license regardless of the location or
method that the person uses to operate such a service, including,
without limitation, at a kiosk, through the Internet, through any
telephone, facsimile machine or other telecommunication device
or through any other machine, network, system, device or means,
except that the person shall not operate such a service through
any automated loan machine in violation of the provisions of
subsection 3.
3. A person shall not operate a deferred deposit loan service
or short-term loan service through any automated loan machine,
and the Commissioner shall not issue a license that authorizes the
licensee to conduct business through any automated loan
machine.
Sec. 30. 1. A licensee shall post in a conspicuous place in
every location at which he conducts business under his license:
(a) A notice that states the fees he charges for providing
check-cashing services, deferred deposit loan services, short-term
loan services or title loan services.
(b) A notice that states a toll-free telephone number to the
Office of the Commissioner to handle concerns or complaints of
customers.

The Commissioner shall adopt regulations prescribing the form
and size of the notices required by this subsection.
2. If a licensee offers loans to customers at a kiosk, through
the Internet, through any telephone, facsimile machine or other
telecommunication device or through any other machine, network,
system, device or means, except for an automated loan machine
prohibited by section 29 of this act, the licensee shall, as
appropriate to the location or method for making the loan, post in
a conspicuous place where customers will see it before they enter
into a loan, or disclose in an open and obvious manner to
customers before they enter into a loan, a notice that states:
(a) The types of loans the licensee offers and the fees he
charges for making each type of loan; and
(b) A list of the states where the licensee is licensed or
authorized to conduct business from outside this State with
customers located in this State.
3. A licensee who provides check-cashing services shall give
written notice to each customer of the fees he charges for cashing
checks. The customer must sign the notice before the licensee
provides the check-cashing service.
Sec. 31. 1. Before making any loan to a customer, a
licensee shall provide to the customer a written loan agreement
which may be kept by the customer and which must be written in:
(a) English, if the transaction is conducted in English; or
(b) Spanish, if the transaction is conducted in Spanish.
2. The loan agreement must include, without limitation, the
following information:
(a) The name and address of the licensee and the customer;
(b) The nature of the security for the loan, if any;
(c) The date and amount of the loan, amount financed, annual
percentage rate, finance charge, total of payments, payment
schedule and a description and the amount of every fee charged,
regardless of the name given to the fee and regardless of whether
the fee is required to be included in the finance charge under the
Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z;
(d) A disclosure of the right of the customer to rescind a loan
pursuant to the provisions of this chapter;
(e) A disclosure of the right of the customer to pay his loan in
full or in part with no additional charge pursuant to the provisions
of this chapter;
Sec. 84. This act becomes effective on July 1, 2005.
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/73rd/bills/AB/AB384_EN.pdf

Cash Today incorporated in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as Leads Global Inc., among other names, and is required to follow the laws of the states that they incorporate in.

Vikas if these folks are reading this now, they know who I am, and I could care less.

Polly.... You are likely a fantastic engineer, but I bet you would make one heck of a lawyer.

Why thank you sir. Actually I have represented myself four times in court, and I have a 100% success record. IMHO lawyers are the most overpaid mo fo's in this country in that we all have access to a library.

The ownership(shareholder/directors) of these companies Heathmill and Cashttoday is shown in the documents under this topic:
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/heathmill/ownership.html

This is what I figured from reading these documents. Please help me understand these documents more.

Company: Cash today
Shareholders are: Harris holding
Directors are: Aaron Gershfield

Company: Harris holding
Shareholders are: Carrol Harris and Keith Harris.
Directors are: Keith Harris

Company: HMM Services
Shareholders are:
Directors are: Aaron Gershfield

Company: Heathmill village limited
Shareholders are:
Directors are: Aaron Gershfield

So this is what we can conclude:
1. Heathmill / HMM Services and Cashtoday have the same directors.

What else am I missing here ?

1) the claims originally made by Heathmill that they are not connected to Cash Today were, based on the information noted.. false. 2)That if they were to attempt to litigate, the discovery process should involve all companies involved, thus allowing for a detailed examination of their processes and tactics.. which could then be used to prove the many allegations about the misbehavior of Cash Today. 3) If in the Course of Discovery, a certain large international banking institution were to be linked (either as a lender/funder, or as an involved party) the alledged behavior of Cash today would be at a minimum a public relations nightmare.

I also have company records for HMM and Heathmill Village, which I think, if I read them correctly indicate that they have had some insolvency issues. Vikas...I'll email those to you now.

Vikas, you can pull credit reports of all of the companies in question quite easily. They cost about 10 pounds eachs.

here we go, the fight is on. Strength in numbers turth and purpose.. we shall prevail

Thanks pollyandsay for sending the Company record documents. They are now available under this topic for your reading pleasure:
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/heathmill/ownership.html

You can directly download them from here: (6 pages pdf each)
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/heathmill/heathmill-village-company-record.pdf
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/heathmill/hmm-services-company-record.pdf

When I read through them I see no mention of Royal Bank of Canada

I have been hearing whispers they are related to Royal Bank of Canada is that true ?

Quote:

Vikas,

On Cash Todays record look at the address for the sole shareholder, Harris Holdings.

Now look at this url:

http://www.rbcprivatebanking.com/guernsey.html

The addresses match...

clay,
the UK requires written disclosures as well. See the consumer credit act of 1974, and its ammendment in 2000 regarding electronic disclosures

I under stand they are required to make those disclosures. My point is that in those disclosures, they specifically state transactions are deemed to have been executed at their home office in england, and as such are not governed under US law, this according to the Federal Trade Commission.

clay,
i think that you missed my point. United Kingdom law dictates that they must provide disclosures. So it is rather hypocritcial of them to bind their clients to UK law when they do not follow UK law. Not only hypocritcal, but highly illegal.

additionally, regardless of what they say as far as the course of business, by maintaining an office and an incorporated presence, they could likely be required to follow US law... really you are both right, just following paralell legal threads.. Clay, your are correct from a strict contract law point of view concerning the agreed to relationship between borrower and lender. However, what Polly is saying that the violations of UK Law and likely US law (based on requirements of the state with respect to the operation of business) could be found in court to invalidate the contractual agreement by virtue of the fact that the lender was conducting business illegally.

That is likley why Polly was able to get a refund, while the contractual agreement is probably legal with respect to what is agreed/stipulated, they likely did not want to go down the road of proving the legalisty of their business operations, hence they decided to settle the account.

Here is an analogy that might help.. Vinnie Soprano hires a hit man and requires a written contract. He pays the hit man $10k in advance. The hit man fails to deliver the goods, so vinnie threatens to enforce contract provisions to get his money back. The hit man contacts the authorities who arrest Vinnie for solicitaion of Murder. The hit man, goes to court and asks that the contract be invalidated becauase murder is illegal and the judge agrees, since although the contract was completely legal, the business transaction it governed was not.

I hope this helps

Who is the real criminal here, the pay day company or this site?

The site claims to 'be an open forum', it claims to be of benefit to the users, and most of all it claims to be against the pay day industry.

Which makes wonder, why do you have phone numbers all over the site that people can call for 'debt consolidation' i.e. an even BIGGER loan?

Is it not true you get paid by the Consolidation companies for these people, because they're just classed as 'leads' to you?

Is it not true you incentivise people with rewards to get them to write on the post, in the hope that more people will join and phone the 'number'? Its multi-level marketing at its best.

Basically, your no better than the pay day companies, in fact your worse, at least when someone applies to them they know what they are getting, in your case they think they have found a 'friend' but in reality you couldn't care less, your just selling there debt to make money.

As for being a non profit organisation, what a joke, the owners of this site don't drive round in old cars or live in ghettos, do they?

People, get real, these guys are as bad as the pay day companies, only they're far cleverer.

I do not know what planet you are living on, but nobody has tried to sell me a loan...

Dude, quite smoking.... the debt consolidation services are based on a "fair Share" "CCCS" model, not consolidation loans (which if you bother to read this siet) are not a good idea.

Hello who are you? Nobody has ever tried to sell me a loan. They have been absolutely wonderful in helping me figure out how to pay every cent of my debt. Read further before your spout off. :x

I've never been offered a loan either...Big difference between a loan and consolidation...

Quote:

Quote:

You're welcome Vikas....I'm not a hateful person, but I really dislike people who are just plain stupid.

And about your last statement there--I was thinking the same thing....

I have never been offered a consolidation loan either. I have never received a single e-mail message or PM from this site eluding to any type of loan.

Just simple slander folkes.

I figured with the debtcc points that they get money from the advertising your see off to the side every time we post.

All great and skeptical minds think alike I was thinking the same about where that poster came from

As to the person who said, "IMHO lawyers are the most overpaid mo fo's in this country in that we all have access to a library.", and speaking as an attorney, I have to say that I agree. On the other hand, most folks are unwilling to change their own oil, and take their own garbage to the dump, so why should handling legal crap be any different. It's a demand thing: if people would either stop causing problems or learn to handle the solutions themselves, the lawyers would be out of a job.

Secondly as to the defamation issue. I suggest a short, simple response to the letter that politely acknowledges receipt of the letter, thank them for the identification of the specific issues they're having trouble with, and ask them why (1) the website should be liable for the remarks of third parties where it exercises no editorial control and (2) what jurisdictional basis do they think there is for any kind of legal action in England?

First, they can, of course, file suit in England. I suspect the reason they've sent the letter is to bolster a claim for reimbursement of attorneys' fees which is generally the lion's share of defamation judgments in England. But (1) I don't think there's any basis for jurisdiction in England, as the website is published entirely in the U.S. and (2) they can get a judgment in England but won't be able to enforce it in the U.S. because the English court won't have had a basis for personal jurisdiction, and its order will thus be void for lack of jurisdiction.

The mere fact that people can, of their own volition, reach into the U.S. via the internet in order to view the postings on this website doesn't represent entry into England for purposes of jurisdiction. The website does not project itself into England for viewing, it can be viewed there only by the conscious act of someone there who reaches into the U.S. to do so.

The website could file a pre-emptive strike against Heathmill by filing a suit for declaratory judgment in California to the effect that the website is not defamatory under either California or U.K. law; once you've done that, the matter would be precluded by the doctrine of res judicata (things already decided), which an English court would likely consider determinative. Let them come to California to litigate the issue if there is one.

virginia, thanks for that clear and concise outline. Your presence here as always is most valuable

As always, V-L-D, nice post!

~Mary

When did I say any of you had been offered a loan?

I never did.

I simply said that if you call the number listed above 800 601 1579, the owners of this site will be paid a 'finders' fee for a new customer.

Admittedly, only 4 or 5% of you all will call it, but 5% of 20,000+ people will make the owners a LOT of money, trust me, lead generation is what I do for a job!

Have none of you ever asked your self how these guys pay theyre staff, theyre rent, theyre electricity, theyre hosting costs etc etc AND pay you for posts??? Its by feeding on the 4 or 5% of you who really are in a bad way and think a consolidation loan will help.

Site admin put:

* The website makes money from google adsense.
* The ads come because there is content.
* The content comes because people post.
* The people who come here are in financial difficulty.
* Hence we share the income from ads with the people who create the ads.

That may be correct (but Ad Words pays really badly, you can't fund a business on it, no where near), but please answer me this:

Do you recieve NO money for people sent to the above Consolidation company? I already know the answer, but it would be interesting to see what you tell your readers.

Am I from Cash Today - No.
Am I from a Pay Day company - No.
Am I from the Industry - Yes.
Am I pissed off with companies, both sides of the fence, generating leads in unscrupulous ways - Yes

If this is an honest forum, tell the truth, what do you get per 'new customer' - $15, $25 or does the volume bonus make it more like $32...

When I signed up the only way to register (that I could find at the time) fed your name to a consolidation company. when they called, I explained I wasn't interested in consolidation, that I was registering for the website, and they were totally cool about it, not any pressure to do anything. I truly feel the owners and administrators, as well as the from participants are here for one purpose. to help and educate others, there is no pressure to take loans, consolidation, etc. only good hearted people trying to do they best they can and help others, and themselves in the process.

Anon,

I could care LESS what the owners of this site make. That's beside the point. How much do you make? Yeah, I know, that's a personal question. Same goes for Vikas and the rest of the staff.

Good for him if he gets a bonus for referring people to consolidation companies.

I think you're just mad because of the people you haven't got to pay a big lump sum, instead they pay payments through their rep.

And yes, you did say something about a loan. In your post made on March 17...

Quote:

"Which makes wonder, why do you have phone numbers all over the site that people can call for 'debt consolidation' i.e. an even BIGGER loan? "

I never received counseling call because I did community sign up.

Anon, grow up and do some homework before asking your question. Read the FAQ pages first and then post here. The business policy is quite clear and transparent; I cannot see anything wrong in it.

Quote:

Virginia,

I am glad that you took no offense to my statement that you are overpaid:)

I know you worked very hard in college, and took on a huge financial undertaking at the same time. You definitely deserve to be compensated for your hard work, knowledge and time.

I am not as much anti-lawyer, as I am confident in my own abilities to seek answers. (I am also cheap!LOL) I have difficulties paying someone $175 dollars an hour or more, for something that I can do myself.
With that being said, I would never walk into a court room proceeding regarding custody of my children without a lawyer. My children are far too precious to me to ever take a chance like that. Especially since we live in such an uncertain world. If I were ever arrested I would definitely envoke my right to remain silent, and I would accept my right to a free attorney.

Anon...

One more thing I'd like point out.

Every business is trying to make money. People have to live. How much money does the owner of your company get for each account that you collect on? More than you do, I am sure. But that's life. Deal with it.

Cashtoday/Heathmill caught lying

[quote=Anon]Am I from Cash Today - No.
Am I from a Pay Day company - No.[/quote]

Here are the details of Anon. If you view the image below, you can clearly understand that he is from Heathmill.

hmmmm, the plot thickens. good Job Stanley

What a moron....lol

LOL! Not much can be said now!

~Mary

When I signed up for this site,the consolidation company could not help me,and even recommened another company that has nothing to do with this site,they were very kind and helpful,and I do think they should get some kind of fee for anyone who does sign up,but the point is there is no pressure,they are here to help,and have helped many.